The UK government has reaffirmed its commitment to NATO and outlined plans to reinforce its leadership in European and transatlantic security.
Responding to a parliamentary question from David Reed, Conservative MP for Exmouth and Exeter East, Defence Minister Luke Pollard described NATO as the “cornerstone of UK and Euro-Atlantic security,” adding that the UK’s commitment to the alliance is “unshakeable.”
Pollard stated, “This Government is pursuing a ‘NATO First’ defence strategy. In response to growing threats, the Prime Minister has underlined the UK’s cast-iron commitment to spending 2.5% of GDP on defence. Our commitment to NATO includes our nuclear deterrent and world-class carriers with 5th generation combat aircraft.”
He framed these investments as critical to ensuring that the UK remains at the forefront of the alliance’s defence capabilities.
The minister also highlighted that “European security will be our foreign and defence priority.” He stressed the need to restore trust with the UK’s closest neighbours, pointing to new security and defence agreements with Germany, plans for a comprehensive UK-EU Security Pact, and the reinvigoration of the Lancaster House Agreement with France as key initiatives.
Pollard said these measures are designed to “enhance cooperation between the UK and key allies that complements the wider NATO alliance.” The approach reflects a commitment to addressing the growing security challenges across Europe and strengthening the UK’s role within the transatlantic partnership.
At the UK Defence Journal, we aim to deliver accurate and timely news on defence matters. We rely on the support of readers like you to maintain our independence and high-quality journalism. Please consider making a one-off donation to help us continue our work. Click here to donate. Thank you for your support!
Definitely positioning the Carriers as being useful to NATO beyond the worldwide CSG role.
Hopefully bodes well for retention 🤞
The thing is, we have been “NATO first” for decades.
It just sounds good repeating what already exists.
“cast iron committment to spending 2.5 per cent”. sometime , when circumstances permit, as economic factors allow et al. As you say keep repeating and maybe it will be believed.
The UK was literally the driving force and founding member of NATO, the US never wanted to be involved in European defence.
NATO was probably Labours greatest foreign policy achievement.
Sure. That is history.
Fact is they’re still re announcing what exists just like the previous incompetents.
Everyone including the most basic simpleton in the nation knows NATO is the bedrock of European defence.
If the Donald does withdraw from NATO it’s worth the UK increasing defence spending to 3% of GDP.
No other big economies in NATO are willing or able to spend any more and the UK
Cementing its position as the biggest military power in Europe would give the UK great influence on the world stage.
Even without the USA, ENATO would still be a massive military power especially if the shock of US exit forced it to become more integrated.
If NATO was to extend its remit to cover the Falkland Islands then the UK could almost entirely commit defence expenditure in the South Atlantic to Europe instead. This would enhance European defence while costing other NATO partners absolutely nothing in exchange for a miniscule chance of having to defend the Falklands one day which itself would be even more unlikely if the islands were under the NATO umbrella.
Just how serious is NATO taking collective European defence?
There’s very good reasons not to expand the NATO commitment like that. Suddenly every US base on the globe would represent a potential Article V commitment. China bombs a US base in Japan or Korea? We get dragged in whether we like it or not.
Iran launches a missile strike on US troops in Iraq?
We’re now going into Iran.
I understand your point but the Falkland Islands are not analogous to US military bases in foreign countries such as Iraq or South Korea. They should be treated like Hawaii or the Azores, places like that.
YAWN…Guessing the old No10 voice recording must have been used for this one…