Landmark moment as the return of Trump stuns UK into action on defence
This is the moment the government finally woke up to the enormity of the threat faced by the UK and the inability of its hollowed-out armed forces to cope.
But make no mistake, today’s decision to increase military spending is not just about increasing the number of troops, warships and fighter jets or even ensuring they can use the latest drones, satellites or artificial intelligence breakthroughs.
This is an emergency that requires the entire nation to take responsibility for – or at least an interest in – the defence of the nation and the importance of being able to deter threats.
Politics latest: PM makes defence commitment
Sir Keir Starmer signalled this fundamental shift in priorities when he told parliament: “We must change our national security posture because a generational challenge requires a generational response that will demand some extremely difficult and painful choices.”
He continued: “And through those choices, as hard as they are, we must also seek unity. A whole society effort that will reach into the lives, the industries, and the homes of the British people.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Starmer announces defence spending hike
Such a proposal is not something new.
The UK has a long history of being prepared for war.
The entirety of the Cold War era was framed around ensuring the UK had enough troops and reservists to fight a sustained conflict, supported by a vast industrial base to produce weapons and a society that was intrinsically resilient, with the ability to sustain itself with emergency food rations, power supplies and an understanding of the need to be prepared to respond in an emergency.
Back then, the threat was war – maybe even nuclear annihilation – with the Soviet Union.
Today the threat is just as stark but also far more complex.
Russia is the immediate danger. But China poses a long-term challenge, while Iran and North Korea are also menacing adversaries.
Most fundamentally though is the change in the UK’s ability to rely squarely on its strongest ally, the United States.
Donald Trump, with his resentment of shouldering the responsibility for European security, has made clear the rest of the transatlantic NATO alliance must take much more of the share of defending themselves.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘The world is becoming more dangerous’
He has also signalled that he may not even be willing to deploy America’s powerful military to defend every single member state – singling out those who pay far too little on their defences.
He has a point when it comes to Europe freeloading on the might of the United States for too long.
But the suggestion that European allies can no longer automatically rely on their American partner to come to their aid is enough to call into question the value of Article 5 of the NATO Alliance, which states an attack on one is an attack on all.
When it comes to deterring foes, there must be no such uncertainty between friends.
Read more from Sky News:
Why Trump wants Ukraine’s minerals
Putin hints at potential deals with US
Sanctions have changed European imports
File pic: PA
It is why countries across Europe are being urged by the new head of NATO to rapidly ramp up defence spending and adopt what NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has called a “war mindset”.
The UK, who along with France are the only two NATO powers in Europe to possess nuclear weapons, has a bigger responsibility than most to heed that call.
Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014 was not a sufficient enough alarm bell.
Eve Russian President Vladimir Putin’s full-scale war in Ukraine in 2022 failed to shake the UK and most of the rest of Europe from their slumber.
Instead, it seems the return of Donald Trump to the White House, with all the unpredictability that he brings, is the final shock that has stunned the UK into action.
Of course, defence insiders know that increasing spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 is not soon enough.
But this – coupled with Sir Keir’s language about the need for a “generational response” – is a landmark moment.
The beginning of the correction of a strategic mistake made by Labour and Conservative governments over years to take a “holiday from history” and fail to find credible, capable armed forces and ensure society understands the importance of defence and the ability to deter.
World
‘Better late than never’: Palestinian minister says UK recognition of state would be ‘courageous step’
Britain will be taking “a courageous step at a very difficult time” by officially recognising a Palestinian state, according to the authority’s foreign minister, who told Sky News she believes the announcement – expected in the coming days – will inspire more nations to follow suit.
The Palestinian Authority’s foreign minister, Varsen Aghabekian, told me Britain’s move was “better late than never”, and said “Britain, with its weight, can influence other countries to come forward and recognise, because that is the right thing to do”.
But she also said she is “very angry” with the White House over its “unwavering support” for Israel, and said that Israel’s refusal to pass on tax revenue was pushing Palestinian civil society to the brink of “collapse”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Could recognition of Palestine change the West Bank?
Aghabekian was speaking as Britain, along with France, Canada and Australia, prepares to recognise the State of Palestine officially at the United Nations.
She told me: “Britain has been supporting the existence and the flourishing of Israel for some time, but I think today Britain is looking at the matter objectively, in terms of the right of people, in terms of complying with international law, and in terms of the future of this area for both the Israelis and Palestinians.”
She rejected the idea that recognising Palestine was a reward for Hamas terrorism, saying that “non-recognition” would also be a “reward to the extremists” and said that “if we wait until Israel decides it wants to go into negotiations with the Palestinians, then it won’t happen”.
Aghabekian told me she expected Gaza to be returned to the Palestinians, but I put it to her that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was being empowered by the diplomatic support he receives from America, and in particular, US President Donald Trump.
So is she angry with the White House? “Very angry, because I expect the White House and the United States of America to align with international law, with human rights, with having no double standards.
“This unwavering support for Israel, this blind support, is not only harming the Palestinians but also Israeli society.”
Read more:
What does recognising a Palestinian state mean?
Gaza could be ‘real estate bonanza’, Israeli minister says
Varsen Aghabekian speaks to Sky’s Adam Parsons
The state of Palestine is already recognised by three-quarters of the United Nations’ members. It comprises two separate territories – the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Together, they are officially known as the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The West Bank has been subject to Israeli military occupation since 1967, while Gaza has been attacked by Israel since the Hamas attacks of 7 October 2023, when nearly 1,200 Israelis were killed and around 250 people were taken hostage.
Since then, more than 65,000 people have been killed in Gaza as Israel has sought to destroy Hamas and recover its hostages. There are 48 hostages still in Gaza, with 20 believed to be alive.
She confirmed to me that Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority, which governs the West Bank, “has given guarantees in letters to various leaders around the globe that said Hamas will not be part of the governance of the Gaza Strip” and insisted there was “probably a worldwide consensus” on the topic.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
How has UK responded to Israel-Gaza conflict?
But she also insisted it was “not reasonable” to talk of completely erasing Hamas: “Hamas is an ideology, not a building that you bring down. Hamas is in people’s minds; in their heads.
“Those who support Hamas need to see a future, need to see something that is moving on the political level, need to see that there might be a state in which their children and their grandchildren might prosper.
“What people see today, whether they are Hamas supporters or not, they see darkness and they see destruction all over. They see violation of rights. They are helpless and hopeless. People need to see things are moving forward, and once that happens, there will be a shift in the mood, and they will look for a better future.”
But just as the Palestinians prepare to welcome recognition, Aghabekian said the West Bank was facing financial collapse as Israel continues to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars of tax revenue that, under a 30-year-old agreement, it collects on the Palestinian Authority’s behalf.
Israel has retained a proportion of the money since the start of the war in Gaza, but, encouraged by finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, it has recently withheld a much higher amount.
“People have not been paid, civil servants are only receiving small parts of their salaries. We can’t buy medical supplies, equipment, you name it,” said Aghabekian.
“How can a government run a country under such conditions? So yes, we are very worried.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment12 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024