Defence Secretary John Healey told MPs this week that the UK is committed to leading international efforts to help secure a lasting peace in Ukraine, even as questions emerged over the feasibility of a peacekeeping deployment without a U.S. security guarantee.
Responding to a question in the House of Commons from Conservative MP Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater), Healey emphasised the Government’s stepped-up military support to Ukraine, stating: “This year the UK will provide £4.5 billion in military support, the highest ever sum.”
“We are fully behind President Trump’s pledge to bring a lasting peace to Ukraine,” he added, “but we will not jeopardise the peace by forgetting about the war.”
Sir Ashley followed up with concerns about the credibility of UK-led peacekeeping proposals, after President Trump’s special envoy reportedly dismissed the Prime Minister’s plan for an international force as “a posture and a pose.” He asked whether UK troops might deploy in Ukraine without American backing.
In reply, Healey insisted that British leadership remains central: “As the Chief of the Defence Staff said over the weekend, no one should doubt that the work that the UK is leading with France to pull together a coalition of nations willing to step in and help ensure lasting peace in any negotiated settlement in Ukraine is critical and substantial. The UK is determined and will lead that effort.”
Labour MP Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) later highlighted the significance of continued military support: “Does the Secretary of State agree that it is crucial to wider European security, and to our own security here in the UK, that we continue to support Ukraine and ramp up the pressure on Putin?”
Healey agreed, stressing the importance of equipping Ukraine for both peace and continued defence: “Putting the Ukrainians in the strongest possible position as they choose to go into discussions is part of the responsibility and commitment of this Government.”
He added that the UK’s 2025 support plan was built in consultation with Ukrainian authorities and would focus on “drones, air defences and ammunition.”
The Defence Secretary also announced a new £1.6 billion deal to supply more than 5,000 lightweight multi-role missiles built in the UK—supporting both the Ukrainian military and domestic defence industry.
Earning over $15k monthly through a simple online job has been a game-changer for me. Last month alone, I earned $17,529 by dedicating just a few hours online. If you’re looking to increase your online income, you can start earning more cash by following the instructions provided here…
Open This——➤ 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞/
Earning over $15k monthly through a simple online job has been a game-changer for me. Last month alone, I earned $17,529 by dedicating just a few hours online. n If you’re looking to increase your online income, you can start earning more cash by following the instructions provided here…
Open This——➤ 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞/
The Best opportunities To Earn $22,000/Month. We all spend a lot of time on social media every day – Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, and the list goes on. If you’re used to getting a lot of likes or comments, or if you’re great at motivating others through your posts, you might want to consider turning this into a profession. It appears unbelievable but you won’t forgive yourself if you do not check it…
HERE →→→→ 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐂𝐨𝐦
I make up to $220 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $100h to $220h… Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now I am hoping I could help someone else out there by sharing this link.Try it, you won’t regret it!.
HERE→ 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟕.𝐂𝐨𝐦
What with?
Can’t see any sign of orders for more Typhoons, soldiers, or even enough guns to arm them? If Starmer was anything but grandstanding then these orders would be flying in now (already late).
Don’t get me wrong. I want the UK to fully support Ukraine and stop Russian expansion, but the Gov needs to get serious with defence spending – especially now that Trump and his yes men have taken America to the Russian side, so nothing they say or do from now on can be trusted.
He’s playing Fantasy Peacekeeping, a large pinch of salt required 👍.
Yep, that is the term I like to use. GRANDSTANDING.
They just cannot help themselves.
i dont mind betting that industry has already been told what will be ordered in advance as part of SDSR. They are probably getting ready before formal publication. What? I dont know
And how does he expect the uk army to cope ??? Cutting defence budgets and capabilites and expecting troops to fight everywhere and do peace keeping everywhere is a disaster waiting to happen
Continue sending money to Ukraine and reducing the armed forces, Starmer. You’re laughing at your citizens, and you have to be a bad person to send troops with barely any resources. No comments on this nonsense. All of Europe is rearming, except for this country, which will be rendered irrelevant in the global defensive landscape after the upcoming strategic defense cuts (review).
They are leading a discussion and trying to get consensus..not invading another country.
Lots of hyperbole going on..there is nothing wrong with leading a discussion on something that is profoundly important..what else is HMG meant to do sit at the back going “ it’s never going to work, Ukraine is doomed, we are not helping, let the Russians win”.
Be honest that we do not have the forces for such a venture as they have been cut, and that they themselves are not reversing that.
They had already admitted no increase to army numbers before Trump embarrassed the lot of them to go running to Paris to try to look important, resulting in these budget increases.
Be honest that despite being in Estonia for years a 73K army still is not set up to provide at least 5 all arms Brigades to enable a proper roulement of 1 Brigade to such enduring operations.
That means the Army reorganising itself for the upteenth time.
Admit the cuts over the last 30 years went way, way too far and that both parties are to blame.
Declare the hollowing out will stop, and that steps to reverse it will start, but it will take time.
So far, I have seen and heard nothing on these issues.
That, is what I want HMG to do.
I do agree, but I think all they can really now do is work to pull together a potential framework of a European guarantee to at least put Russia under a bit of pressure around a peace agreement and actually show European nations have skin in the game and are part of the negotiations,
To be very honest the EU nations are going to have to put up as well.. but in the end I don’t think for a second the UK can provide a 1 brigade for a enduring op, which is appalling and is less about the cuts and more about organisation and focus.. as you say a 73,000 strong army should be able to provide 5 deployable brigades.. In reality it should be able to provide 6 ( 3 armoured, 1 air mobile, 1 mec infantry, 1 light role infantry). I hate to be brutal but to my mind that’s a failure of army leadership,
Agree something must be done the army needs a focus and to restructure around delivery of a specific capability and that’s being able to put a heavy brigade long term in north Easter Europe so that needs 3 proper armoured brigades with CS/CSS not 2 proper armoured brigades and what is essentially a support brigate full of armoured cav and artillery.
7 brigade needs to be a proper Mec brigade ( with 25 ton range APCs, and mobile 155mm fires etc) 4th brigade needs to be formed into a fully deployable light role infantry brigade, with protected mobility vehicles and full CS/CCS, fires etc, 16th air assault brigade.. needs to really be refocused on becoming an air mobile brigade that is a bit heavier than it is now( we are not going to do an air assault, but we need a fully deployable air mobile brigade) again with protected mobility vehicles and more leathal fires than a few 105mm guns.
That’s would give 3 mec/infantry based brigades allowing one to be deployed as needed in Africa, another flash point or as part of a Ukraine peace and security deal
Finally 11 brigade, should be restructured to provide the troops for world wide standing deployments in Belize, Kenya etc
Agree with all that J.
The word/rumour is that NATO want 6 proper deployable Brigades from the British Army.
So being an ORBAT type, that’s what I’m looking for in SDR, as grand increases are not going to happen.
But relatively cheap ones, for all three services, like the ones you often suggest, might. Fingers crossed.
There is no way the UK will deploy troops into Ukraine for a deployment that has no clear end goal or date.
Brig, when did the British Army ever deploy on an operation that had a clear end goal or date?
This is the last thing we need to be doing.
Yes in the Cold War we had an “Army” based in Germany to deter the Warsaw Pact, but we as an is.and national have always relied on the Royal Navy for our defence. Getting involved in “peacekeeping” in the Ukraine will only end in tears.
‘Getting involved in “peacekeeping” in the Ukraine will only end in tears”’
There are currently 12 UN missions still active. The oldest have been going since 1948 (Middle East) and the second oldest since 1949 (Kashmir). Ukraine promises to be no different. Probably for just as long as Putin is around.
Crabfat, very true and we have been peacekeeping in Cyprus since the UNFICYP mission started in 1964. Peacekeeping missions often never end.
It would be a more reasonable plan if the Army actually had force numbers significant enough to match the rhetoric, in the Cold War they did, now it’s only words.
ATJ, true. If the army was tasked with peacekeeping (or ‘reassurance’ to use this weeks buzz word) in Ukraine (an obvious enduring operation) and used only regular troops who were armoured or mechanised and the Generals had the balls to tell the politicos that we would keep to Harmony guidelines on Tour Intervals, then we could only continuously field one BG of 1,000 troops…and might have to shut down the Op Cabrit mission in Estonia. Things really are that bad.
Mark, this island nation phrase is worked to death. We rely on the RAF as much as the RN to protect the homeland. We are in NATO and have shared remit to deter attack on the Euro-Atlantic region, and if deterrence fails then to attack the invader and restore sovereignty and territorial integrity of the NATO area.
With allies, we are responsible for the defence of 32 countries, including our own. Irrelevant if we are an island or not.
Good to see politicians doing what they do best, grandstanding and political nonsense, let’s ignore the reality that the country lacks the ability to deliver on the tough talk, caused by problems that they are fully aware of and could but choose not to fix. They still won’t accept you cannot dictate rules when you no longer have the hard power to back it up and the reality is countries like Russia don’t care about words of men in suits who lack the conviction to make real decisions and do what is necessary. It seems to be more of a ‘let’s position ourselves at the top with the loudest voice and hope no one notices we can’t actually contribute much beyond that’ apart from CASD which doesn’t really help this situation as MAD shouldn’t be the starting point. A real leader would have pushed hard to make the necessary decisions to get the Armed Forces to where they need to be for such a significant task rather than committing to the task and ignoring the limitations, in an attempt to gain political capital on the World Stage.
The current Government has had 3 years of watching a lack of progress to address the limitations and capability gaps in the Armed Forces with more than enough time to plan in opposition. The Army Structure is still based on pre 2020 logic that didn’t include a potential major war in Europe, yet little has been done adapt to this.
Plenty of other countries are putting in orders to increase stockpiles, expand production lines and deliver new capabilities where needed. Here the Government announces more contracts and treaties rather than orders with tangible deliverables that improve the current state of the armed forces in a reasonable timescale (early to mid 2030s adds no value to now). This is despite many of the issues being apparent for years with capabilities increasingly becoming gapped or completely missing such as Long range GBAD and that’s before you even consider the addressing the ability to deliver force levels for NATOs Armoured Division commitment plus expeditionary commitments like the JEF or the basics such as recruitment, retention, low quality housing etc.
Even the few programs with orders for new equipment the Army is currently progressing are a mismatch and not based on brigade sets leaving all brigades missing capabilities and modernisation in numerous areas, i.e Boxer B1 missing module types completely, B2 to deliver new types many years later, still no RCH 155 order or LMP, no IFV.
If funding is such an issue especially short term, why have orders for equipment across the various programmes not been done in brigade sets, Boxer, AJAX, LMP, AresIFV, RCH155, CH3, GBAD, have the first brigade fully equipped and deployable and update each as the funding becomes available. In the event numbers were expanded additional brigade sets could be ordered.
However I’m sure we will see more of the same from those trying to be Temu Winston Churchills.
Great post. Full agreement from me.
I’ve been a reader here for a couple of years but never used to post, but the disconnect between reality and the grandstanding from politicians seems to be ever widening and something people should be talking about.
We read about increasing commitments and supporting x countries in ways that will require significant commitment from the country and resources that are already overstretched and double hatted as you’ve highlighted before to cover existing commitments after the decades of atrophy to insufficient levels.
Those leading the country are acting like we have sufficiently large scale forces that are fully equipped and modernised with everything needed to be sent anywhere and everywhere at anytime and be done within 3 days, whilst seemingly doing everything possible to ignore or prevent that from happening, whilst seemingly under the assumption there will be no consequences. It’s hard to take these people seriously.
The trouble is if Russia is not stopped in Ukraine and seen to lose, then the next phase will be Russia + Ukraine invading Europe. Do it now else it will be far worse later.
The Russians went to war to stop the eastward expansion of the EU and NATO. The very last thing they will ever agree to is NATO troops in Ukraine. This is a deluded fantasy. It won’t happen unless Russia is actually defeated and has no choice.
The SDR will be a smoke and mirrors exercise by this government and will just tinker at the edges but fail to increase our capability, our forces will never receive enough or of the right type to make a difference on the battlefield field and it’s always the case of scrambling around for kit in an emergency. We always want to have defence on the cheap.