Defence and security review sets out Global Britain’s balancing act

Boris Johnson has promised to make Britain “match-fit for a more competitive world” as he set out how the country would confront threats from hostile states and keep up with global advances in technology and cyber power.

The UK prime minister intended the review of security, defence and foreign policy — published over a year after it was first launched — to mark a new beginning in the UK’s relationship with the world, having just ended its five-decade membership of the EU.

There are striking announcements on an expansion of the nuclear deterrent, the dangers of biological and chemical warfare, and even the warning that “another novel pandemic remains a realistic possibility”.

However Peter Ricketts, the UK’s former national security adviser, said that in many ways, the review is “more balanced and less radical than had been foreshadowed”.

He said it presented a “nuanced” position on UK relations with China, and still “fudges” the details of Britain’s future security relationship with the EU. “No document can resolve all the problems,” he said. “This one presents high ambitions while omitting the prioritising of risks in previous reviews, so it largely avoids the hard choices.”

The nuclear deterrent

The surprise announcement of the review was that the UK is to lift the cap on the number of warheads it can stockpile by just over 40 per cent to 260. According to the document, this is a response to concerns that some states are “significantly increasing and diversifying their nuclear arsenals” and a range of new “technological threats” — although these were not specified. 

The move reverses Britain’s previous commitment to reduce its nuclear stockpile from 225 to no more than 180 warheads by the mid-2020s. By comparison, the US currently has an estimated 3,800 warheads, Russia 4,300 and France, western Europe’s other nuclear power, 290.

Johnson was not explicit about why he was choosing to raise the limit. One possible motive would be to counter improvements in missile defences by countries such as Russia, which would require more warheads to ensure some get past the shield to continue to hold a city like Moscow at risk. There have also been increasing concerns expressed about nuclear proliferation by North Korea and Iran.

Matthew Harries, a nuclear expert at the Royal United Services Institute, said the move was “a real blow” to the multilateral process of nuclear disarmament that has been in place since the end of the cold war.

“Whatever you think the deterrence impact of these changes is going to be, there will be a cost in terms of the UK’s reputation in nuclear diplomacy, and that stands out as a contrast to emphasis on multilateralism elsewhere in the review,” Harries said. 

State-based threats from China and Russia

After months of speculation over how Downing Street intended to reset its relationship with China, the answer is to designate the country as the “biggest state-based threat to the UK’s economic security” and a “systemic competitor”.

The review continues the government’s attempted balancing act between recognising the security risks posed by China, while maintaining the good relations necessary to protect trade ties and enable joint working on issues such as climate change.

The strategy makes clear that Britain will “increase protection” of its critical infrastructure, institutions and sensitive technology — presumably as a bulwark against Chinese interference and industrial espionage.

It warns that Beijing’s military modernisation and growing assertiveness in the Pacific region will pose an “increasing risk to UK interests”. However, it also promises that Britain will pursue a “positive economic relationship [with Beijing], including deeper trade links and more Chinese investment in the UK”.

The approach drew criticism from Conservative party China hawks, who castigated the prime minister for failing to pursue a sufficiently tough line on Beijing. Former foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt expressed concern about human rights abuses against the Uighurs, and questioned why China was merely being designated a systemic challenge “given the terrible events in Hong Kong and Xinjiang”.

The review’s evaluation on Russia is far more straightforward, with the country designated as the “most acute direct threat” to Britain. The review also pledges to help build up resilience against Moscow among its eastern European neighbours including Ukraine, where the UK already helps train the armed forces.

Terrorism and ‘CBRN’ threat

One of the review’s most notable warnings was it was “likely” that a terrorist group would launch a successful chemical, biological radiological or nuclear (CBRN) attack by 2030.

Security experts said the government’s fears about the biological threat have increased following the coronavirus pandemic — which has demonstrated the disruptive effect of a contagious disease.

Hamish de Bretton Gordon, a former commander of the UK’s chemical and biological weapons regiment, has previously raised concerns that the CBRN threat was not taken seriously enough. He said the reference to an attack by 2030 “might be stretching it a bit — this is a threat that’s evident now”.

He pointed out that Islamic State used chemical weapons extensively, which had been “tremendously effective” in Iraq against Kurdish Peshmerga forces.

The document also highlighted the danger posed by state-sponsored terrorism. Referencing the attacks in Manchester, London and Reading over the past four years, the review said the threat from violent extremists remained “all too real” — whether these were Islamist-inspired, Northern Ireland-related or driven by “other motivations”.

Overseas aid

Johnson promised in his foreword to the review to restore a controversial £4bn cut in its overseas aid budget “when the fiscal situation allows”.

But the review strikes a potentially downbeat note on aid, with one section on the UK as a “force for good” suggesting that as other countries become able to finance their own development priorities “we will gradually move towards providing UK expertise in place of grants”.

Conservative MPs, led by former development minister Andrew Mitchell, have demanded a House of Commons vote on the decision to cut Britain’s aid budget from the 0.7 per cent enshrined in law to 0.5 per cent.

But Johnson insisted the original legislation allowed for the target to be missed in “exceptional circumstances” and that the coronavirus pandemic fell into that category.

Ministers fear that if they put the planned cut to a vote, the government would suffer an embarrassing rebellion or defeat.

Science and technology

At the heart of the review is a commitment to using science and technology to boost UK prosperity and increase its “strategic advantage” against adversaries.

This is partly about working with allies to build new capabilities in areas such as telecoms, following Britain’s decision to ban the Chinese telecoms company Huawei from the UK’s 5G rollout. 

In defence terms, the focus is on making the most of Britain’s science base to deter threats, particularly in space, which is becoming a new front in Chinese and Russian military experimentation.

At least £6.6bn in defence funding will be invested to deliver an “enduring military edge” in areas such as space, lasers and advanced high-speed missiles, according to the review.

The document also brings together military and civil space policy for the first time and announces an integrated “space strategy”, so that by 2030, the UK can “monitor, protect and defend” its own interests in space.