The UK and its European allies should move towards a more forward-leaning military posture, including stronger defence in the Baltics and High North, as part of efforts to shift Russian risk calculus, according to a parliamentary report.
The Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy highlights criticism from experts that the current approach to managing Russia-related risks has been too incremental, contributing to a more attritional form of conflict in Ukraine rather than enabling decisive outcomes. In response, witnesses argued that European readiness should focus on forward defence in areas most exposed to Russian pressure.
The report also points to the need for deeper integration between the UK and European allies across defence industry, procurement and supporting infrastructure such as transport networks. A more “flexible and scalable” defence-industrial base is seen as essential, particularly if Europe is to reduce reliance on US support over time.
There are also calls for new mechanisms to support this shift, including closer cooperation through NATO or a “coalition of the willing” focused on funding and developing strategic capabilities. Integrating Ukraine into Europe’s defence-industrial base is highlighted as a priority, both to sustain its economy and to leverage the experience it has gained in combat.
On deterrence, the report notes concerns that Russia lowered its nuclear threshold in 2024, prompting suggestions that the UK should consider sub-strategic capabilities more closely. While recent steps to deepen nuclear cooperation with France and participate in NATO’s dual-capable aircraft arrangements are welcomed, experts stress that credible conventional forces remain central to deterrence.
Beyond continental Europe, the report flags the Arctic as an area where the UK risks falling behind. Despite longstanding strengths in polar science, some witnesses argue that Britain is not giving sufficient strategic attention to the region, particularly as tensions increase and areas such as the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap and Svalbard become more contested.
The report also warns against assuming a fundamental shift in Russia’s long-term trajectory. Experts describe “Putinism” as entrenched, centralised and likely to persist beyond any individual leader, urging caution about expectations of a post-Putin reset.
Alongside these strategic concerns, MPs and peers identify broader weaknesses in how national security policy is developed and delivered. They say industry and civil society were not sufficiently engaged in shaping the National Security Strategy, and warn that a lack of transparency, particularly on issues such as China, risks undermining public trust.
The committee calls for clearer accountability across government, including identifying which ministers are responsible for delivering specific elements of the strategy. It also recommends regular reporting to Parliament and annual progress updates to track implementation.
For goodness sake, we are repainting Bulldogs as fast as we can. What else do they expect?