British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced a defence review on Monday 2 June 2025, promising to make Britain “battle-ready.”
Starmer also committed to increasing annual defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP, although he did not specify when or how this would be achieved.
This announcement builds on Labour’s manifesto promises from the general election in July 2024. The manifesto promised to conduct a defence review in their first year in government; to commit to spending 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence.
The Green Party have emphasised poverty and climate change as causes of conflict, saying the Labour government’s plans are not holistic or sustainable enough. Both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats expressed concerns about when and where the funding will come from.
In Scotland, the First Minister and leader of the SNP, John Swinney, has reiterated his opposition to nuclear weapons.
The Defence Secretary, John Healey, outlined the details of the planned increase in government military spending.
These include the target size of the British army increasing to 76,000 soldiers, £15 billion to be spent on new nuclear submarines, and military stockpiles of munitions and other weapons also facing increase.
Ben Young, a fourth-year student studying International Relations, agreed with Healey’s statement that the UK is in a “new era of threat.” Russia poses the biggest threat to Britain’s security, he added, partially due to the war in Ukraine.
He said that “ideally” the UK would spend more than 3 per cent of GDP on defence, as nuclear proliferation have prevented major wars and give Britain “significant prestige.”
Xavier Boyce, a second-year History student, echoed these concerns. US President Trump’s re-election also threatens global security he said, as the US is “pivoting towards Russia” and undermining NATO (collective security organisation the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance that the UK is a founding member of).
Since the government’s announcement, NATO chief Mark Rutte has proposed that its members should commit to 3.5 per cent of GDP on hard defence and 1.5 per cent on other security like cyber by 2032. President Trump has also demanded NATO allies increase military spending further.
Support for the UK’s role in NATO was controversial among students. Half expressed support for the organisation, and half were critical of its nuclear foundations citing concerns about Western hegemony and excessive militarisation.
Over half of the students surveyed by The Student said they disagree with the British governments plan to increase its defence spending.
Over two thirds said they disagree with the UK possessing nuclear weapons.
Philosophy student Michael Lake said that nuclear weapons “also make us a massive target.”
Alice, a second-year student studying History and English Literature, emphasises the threat of cyber-attacks from Russia and China. She was critical of Starmer’s proposed plans:
“3% of GDP is 157 billion — we have an NHS that is crumbling, social services that are barely fit for purpose, and a society that is increasingly fractured. There is no point in investing money directly into defence when the population is neither emotionally nor physically fit and invested in it.”
A second-year physics student rejected Healey’s claim of a “new era of threat.” They also disagreed with planned increases in military spending, not viewing the war in Ukraine as a threat to Britain’s national security and were very critical of the UK and US’s alliance with Israel. They added that “nuclear weapons should not exist” as Britain’s colonial history has “caused enough war and trauma.”
Overall, the students surveyed were critical of the UK increasing its military spending and expanding its nuclear arsenal.
Alice reflected this view, asking “did we not learn enough from Hiroshima and Nagasaki?”
The defence review concluded that Britain must be ready for war in Europe or the Atlantic. Starmer warned that “we cannot ignore the threat that Russia poses… we have to be ready.”
“Trident Nuclear Submarine HMS Victorious” by Defence Images is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.