Readers have responded to Simon Jenkins' recent article on UK defence spending, challenging the notion that the debate should be limited to whether to spend more or far more. They argue that two key points are missing from parliamentary and media discussions: the need for political resolve among European NATO members rather than simply more money, and the growing cost of nuclear weapons programmes that is squeezing other defence priorities.
Political resolve vs. budget increases
Steve Barwick, chair of the Nuclear Education Trust, points out that European NATO members already outspend Russia on defence. The central issue, he says, is not funding but political will—where do European allies draw their red lines, and what is their strategy to end Vladimir Putin's illegal war in Ukraine?
Barwick also highlights that the government's defence investment plan rarely acknowledges the rising cost of nuclear weapons spending. According to the public accounts committee, nuclear expenditure will increase from 18% to 25% of the defence budget. This includes the Dreadnought replacement for Trident, which is behind schedule, and a £15bn programme for a new UK-developed nuclear weapon, Astraea.
Lack of parliamentary scrutiny
Parliament has repeatedly complained that published information is too limited for meaningful scrutiny. In response, the government has proposed a new parliamentary committee to oversee nuclear defence expenditure, but it will be appointed by the prime minister, report only to the prime minister, and meet in private. Barwick calls for greater parliamentary scrutiny and a more informed public debate.
Preparing for war to ensure peace
Hector Tsukagoshi of London argues that Jenkins' article is shortsighted. While the Ministry of Defence has issues, cutting armed forces funding would leave Britain worse off. Tsukagoshi warns that authoritarians are on the rise, and if the UK cannot defend Taiwan or eastern Europe, it may spur China and Russia into action. He notes that Russia is already waging covert war through cyber-attacks on infrastructure.
Tsukagoshi points out that the military provides employment, welfare, and growth—it is one of the UK's biggest employers, drives innovation, and responds to disasters, from emergency care on Tristan da Cunha to aid deployment in Venezuela.
Russia's actions not just a nuisance
Jari Mäkelä of Helsinki, Finland, criticises Jenkins for describing Russia's actions as 'making a nuisance of itself.' He cites recent Russian attacks on civilian targets in Kyiv, killing at least 20, and the Novichok poisoning in Salisbury. He also references Guardian reports on Russian drone surveillance of nuclear sites in the UK, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
