Defence Minister Luke Pollard has defended the UK’s ongoing military presence in the Middle East following criticism in the House of Commons over the recent security breach at RAF Brize Norton.
SNP MP Graham Leadbitter raised concerns that “years of under-investment” had compromised security at UK bases, warning that last week’s break-in by the activist group Palestine Action had left armed forces personnel and their families feeling alarmed. Leadbitter, who represents Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey—a constituency home to three military installations—questioned how the Government could justify further overseas operations in the Middle East given domestic vulnerabilities.
“The actions of Palestine Action at Brize Norton last week were utterly reprehensible and will have caused fear and alarm for military personnel and their families across the country,” he said. “At the same time, though, the UK Government are not ruling out engaging in further military conflict in the Middle East… How can the UK Government seriously be considering engaging in further military intervention abroad, given that years of under-investment has diminished security at bases right here in the UK?”
In response, Pollard reiterated the purpose of the UK’s forward deployments and rejected any suggestion that overseas operations were undermining domestic base security.
“The deployment of UK military force in the Middle East is to defend our people and our bases,” he said. “It is worth reminding ourselves why we have a UK military presence in the Middle East: to support regional stability and to undertake counter-Daesh operations in Iraq and Syria. They are the same operations that help keep the streets of Britain safe from terrorists.”
He acknowledged Leadbitter’s concerns for personnel safety but argued that the defence of UK bases abroad is a necessary extension of the country’s broader security posture.
“That is the reason we have a presence in the Middle East—securing our allies—and it is why the Prime Minister flowed forward additional jets to provide cover and support for our armed forces personnel,” Pollard said. “As we assess what is taking place currently, we reserve the right to make further military changes to ensure that our people are kept safe.”
His remarks come amid growing political pressure over both the domestic security implications of the Brize Norton incursion and the UK’s role in the volatile regional climate following Israeli airstrikes on Iran and retaliatory missile launches.
The Government has so far confirmed that while no UK assets were used in the Israeli strikes, additional forces, including 14 RAF Typhoons based in Akrotiri, remain ready for potential reinforcement.
A blatant attempt to masquerade an attack on ME deployments as one on base security. The SNP being pathetic once again.
In order to be taken seriously Government need a robust attitude towards military deployments. They should not be swayed by minority groups.
Base security and the security of important assets is essntial – especially as tentions mount. It is not rocket science.
OT – at the Nato press conference, Starmer just announce 4.1% of GDP for defence by 2027 with target of 5% by 2035
2.6% by 2027 already announced, including the extra 0.1% on security. The 1.5% is the resillience and control budget, which is just shuffling things like Border Force into a new accounting bucket. There’s no new expenditure for that. So 1.5% plus 2.6% is 4.1%.
I think he’s just announced no new Defence spending!
thanks was typing as you replied
that said with that vague 1.5% which is part of the NATO 5%, i expect 4.1% in 2027 is really the 2.7% previously announced + that vague 1.5%
Most NATO leaders tell Trump whatever he wants to satisfy him, as bad parents do with spoiled kids. Difference is that he will go 3 years before we see the reality of today’s commitments.
“will go 3 IN years”
Anyone talking about the announcement of 12 F35A’s for UK Nuclear deterrence?
yes there is ukjd article on it already
Bloody Hell so there is. I didnt see it on first scan. Its been a busy defence day!
I’ll go first. These are not ‘new’ jets. They are part of what was the 27 Jet F35B follow-on order, now 12 F35A and 15 F35B. So no increase in total aircraft but as least the bean counters have saved some money as i believe the F35A unit cost is cheaper? Sigh….
Yes, interesting. But if we put US bombs on them, we can only use them with US consent. A trickier matter than it used to be. Could we not make some more WE177, so that we would have complete control ?
Some sort of attempt for tactical nukes to not be zero vs Trident Armagedoon?