The UK will provide a further GBP 100 million in air defence support to Ukraine, aimed at protecting cities and critical infrastructure from ongoing Russian attacks, according to the government.
The funding, announced by the Prime Minister at a Joint Expeditionary Force leaders’ meeting in Helsinki, brings total UK air defence commitments over the past two months to £600 million. The additional support is intended to be deployed rapidly to reinforce Ukraine’s ability to counter aerial threats.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “As Putin continues his abhorrent attacks across Ukraine, my message is simple – there will be no let up in the UK’s support.” He added that the package would help “protect millions of people in Ukraine from Russia’s barbaric strikes on cities and homes.”
Defence Secretary John Healey said the support would deliver “vital air defence to protect civilians, cities and critical infrastructure from Russia’s relentless attacks,” and linked the effort to wider cooperation between UK and Ukrainian industry. He also highlighted what he described as an “axis of aggression between Russia and Iran” as a factor shaping the security environment.
The new funding builds on a £500 million package announced in February, which included contributions to NATO’s Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List, more than 1,000 Lightweight Multirole Missiles, and support for industrial collaboration between the UK and Ukraine. Additional deliveries include 1,200 air defence missiles and 200,000 rounds of artillery ammunition through multinational initiatives.
Good news. But what about some sort of commitment to our own vulnerabilities? Sure the whole country can’t be covered but we can’t even defend a handful of critical sites!
With a little focus and determination we should be able to mass produce these air defences in such a way as to resolve our own air defences in addition to the Ukrainian defences. There isnot future in building these things by hand. We need a production line – probably several production lines. This is not rocket science (or maybe it is).
And what we spending on our GBAD? we give, gift but never replace. Ukraine rightly needs the help but on the whole they have more and better GBAD than we do. Time to think about protecting the UK as well. Rather than just talking about ir and having a few projects.
UKR is the ultimate test environment so I understand trying new kit there for our benefit.
As you say, we could do with buying some kit for UKPLC protection as we have been a bit exposed by the latest shenanigans.
Up to that point it was just about credible to suspect that there might have been some undeclared GBAD facility and now everyone knows that there isn’t….
I totally support helping Ukraine, but not at our own loss. It is the best place to test new kit etc and again I agree on that. My biggest thing is we have been publicly embarassed around the world for our lack of long/med range GBAD, And its just a case of carry on scrap what we can togeather and wait and see if any time in the future we fix the problem.
That is the whole problem its wait and see, while the clock is indeed ticking and we look weak around the world. Any kit ordered this year will not be in service for a few years so its a gap that is not filled and the problem will not go away.
On the out side it seems like nothing is being done, no one is pushing for any thing to be done and its ok we will get to when we get to.
I don’t really agree that everything that is ordered is not in service for years.
Some things that we have we can order more.
Other things that we don’t have we can be politely insistent on.
One of the reasons why a lot of UK materiel supply is so slow is that is
what is contracted.
true, Boxers slow dragged out delivery time is on of those contrats, Any thing new we buy will not be in full service for over a year, Archer was about a year from order to full service,
It helps when it’s 2nd kit.
in the case of Archer yes, they were already built and transfured government to government. ,
Questions for the MOD and HMG
1) when will the defence investment plan be published
2) what urgent action is being taken to rearm and prepare the UK for war considering the international security situation is deteriorating significantly
3) when will the conclusions and outcomes of the SDSR 2025 be delivered into service
Agree with other posts on here, we need much improved GBAD for the UK’s main critical infrastructure and defence industrial/ military sites. relying on a few typhoon interceptors flying on QRA will not deliver the interceptors readily available and urgently needed to ensure the UK is not taken out of any conflict on day one by 50-100 cruise missile or drone strikes hitting sensitive locations.
“when will the defence investment plan be published”
When enough sand is through the hour glass that funding it is the next parliament’s problem – that is the real answer.
Apparently may is the timeframe now.
Is that may or may not be released or the month of May?
The article read suggested May, it may be right or may be wrong.. I may make a guess that may be wrong… we may wish for more clarity than May..
I consulted Bernard Wolley to clarify matters – he was most pleased to be of Assitance.
“Minister, the article rather tentatively implies that the Defence Investment Plan is due in May. It may, of course, be accurate… or it may be wholly speculative. The difficulty, you see, is that May is a month, but it is also, in the present context, a state of mind — a sort of administrative limbo in which commitments are simultaneously suggested and denied.
I might venture a conjecture — purely for the sake of discussion — that the author has been given a vague indication which has then been translated into something resembling a date. Which may be correct. Or may not. Indeed, it is entirely possible that the Plan is due in May in the sense that it is due in some May… at some point… in some year… possibly not this one.
And while it is perfectly true that we cannot accuse the Ministry of missing a deadline which has never been formally acknowledged, we may nevertheless find ourselves in the somewhat awkward position of being held responsible for not having prepared for an event which may or may not occur, at a time which may or may not arrive.
So, Minister, I merely suggest that we might prefer a degree of clarity somewhat greater than that which May — or, indeed, the Ministry — is presently providing.”
Healey is pretty consistent and his next Defence Questions are 11th May, with the State Opening on 13th so there are my 2 probable guesstimates.
It actually gives them 2 options :-
A) It’s an increase and it’s significant enough to be a Political Ra Ra announcement so dropping it into a staged question is maximum publicity.
B) It’s crap so stick it in the Kings Speach so everyone can forget about !
Or even the other way around.
Polling day is May 7th. The DIP should drive a lot of investment and jobs in Wales and Scotland so for the govt this would argue in favour of releasing it before the 7th. Unsure of its effect on the English local authority elections. I suspect these will just be a massive anti govt protest vote.
Yes I agree if there is good news in the DIP politically they will move heaven and earth to get it out.. and I not talking good news for the geostrategically aware.. I’m talking so good easy selling points and job creation as well as investment I. Communities.. also can they sell the look at the world we are defending you message.
So all I’m all I’m betting now ajex is sort of sorted they will move fast.. but have it close to the 7th of May so it’s the big news story and people are thinking about it.
Yes, I’m not going to bet against Ajax being confirmed as ‘sorted’ with the message that Wales should stick with Labour, not Plaid Cymru. I wonder is an order for the Ajax IVF on the cards. In a similar vein for Scotland. I think the govt will want to announce an order for Babcock in Rosyth but that might be the Danish order for T31s. England might see orders for UK assembly of Patria and whatever they choose as the Land Rover replacement. None of this will please the Greens of course but they are a constitutionally unhappy bunch.
Since last Autumn the DIP publication date slips one or two months … every one or two months. As others have pointed put, the government is probably not to unhappy about that as it (1) gives them an excuse to defer having to find extra for defence as long as possible; (2) even if some extra money is found, there will still be obvious gaps and omissions in the DIP that will create a hail of criticism; (3) if any extra money is found for defence there will be a hail of criticism that it should instead have been spent on foreign aid, pensions, net zero, NHS, etc.
An even worse scenario is that it’s decided that in the light of recent events the DIP cant “affordably” be aligned with SDR2025 – and the later needs to be updated already, including making some difficult decisions on capabilities to cut in order to free funding for new capabilities. E.g. Does carrier strike really justify its cost when the UK is focused on NATO and Northern Europe? Does the army really need any heavy armoured formations when these have become so few that they are tokens that will make no difference on the battlefield? Does the RAF really need more A400’s when a much smaller, more versatile and cheaper aircraft (C295, C-390, …) could fulfill so many taskings?
GBAD could never provide defence against a surprise cruise missile defence. The best defence against Russian cruise missiles is towed array frigates operating in the Bear Gap and typhoons operating as far from the UK mainland as possible to intercept any Russian bombers. All of that is in place already today.
Ukraine has been attacked by hundreds of Russian cruise missiles in a single day before and at no point has it ever been close to being knocked out.
So our total lack of Long range GBAD is not an issue then is all in hand job done? Well glad you cleared that up nothing to worry about from those ballistic misslies, drones etc, thank the lord for that.
I think it is called full spectrum defence to enable UK to maintain its offensive capabilities.
How about boosting homeland defence?
That is my point, we can not defend an airfield from a prop powered slow drone, let alone defend our home land, but its ok there are a few projects and industry days looking in to it, no rush.
On what do you base this, given the excellent pertinence of Rapid Sentry and the LMM in the Middle East?
A drone hit the run way, and we had wait over a week for our fully working only Type 45 to get there. A £ billion ship is all we have to protect us from ballistic missiles. So does that one ship, out of 6 protect Cyprus/Gibraltar and the whole UK? we have no integrated air defence.
We have to had send Stormer to Cyprus, along with the stormers we gifted to Ukraine how much close in Air defence does that leave the Army? robing Peter to pay Paul.
Any one who thinks thats a good idea is likely on meds, why no gun based GBAD? cheaper than an LMM, As has been the case for 20 plus years its the military scraping together what it can going from crise to crises then patting its self on the back when just has enough to get by.
I saw that Brazil recently bought 3x EMADS SAM batteries from Italy for $624m. That uses the CAMM-ER missile. The same deal for Britain would be good. One battery each for Lossiemouth, London & Akrotiri, would be better than what we haven’t got now.
London, not where the SSBNs are?
Pompey?
Aldermaston?
It would be great to have a full multi layer SAM system for the whole of the UK, but that is probably $25 Billion+. Start with what we can afford.
You missed the point, entirely.
For the last 28 years, I have seen the MoD think about missile defence, spend money on gaining information, then order nothing because of the huge cost. We need to get off zero, so that means starting small.
Still, you miss the point.
Threats change over time. The risk today is to our most exposed bases. They are Lossiemouth & Akrotiri. Putin threatened Boris in 2022, that he could launch a missile into Downing Street. London is still where decision makers are.
Protecting the nuclear estate is a good idea if you have the resources. I doubt a CND laden Labour government would find the money.
Start with what you can. You can always add in future years.
When those missiles fly, the decision makers will be miles away from Downing Street.
Given enough warning. Look at what happened to the leadership in Tehran.
I have decided to give this bone to my wife’s dog
Plus add Portsmouth, Devonport and Faslane, London, Southampton and Felixstowe and others. Barrow, UKs sole sub manufacturers.
I think we need to see where this $25 Billion figure comes from and what could be sensibly done for maybe a lot less. A shared pool of missiles with the RN is a start so no real wastage. Having an Aster SAMP/T NG ttpe system that could handle Aster+CAMM+ NASAM+others and if a enough quantity to be deployable to wherever and when needed. Complement SkySabre, Stormer & Rapid Sentry.
A single THAAD battery is $2.5 billion, a single Patriot battery is $1.1 billion. Try to cover the whole UK in multiple layers & it soon adds up. That is why we need to do it in stages, so as not to give HM Treasury a “fit of the vapours”.
Maybe costs can be more controlled and better value if UK/European missiles are used? There’s also the MBDA’s Aquila to look at.
Trying to get pricing on European systems can be tricky. SAMP-T is still being quoted at 500m euro, but that is an old price. I suspect it is nearer to Patriot on cost for the latest version. CAMM-MR looks promising as does Aquila, but they are some way off production yet. BAE is developing a new 2 colour seeker for THAAD, so that missile should get an upgrade soon.
I believe its the same truck launcher as SkySabre too. Extra 20km+ range over CAMM which would be handy. Can quad pack in mk41.
Have a look at YouTube “weapons of victory” excellent Ukrainian channel showing all the kit/platforms in use in Ukraine from the west, how they are used, advantages and disadvantages! Excellent channel for those who want to see how the kit we send is used (within security considerations of course) 👍
Britain has two major constraints on conventional defence spending.
The first is the expense of the nuclear deterrent. 2014/2022 demonstrate what can happen to a country after unilateral nuclear disarmament; not an option.
The second, which we can do something about, is the disastrous and, frankly, mad pursuit of net zero.
‘The book critically reviews the scientific foundations of modern climate theory, the evolution of IPCC assessments, and the limits of global climate models (GCMs) when confronted with observations…From this evidence emerges a balanced view of climate risk, favoring pragmatic adaptation over narrowly defined policy pathways such as Net Zero.’
‘To achieve net-zero carbon, affluent countries will incur costs of at least 20 percent of their annual GDP. While global cooperation is essential to achieve decarbonization by 2050, major emitters such as the United States, China, (India) and Russia have conflicting interests. To eliminate carbon emissions by 2050, governments face unprecedented technical, economic and political challenges, making rapid and inexpensive transition impossible.’ Vaclav Smil 2024
In view of the now clearly identified gap between ambitions and reality regarding Britain’s defences, in order to properly resource the Strategic Defence Review of 2025, net zero must be abandoned in short order.
‘Renewable electricity generators have now enjoyed generous financial support for over twenty years without showing any significant progress towards independent economic viability. On the contrary, the requirement for such support seems to be rising. The public is surely entitled to ask when government will bring this extraordinary and insupportable level of subsidy to an end…In the period 2002 to the present, the total cost to the electricity consumer of those renewable electricity subsidy schemes that we can quantify has amounted to approximately £220 billion (in 2024 prices), equivalent to nearly £8,000 per household. The annual subsidy cost is currently £25.8 billion a year, a sum equivalent to nearly fifty per cent of UK annual spending on defence. Subsidy to renewable electricity generators now comprises about 40% of the total cost of electricity supply in the United Kingdom.’
The Renewable Energy Foundation (The Renewable Energy Foundation is a registered charity promoting sustainable development for the benefit of the public by means of energy conservation and the use of renewable energy. REF is supported by private donation and has no political affiliation or corporate membership)
I would like to know whose budget the arms for Ukraine comes out of. I believe the Gulf wars came out of the Defence Budget. Hence the lack of procurement during that time.