Britain is ‘under sustained attack’ from foreign states

In a Commons debate on foreign interference, MPs argued that hostile state activity is increasingly shaping Britain’s security, economic resilience and democratic life, with speakers repeatedly pointing to Russia, China and a more uncertain international environment.

Opening the debate, Liberal Democrat MP James MacCleary said the issue now sits at the centre of national life, telling MPs: “Foreign interference now strikes at the very core of Britain’s democratic institutions, our economy and our national security.”

He said the debate came against “an extraordinary backdrop” and argued the United States’ newly released national security strategy amounted to “nothing less than the wholesale rejection of the values and alliances that have underpinned British security for 80 years”.

MacCleary warned that Britain’s reliance on alliances and international institutions is being tested, with bodies such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation and the OSCE “receding in influence at precisely the moment when Britain needs them most”. He described the UK as “dangerously exposed” as authoritarian states probe democratic societies, saying: “We live in a fractured world in which authoritarian states test boundaries with impunity, and Britain is squarely in their crosshairs.”

He pointed to Russia and China as central concerns, arguing Russia’s war in Ukraine was “on our doorstep” while China had “made a grab for British infrastructure, from our nuclear power stations to our telecommunications networks”. He also cited comments he attributed to Sweden’s chief of defence, quoting: “Political polarisation in many countries in the west is…a candy shop for a hybrid-warfare warrior to exploit”. Domestic political divisions, he said, create vulnerabilities that adversaries seek to use.

SNP MP Stephen Gethins intervened to press MacCleary on Georgia. MacCleary replied that the international context made closer European cooperation more urgent, adding: “the context of the national security strategy has, if anything, made it more urgent to work more closely with our European friends.” He pointed to negotiations around the EU SAFE defence fund, saying the talks “seem to have broken down” and calling for clarity on what assessment the government has made of the benefit to British industry.

Counter Terror highlights rising state threats, disinfo push

MacCleary argued that cyber-attacks, disinformation and economic coercion can now rival military power in effect. He warned against transactional geopolitics, saying: “treating alliances as protection rackets and viewing international law as optional—leads to disaster for a country of our size and position.” He also cited alleged acts of sabotage linked to Russia, describing them as part of a wider hybrid campaign.

Referring to an arson case, MacCleary quoted what he described as a message from the convicted individual: “They have a warehouse in Czech Republic to burn for 35 thousand”. He told MPs: “This is hybrid warfare, and Britain is on the frontline.” He said much of what occurs remains undisclosed: “what is publicly understood is just the tip of the iceberg”. The aim, he argued, is internal destabilisation: “These attacks seek to destabilise British democracy internally, rather than defeat us militarily.” He characterised it as: “espionage delivered via the gig economy”.

On China, MacCleary said the country’s involvement in UK infrastructure should be understood as “strategic positioning” rather than simple investment, citing Huawei’s past role in telecoms and China General Nuclear’s stake in Hinkley Point C. He also linked trade and investment to national security, saying: “We cannot and must not separate economic security from national security.”

MacCleary criticised what he described as a failure to properly investigate alleged Russian interference in the Brexit referendum, saying: “We still do not know the full extent of Russian influence on the most consequential vote in modern British history.” He also referred to Russian attacks on British soil, including the Litvinenko poisoning and the Skripal case, arguing they showed Russia would violate sovereignty with impunity.

He said the US national security strategy’s language should alarm allies, and quoted a post attributed to US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau stating America can no longer “pretend that we are partners” with European countries pursuing policies “utterly adverse” to American interests.

Labour MP Calvin Bailey said foreign interference should be understood as part of a wider confrontation, telling the House: “This is more than interference—it is conflict.” He added: “Russia believes that it is already at war with NATO, and so with us.” Bailey argued Russia aims to erode social cohesion and trust: “slice by slice, until we find that the freedoms, security and unity we have taken for granted have been carved away.” He cited historical KGB operations and said modern Russia supports extremist parties while contracting sabotage to criminals.

Bailey also made allegations about political influence linked to pro-Kremlin networks, prompting Deputy Speaker Caroline Nokes to caution Members about criticising others without warning. She told the House: “If hon. Members are going to criticise other hon. Members of this House, they should have informed them in advance.”

Conservative MP John Cooper widened the focus to devolved issues, asking: “Who is in charge of our national security, and who is a risk to our national security?” He criticised Scottish Government engagement with China, including a visit to Beijing by a Scottish minister, and raised concerns about a Chinese firm seeking to enter energy infrastructure, which he suggested could carry “possible kill switches and all”.

SNP MP Chris Law described foreign interference as a daily threat and argued the UK’s response has been too slow. He cited the Strategic Defence Review calling Russia “an immediate and pressing threat” and argued disinformation infrastructure has been allowed too much space, while the BBC World Service remains underfunded. He questioned whether the government would consider stronger central coordination, asking what steps were being taken to shift from reactive action to sustained resilience.

Law also focused on the foreign influence registration scheme. He noted Russia is on the enhanced tier while China is not, despite what he cited as the Strategic Defence Review’s assessment that China is “likely to continue seeking advantage through espionage and cyber-attacks, and through securing cutting-edge Intellectual Property through legitimate and illegitimate means.”

Labour MP Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi intervened to cite “transnational repression, misinformation and disinformation, hostile cyber-attacks” and “spy ships surveilling our critical infrastructure”, and asked whether a dedicated minister for homeland security was needed. Law replied: “it is now clearer than ever that we need a separate Minister and Department.”

Responding for the government, Security Minister Dan Jarvis said: “This has been an excellent debate.” He thanked MacCleary for securing it, and said contributions showed “the diverse and evolving nature of the foreign interference threat landscape”. Jarvis said that in recent years the UK had seen attempts to influence politics through “covert donations” and cited “MI5’s disruptive alert on Christine Lee and the conviction of Reform UK’s leader in Wales, Nathan Gill, for bribery offences”. He also pointed to “the issuing of arrest warrants and bounties by the Hong Kong police” and “Russian information operations spreading false pro-Kremlin narratives online to undermine support for Ukraine”.

Jarvis warned of the stakes, saying: “When these threats are left unchecked, they place at risk the things we value most about our country: our democratic values and freedom of expression, and our ability to pursue long-term economic growth.” He added: “Upholding national security is the first duty of Government, and we continue to take all the measures necessary to disrupt these threats.”

He said the government’s approach rests on the National Security Act 2023, which he said “overhauled our espionage laws and introduced a crucial new foreign interference offence”. Jarvis added that he was “deeply committed” to improving cross-government coordination and said the Prime Minister had renewed the defending democracy taskforce. “I am leveraging that taskforce to co-ordinate the delivery of the Government’s counter-political interference and espionage action plan,” he said.