During a parliamentary session, Oliver Ryan, Labour and Co-operative MP for Burnley, raised concerns about the UK’s defence capabilities in light of potential shifts in US policy under the incoming administration.
Ryan expressed his apprehension, stating, “As a great supporter of the British-American alliance, I am disappointed to have to ask this question, but, given some of the recent tweets from people associated with the incoming US Administration, what assessment has the Secretary of State made of the UK’s exposure of our defence capabilities, given that there may be some changes in the White House?”
Defence Secretary John Healey responded by reaffirming the enduring strength of the UK-US defence partnership. “The US is the closest ally of this country, and this country is the closest security ally of the US,” Healey stated.
He emphasised the stability of the alliance, adding, “That has been the case for decades—it has withstood the ups and downs of the political cycle on both sides of the Atlantic.”
Healey assured Parliament that the UK Government would maintain a close working relationship with the incoming US administration, saying, “We as a Government will work closely with the incoming US Administration.”
Healy assumes a lot. I guess Donald will take him on a steep learning curve.
What relationship?, wihout ships, tanks or aircrafts Britain is no longer a credible ally.
So why did they want to join AUKUS with us?
Watch the technology workshare get announced over time.
In all fairness we do have 13 frigates in order or in build as well as three solids ships.
T45 is getting fixed. Both QEC have been fixed.
My ire would be more focussed on why the RFA / RN crewing fiasco is still going on.
The fact that so much of the RFA, which is the key enabler, is on the wall is a major worry.
You can have as much kit as you want if you don’t have manpower it isn’t much use!
It could be that they are dealing with the RFA/RN manpower issue as part of the SDR and MRSS decision.
When you consider the pay rises handed out to other groups and their total costs the pay settlement for the RFA is peanuts and the continued delays in sorting it out are an insult to the brave men and women of the RFA who follow the RN into conflict zones on ships with minimal self defence weaponry. Anyone that doesn’t understand that should look up RFA Sir Galahad and Sir Tristram.
The fact that they also do sterling work in humanitarian relief should not be overlooked but sadly it frequently is.
You are right in what you say, which leads me to believe that Healey is planning a major change. Others will know better than me but I understand that the RFA is actually paid on a civil service pay scale – weird. To change this would require the curremt RFA to cease to exist. I wonder if what they are thinking is to change the way we use reservists.
Generally Agree…won’t say 1 way relationship but probably 70 30 in favour of US…UK should stop pretending its ‘special’…unless it helps people sleep at night
It is a bit like a prostitute arguing with the other whores, insisting SHE is the pimp’s favourite. Always a pathetic spectacle.
We were the junior partner even in ww2 when our resources included imperial forces. We relied on US money to keep UK going( in WW1, whilst we received US loans, we broadly financed ourselves)
Since then, the disparity between US and UK in population, GDP and of course military spending has grown much larger. If UK increased defence spending to US % of GDP, we would still only have forces @ a sixth of US levels.
Our reliance on Trident for deterrence makes it more difficult for a UK government to be too critical of the US, France has done much better in that respect. Equally concerning is that we try with an inadequate budget to be a mini superpower with small numbers of high end equipment and at least part time global reach. We could make better use of the available funds if we abandoned this conceit and focussed fully on our own direct defence.
How has France done better in any respect ??
Thankfully Politician’s have very little to do with defence cooperation, Trumps own military and intelligence services will do everything to keep him out of anything useful. No politician wants a picture with the Donald as it’s politically toxic so I would imagine Starmer will do everything to avoid going to the US. One quick trip in February will be it.
There is very little benefit to the UK of being politically any closer to the USA at this time. There is zero chance for a meaningful trade agreement. They won’t even table it for discussion because all it’s likely to do is set off a Twitter Storm. If the Donald goes all in on Tariffs maybe the UK will go for a simple zero tariff deal but then the UK is one of the only countries that buys more from the USA than the other way around. Plenty of other countries for the Donald to hit with tarrifs before us.
The UK’s main focus outside Ukraine will be on climate change which the Donald doesn’t believe in and the Donald has next to nothing he wants to do on the international stage. I can’t see America wanting to invade anyone outside of the Americas so they don’t need us for much unless it kicks off in Taiwan and I can’t see the Donald getting involved in Taiwan either.
I’m sure they are lining up the Royal Family for some regular Washington visits to keep the Donald content.
As a second term US president he will have to be given an official state visit but no doubt that will come near the end of his four years if he is still in office.
“ If the Donald goes all in on Tariffs maybe the UK will go for a simple zero tariff deal but then the UK is one of the only countries that buys more from the USA than the other way around.”
Tariffs that are mitigated by % defence spend by NATO members. Buy a cheaper tariff band by ponying up. That would be very Donald.
So it is cheaper to raise defence spend than face the tariffs?
The Donald wants NATO members to spend 5% of GDP on defence, currently they average 2% and the US is 3% but previous congressional spending agreements have the US at 2.7% by 2030.
The US is running a deficit of 6% of GDP and if Trump gets his tax cuts that’s going to rise to 7% or 8%.
Congress has already refused to raise the debt ceiling.
So where do you think the Donald is finding 2% of GDP to raise Americas defence spending to 5% and why do you think he would tie trade policy to foreign military spending.
The Donald wants a tariffs so he can bring jobs back to America, he doesn’t give a s**t about European security. It’s just a convenient Troll to bash foreigners with.
DOGE is looking for $ 2 trillion in savings and the only place in the federal budget you can cut is defence spending and veteran benefits.
Well if the USA ever need Bombers, AWACs, SP Artillery/Tracked recce vehicles, IFV’s, LPH, SEAD aircraft, Long range ground based air defence then we are the boys and girls not to bother asking. Until about 2030 then we will be fine.
I think this Starmer government is going to be more for Europe than the USA .That’s on Defence and trade ,sure we need to Cooperate with the US government on security matters ,but for me Starmer all for Europe .Lord knows why when on trade Europe do everything to make thing’s difficult for us 🙄
But Europe did a trade deal with us and the USA didn’t.
Everyone in the world either did a trade deal with the UK or like India and China are desperately trying to get one. The USA refuses to even discuss one .
It’s little wonder the British government will be looking more to Europe than the USA. Politically and economically they have much more to offer.
No other country has required us to accept more rat feces in our food as a condition of a trade deal.
Can’t comment on a European deal with the US ,but when Trump was last in power he was all for a trade deal with the UK government at the time .When Biden came into office deal was off the table much to the disappointment of the Boris Johnson .
I don’t think that America can be considered as a reliable partner anymore, not with Musk carrying out political attacks on the UK government and spreading Russian inspired misinformation. We saw how the US threw its allies under the bus with Trump’s Afghanistan retreat deal, and similar in Syria. There’s a very insecure and paranoid president shortly to take office on January 20th.
The Afghanistan retreat was under the Biden government not Trump .
IT was the Biden government government what retreated from Afghanistan not Trump.
Biden’s administration enacted the ‘deal ‘ that Trump came to with the Taliban .