Senior Ministry of Defence officials and military commanders told the House of Lords National Resilience Committee on 21 May that the UK is on a journey of improvement on homeland defence and national resilience, but acknowledged significant work remains.
Giving oral evidence to the committee’s inquiry into national resilience, Lieutenant General Sir Charles Collins, Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, Lieutenant General Paul Griffiths, Commander of Standing Joint Command, and Damian Johnson, the MoD’s Director of Homeland Security, outlined the framework being developed to meet both NATO Article Three obligations and domestic resilience requirements.
Johnson set out the Cabinet Office Home Defence Programme as the overarching cross-government effort, describing it as “a cross-government program to enhance national resilience and preparedness, so that the UK is even better able to withstand the sub-threshold attacks that we are under now and is better prepared to deter crisis and conflict in the future.” He confirmed that defence plans are being updated as part of a national defence plan, with NATO’s Steadfast Defender 27 exercise earmarked as the point at which those plans will be fully tested, describing it as planned to be “the largest mobilisation exercise since the Cold War.”
General Collins acknowledged the shift in how defence must now think about the homeland, noting that the traditional expeditionary concept of defending at range no longer fully applies. “Long-range systems, hybrid warfare means we’re at danger at home,” he said, adding that under NATO the UK has not only an Article Five but an Article Three obligation to look after itself in crisis. He said the UK is now part of a regional NATO plan, North West, to be commanded by a British four-star out of Norfolk by the end of the year.
General Griffiths outlined his operational plan for homeland defence under the title Fortitude, comprising four strands. The first, Reliance, connects eight joint military commands into local resilience forums across the country. The second, Sentinel, covers the defence of critical national infrastructure. The third, Genesis, addresses mass mobilisation and growing the military workforce. The fourth, Ford, covers the movement and protection of military assets as forces transition from crisis to conflict.
On reserves, General Collins described three categories: an operational reserve of up to 32,000, a reinforcement reserve of specialists drawn largely from industry, and a strategic reserve of around 35,000 former regulars. He said proposals under the forthcoming Defence Readiness Bill would lift the recall liability age to 65, and that Steadfast Defender 27 would test the recall system. “People feel that once they’ve left service, but still liable, they’re part of the force, which we haven’t done in the past,” he said.
General Griffiths was more direct about the purpose gap that has hampered reserve recruitment and retention, saying “I don’t think we’ve been as clear as we could be” about what is required of reservists. He described Genesis as the vehicle for reconnecting with the strategic reserve this year, and said the Brave Defender exercise series would run in parallel with Steadfast Defender to test Article Three homeland obligations alongside Article Five collective defence commitments.
On recruitment more broadly, Griffiths offered a positive assessment, saying it was the first time in approximately four years that more people had joined than left the armed forces. He cited reduced friction in the recruitment pipeline, improved branding and childcare provision as contributing factors, and confirmed the Army’s gap year scheme is due to begin in September 2026.
The question of a new civilian reserve specifically focused on protecting critical national infrastructure drew a measured response from Johnson, who confirmed the SDR had recommended exploring such a force and that advice to ministers is being prepared. “Defence should look at a new deal for what else it can do to support other lead government departments and industry on critical national infrastructure,” he said.
On the Defence Readiness Bill, which did not appear in the King’s Speech, General Collins was clear it would not slow existing work. “It’s not going to stop us getting ready,” he said, while acknowledging legislation would make the national liability “more robust.” Johnson said the approach would be evidence-led, informed by planning and exercise activity rather than legislating for its own sake.
The session forms part of a wider inquiry by the committee, chaired by Baroness Coussins, which is due to report in November 2026.
Can anyone tell me exactly how can army reservist be guarding the UK homeland in a time of crisis. There are only two conceivable enemies we can face, one is on the other side of the planet with zero capacity to project power beyond its immediate vicinity and its unlikely it will ever have capacity to project power in the North Atlantic. The other could not get an invasion force 40 miles from its own border in a surprise attack against one of the weakest countries in Europe. I fail to see what role a reservist army can play in the UK.
Any threat we face is air or naval. If it’s a matter of terrorism or civil unrest these are a job for the police.
By your logic, we don’t really need an army at all. Acknowledging that the era of expeditionary wars of choice is over and that any NATO obligation is a spending commitment only, there are tasks for which ground forces are needed. ( Capability commitments are not treaty mandated)
Terrorism and violent uprising cannot be handled by the police alone. Northern Ireland showed that as did the protracted state of emergency in France.
We need to be able to defend our own possessions against possible threats- Falklands, Gibraltar etc, or decide to give them up.
GBAD is almost non existent, yet current wars show how real the threat of long range drones and missiles is.
Pretty much everything else is a matter of choice, giving political leaders options. Many bemoan the small 148 MBT force but is it in fact too big for Britain’s own needs?
To some extent, the choices are about retaining capabilities we might need in the future and need to scale up quickly.
Which brings us back to reserves.
They are double hatting again if they are expecting the “operational Reserve” ( assume he means the Army Reserve ) to be used for home defence.
Much of the CS CSS of the Field Army is found from the Reserve, which heavily contribute to 101,102,104 Brigades, and in other areas.
The RAMS Reserve forms most of 2 Medical Group, yet as J has pointed out many times is made up of NHS staff who’d be needed in hospitals at home if the balloon went up.
The area that interests me is the mention of the Strategic Reserve, which could be used much better going forward, and the idea of a civilian force involved in defending CNI.
Recruit it on a county basis, I’d happily get involved in that if I could contribute.
On lifting the recall liability to 65, well, that’s just great. Maybe many might be happy, but from what I’m seeing, after risking life and limb then you might get dragged into the courts by the left wing lawyers and HMG for what you might have done in a split second decision while on operations, while the idle happily sit comfortable at home making no contribution???
If it were me who’d served, on your bike HMG, go and serve yourself before expecting the old and the bold to go and do it all over again, while you continue to cut the military, delay everything, and talk tough.
How about having a “Corps” of economic migrants who’ve arrived over the last two decades, to help them assimilate and help the country that’s taken them in, so that they make a contribution?
Otherwise, why the hell do you expect the old timers to do it all themselves, purely on their accumulated skill set?
No.