After much anticipation, the UK Government published the Strategic Defence Review on the 2nd June – almost a year since Labour came into power. After receiving 8000 responses from industry, academia and military, a hefty document of 144 pages was presented, with Secretary of State for Defence, John Healey emphasising that this would bring about the change desperately required in defence to transition the country into a state of ‘warfighting readiness’. 

The case for change 

The case for transformation comes at a period of uncertainty, with the UK entering a new era of challenges with growing multipolarity, intensifying strategic competition, and rapid advances in technology that are changing the character of warfare, creating new risks, particularly in the cyberspace and space domains.  

Of particular concern, of course, is the threat from an aggressive and expansionist Russia – CMS sources suggest that in three months Russia is manufacturing as much military kit as the whole of NATO is in a year – and it’s not going to the frontline in Ukraine, but into storage to ready Russia for the conflicts to come. This puts into perspective the scale of the threat, and the UK has reached a critical juncture that demands action not just ambition.  

Key focuses 

Throughout the SDR, there was a general theme of instilling a ‘whole-of-society approach’ towards defence. It highlighted the importance of developing a thriving and resilient innovative and industrial base that contributes to national cohesion and preparedness, while stimulating economic growth that is felt across all regions of the UK. To achieve this, it recommended a transition from a ‘joint’ to an ‘integrated’ force, and that changes should be innovation-led and industry-backed. As anticipated, the procurement system was a key focus, with the Review recommending a streamlined  three-tiered approach to ensure that major modular platforms could be contracted within 2 years, modular alterations within a  year, and rapid procurement of novel technologies within 3months, to ensure the UK remains competitive in an age of rapid technological advancements.  

More broadly the SDR recommended: 

• £11bn annual budget to fund front-line kit. 

• £15bn investment in the sovereign warhead programme this Parliament. 

• Build 12 new attack submarines as part of AUKUS, with a new submarine delivered every 18 months.  

• A ‘New Hybrid Navy’ will use aircraft, drones, warships, and submarines to patrol the North Atlantic and beyond.  

• A ten-fold increase in the lethality of the British Army. 

• A next-generation RAF, through F-35 and Typhoon jets and autonomous aircraft. 

• £1bn investment in homeland air and missile defence and the creation of a CyberEM Command.  

• £6bn investment in munitions this Parliament, including £1.5bn for an ‘always on’ pipeline for munitions and building at least 6 new energetics and munitions factories. 

• Build 7,000 new long-range weapons. 

Conclusion 

While the Review is comprehensive in breadth – spanning all aspects of defence, from space to national resilience, it often sacrifices the depth and detail that the defence industry requires at this time. For almost a year, there has been a tendency to defer answering questions by citing the ongoing SDR, which has pushed critical decisions further down the line. However, with its release, many in industry are likely to question the absence of key contracts and timelines – with no mention of small arms, mortars, and other related capabilities.  

Moreover, the question remains about how defence will be financed going forward, even with the spending uplift to 2.5% of GDP, announced earlier this year. The Review rightly highlights the need for a reversal in post-Cold War perceptions on defence and security. However, Sir Keir Starmer has said he won’t set an arbitrary date for reaching 3%. With the rest of Europe looking to step up their defence spending, compounded by the fact that in 1989, the UK spend 4.1% of GDP on defence, even the 3% figure is looking far too slim to fully address the complex challenges facing the country in both the immediate and long-term. Alongside this, sources suggest that the UK will be forced to increase defence spending to 3.5% within the decade with a further 1.5% of GDP to be spent on intelligence services and infrastructure to satiate the US and meet NATO requirements.  

Nevertheless, the Review is a step in the right direction. Particularly with the investment in autonomous capabilities with a new ‘Hybrid Navy’, emphasis on stockpiles and long-range weapons, and the additional £1bn funding to homeland air and missile defences. The ambition to harness the wealth of economic opportunity and maximise the investment defence brings to the UK was welcomed alongside the concept of a “defence dividend”. With the Spending Review set to be released next week and the Defence Industrial Strategy to be published in the coming months, industry and military stakeholders will be looking for greater clarity and substance on how this strategy will be implemented – and more importantly – how it will be paid for.  

Written by: Phoebe Chubb, Junior Account Manager at CMS Strategic

Image: Taken by LPhot Finn Stainer-Hutchins and is under UK MOD © Crown copyright 2024

CMS Strategic specialises in defence communications and government relations, supporting clients across cyber security, aerospace, maritime, land systems, and defence technology. As the UK transitions from peacetime to preparedness under the Strategic Defence Review, we support defence companies of all sizes navigate policy changes, engage stakeholders, and align messaging with evolving government priorities.

Find out more about how our team can assist you. Discover more.