The UK government has announced an unprecedented £4.5 billion military aid package for Ukraine, reinforcing its unwavering commitment to supporting Kyiv in the face of continued Russian aggression.
The funding will not only bolster Ukraine’s defence capabilities but also create significant opportunities for the UK’s defence industry.
Revival of Artillery Production in Yorkshire
For the first time in almost two decades, a Yorkshire-based company will manufacture artillery barrels following a £61 million contract awarded to BAE Systems. The collaboration, involving Sheffield Forgemasters, will produce barrel forgings in the UK before sending them to Ukraine for final integration.
This initiative is part of the UK’s expanded military support, which includes a £3 billion commitment for lethal aid in 2025. Additionally, £1.5 billion from a £2.26 billion G7 loan, to be repaid using profits from immobilised Russian sovereign assets, will fund procurement projects critical to Ukraine’s defence efforts.
New Air Defence Systems
Among the UK’s key contributions is the Gravehawk air defence system, a groundbreaking UK-Denmark collaboration. Designed to retrofit air-to-air missiles for ground-based defence, the shipping-container-sized system has been specifically tailored to meet Ukraine’s needs.
Following successful tests in Ukraine last September, 15 additional units will be delivered this year to strengthen the country’s ability to protect its cities, troops, and infrastructure.
Defence Secretary John Healey highlighted the importance of these efforts, stating:
“This new package of support will help strengthen Ukraine’s position on the battlefield or at any negotiating table.”
Expanding Training Programmes
Building on the success of Operation Interflex, which trained over 51,000 Ukrainian recruits, the UK will expand its training offer. Ukrainian officer cadets will be hosted at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, while British cadets will attend training in Ukraine, fostering stronger military ties and exchanging invaluable battlefield knowledge.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer reaffirmed the UK’s commitment, stating:
“Ukraine’s security is our security. We must continue to do everything possible to ensure Ukraine is in the strongest position.”
Economic and Strategic Impact
The aid package not only reinforces Ukraine’s defence capabilities but also invigorates the UK’s defence sector, creating jobs and supporting economic growth. These initiatives align with the government’s Plan for Change, which focuses on enhancing national security and strengthening Britain’s industrial base.
The £2.26 billion G7 loan, enabled by forthcoming UK legislation, will support Ukraine’s military procurement, ensuring it can invest in cutting-edge equipment, including British-made systems.
A Clear Message of Support
Amid relentless Russian bombardment, the UK’s actions send a strong message of solidarity. The rapid development and deployment of advanced systems like Gravehawk and the revival of artillery manufacturing highlight the UK’s dedication to aiding Ukraine while bolstering its own defence industry.
As Ukraine continues its fight, the UK’s comprehensive support package promises to strengthen its resilience both on the battlefield and in negotiations, reaffirming the UK’s role as a steadfast ally.
As a Sheffielder myself, I approve.
Yes it is good to see the UK regenerating production capability. Perhaps we can design and manufacture our owb tank guns again….
Well quite.
Spending money on getting UK industrial output up from tick over levels is very valuable.
Now if only we could find £4.5Bn down the back of the sofa to fund similar for ourselves….
Mind you Mad Vlad is providing free targets to shoot at and UKR are happy to test our missiles by shooting them down.
Good. Helps an ally and increases spend on defence in the UK. Everyone wins
Dear Prime Minister Starmer,
I am writing to commend you for the bold and decisive actions announced in your recent military aid package for Ukraine. The commitment of £4.5 billion in military assistance underscores a profound recognition that Ukraine’s security is inextricably linked to our own national interests, especially in light of the ongoing threat posed by Russian aggression under Vladimir Putin.
As we face the possibility of a shift in leadership in the United States with the return of Donald Trump on January 20, 2025, it is crucial that Europe remains resolute in its support for Ukraine. The specter of Putin potentially tightening his grip on Ukraine, coupled with Trump’s tacit approval, could drastically alter the landscape of European security. The strategy of merely providing Ukraine with tools for limited defence while keeping the bulk of military assets in the hands of non-engaged European forces is a perilous approach that could leave us ill-prepared for a direct confrontation.
Your government’s provision of vital military training and advanced systems, such as the innovative Gravehawk air defence unit, as well as the revival of artillery production capabilities in Yorkshire, are steps in the right direction. However, to ensure that Ukraine can decisively defeat its aggressor, more must be done. It is imperative that training of Ukrainian forces on advanced combat aircraft be expedited, including the F35, Typhoon, Rafael, and Gripen fighter jets. This initiative should have been in place a year ago, further highlighting the urgency of our collective efforts.
It is clear that for the war to come to a conclusion and for true security to be established in Europe, Ukraine must not only be strengthened but must also emerge victorious. This means removing Vladimir Putin from power and paving the way for a reconfiguration of Russia that prevents it from threatening its neighbours and undermining the stability of Europe in the future. Such an outcome would help invoke a new framework for peace and cooperation on the continent.
Your leadership in enhancing military cooperation and support for Ukraine at this critical juncture sends a powerful message of solidarity. The revival of the UK’s defence sector and the commitment to share our military expertise significantly bolster Ukraine’s position, not just on the battlefield but also in future negotiations. It is imperative that this momentum is maintained.
Thank you for your steadfast support and for recognising the vital importance of Ukraine’s struggle. Together, we must continue to champion a future free from tyranny and aggression.
Yours sincerely,
We see it for what it is BUT most of the media doesn’t! There are already questions as to why we are giving that much when it could be spent here.
The fact it benefits us in the long run is completely lost on them!
It’s the conspiracy theory brigade, it varies but generally they see Putin as a traditionalist defending conservative values. They also push the story that the Ukraine War is one giant money laundering operation – some either think there’s no war at all and it’s all CGI. Before you dismiss them as a tiny minority, they make up a large proportion of those who vote Reform.
And MAGA
Good news but when will the British army get artillery aid since it hardly has any left?
We still have an Army?
Rob, fair point. Todays ‘i’ newspaper reports that the reg army is too small to do an enduring peacekeeping mission in Ukraine, post-hostilities.
You wonder what they do with 70,000 head count if they don’t think they can make a contribution to a NATO peace keeping operation 😀
For perspective we can put a Brigade overseas for an extended period. That is sufficient for a 90km buffer zone. The Russo-Ukraine border is 2000km.
Jim, surely you don’t think that a regular army of 70,000 is a large army? It is the smallest it has been since at least the Napoleonic Wars.
When I joined in 1975, the Regs were 175,000 (and the TA was 73,000). [We also had 900 tanks]
Then Options for Change down-sized or rather right-sized the army for the post-Cold War world. Regs down from 160,000 to 120,000 and the TA down to 63,000 [Tank fleet down to a mere 386].
Since then multiple further cuts have been made solely due to efforts to save money and not because the threats have reduced.
To your question. The army of 73,000 is of course not all deployable – about 70% is Field Force and 30% is ‘Static Org’. Thus the Field Force is c. 51,000. Next, for this Field Army there is a range of permanent commitments that are not defined as ‘Operations’ – stuff like manning the Falklands and other overseas Garrisons and Training Bases (Kenya, Belize, Oman), Ghurka battalion in Brunei, Public Duties, and a whole heap more besides. Then there are deployed Operations including Op TOSCA (UNFICYP, 200 pax), OP CABRIT (800 pax in Estonia; 150-200 in Poland) and other smaller Operations and Training of foreign armies.
Then there are those individuals who either cannot deploy or can only deploy with limitations due to medical issues – that is at least 10% of the army (perhaps 7,500). Other reasons for individual non-deployment include: being on resettlement leave or courses, being under 18, being in MCTC Colchester, or awaiting court-martial etc etc.
I do not have all the numbers for the above but maybe we are left with 35,000+ Regs who are truly deployable and whose units are uncommitted to other vital tasks.
The articles say that a peacekeeping force of 5,000 to 10,000 Brits might be required. For an enduring operation you need 5x the deployed force in order to roulemont, so for a 10,000 deployed force you need 50,000 deployable troops – so can’t do it as we only have 35,000+
For a 5,000 deployed force, you need 25,000 – so we could do that in theory but the army could realistically undertake no other significant tasks. In a structural sense, for a brigade of 5,000 deployed peacekeepers you really need 5 similar looking brigades – and we do not have that. So we have to create a new structure, which has no room left over for the specialised brigades we have today.
A lot too depends on the make-up of the peacekeeping force – if it is mainly light-role Infantry, do we have enough?
It’s claimed we do so it must be true.
NM, The RA has of course recently received 14 Archers. But you are right that we don’t really know when Boxer RCH-155 will be delivered to replace AS-90, of which very few remain in service, perhaps just those in our BG in Estonia.
Well the first Boxer RCH-155s are going to Ukraine, with the first of 54 just delivered. So hopefully we’ll find out soon if they’re going to be as revolutionary as predicated – able to fire while still on the move and perform direct-fire too.
What about to improve tbe british armed forces?
Non sense at all when they,re nearly scrapped.
Does this come from the foreign aid budget? or from the our defence budget?
“ Among the UK’s key contributions is the Gravehawk air defence system, a groundbreaking UK-Denmark collaboration. Designed to retrofit air-to-air missiles for ground-based defence, the shipping-container-sized system has been specifically tailored to meet Ukraine’s needs.”
So containerised Sea Ceptor is a thing?
Can’t imagine that this is anything much else?
I would imagine it’s ASSRAM, shed loads of them around to be fired off and it’s UK industry that builds more… if it was me I would be recapitalising the entire RAF stock and send all the old stuff to Ukraine to be shot off.
ASRAAM on a Supacat, based on reports.
I’ve heard that it’s missile agnostic so it can use whatever AAM is available for the next time the Republicans delay equipment.
And could the GraveHawk also be adopted by the UK if its that useful and cost effective? If containerised can it then go on the RFA ships, the Rivers and even the carriers if needed?
Why introduce another ship-based weapon when we already have one with a soft-launched system that’s ideal for containerisaton and is already scheduled for follow-on development? Containerised CAMM is the way to go, and if we don’t have it, we really, really need to get on with developing it.
Article said air-to-air missiles, so not Sea Ceptors.
Both
“ Among the UK’s key contributions is the Gravehawk air defence system, a groundbreaking UK-Denmark collaboration. Designed to retrofit air-to-air missiles for ground-based defence, the shipping-container-sized system has been specifically tailored to meet Ukraine’s needs.”
So containerised Sea Ceptor is a thing?
Can’t imagine that this is anything much else?
It says it uses missiles already in their possession, so either ASRAAM or some of the old Russian missiles.
Still, if it carries enough reloads then some sort of twin arm ASRAAM launcher would be great.
I don’t think that rules out CAMM.
Containerised is definitely the way to go on this.
When the original Supacat ASRAAM came out I sort of mocked up in my head what a containerised version would look like.
You would put a twin arm launcher at one end of the footprint, with long rails (like Sea Dart) to facilitate reloading.
The other half of the space is built up to the height of the launcher, and includes a horizontal cassette magazine with folding sensors on top.
The launcher pedestal can be positioned right at the end of the platform, because for transport it doesn’t need missiles on it and can be trained vertically.
If the magazine is sufficiently blast proof, 360 degree firing can be achieved with elevation in firing.
The whole setup is reminiscent of Sea Slug, but with the long prep rooms replaced by the rotary magazine.
If CAMM and if has Danish cube(?) input it may be on a reloadable preloaded palletised set up? Blocks of 2-4-6 should fit onto a standard pallet and all less than a tonne. Be interesting to see. Like the sound of it and potential use on ships, trucks, land, anywhere you can park a container.
I thought it was for their missiles as well?
This Gravehawk thing sounds particularly interesting.
Is it an evolution of the Supacat/ASRAAM mashup, refined into a container footprint?
Or is it designed to use up Ukraine’s stocks of old Soviet missiles?
I think Ukraine has stocks of old Soviet R-60 and R-73 I/R missiles.
Those would be the ones.
Not sure how capable they’d be against glide bombs and drones, though.
ASRAAM is probably quite good even against cold targets because of the sensor resolution.
Wondering if it’s in the name with the “grave” like open top container with a lid?
SailorBoy, Pity it only has 2 missiles ready to fire. 4 or more would have been better.
Is this a reply to my comment above, about the idea for containerised ASRAAM?
The problem is that ASRAAM is a rail-launched missile without folding fins, so fitting a big enough magazine, an autoloader, and a quad launcher would be very difficult.
The current way might have a reload time for both missiles of about 30s, which seems reasonable against helicopters or jets, and is probably enough against the sort of all-night trickle attacks that Russia has been using against Ukrainian cities. Depending on how compact the two cassette magazines can be made, you might still be able to fit 12 reloads inside a single container on 6-round drums.
The UK, US and other countries militaries are involved in Ukraine, so paying them a few quid to do the fighting for us, is cheaper in the long term. And that, is why there will be **ck all investment by the UK into its own military for the next 12 months, if not longer.
Well if the UK has the plans and capabilities to make a quick ASSRAM based GBADS that’s pretty good to have in your back pocket if a war did happen.. a cost effective missile the RAF have a lot of.
Great excellent now Mr Starmer, if you, if it is not to much trouble if you could find your way. TO STOP RAIDING THE MoD BUDGET AND FUND IT DIRECTLY FROM THE TREASURY!!!!
I’m a big supporter of this and helping Ukraine. But isn’t it crazy that shit happens pretty quick when you collaborate and understand platforms and systems need to be in place quickly! However, as per, our own planned capability upgrades are continually kicked down the road, in the form of a can! Whatever few quid we have left are being used to re-stock our own munitions “all within current budget availability” but I am presuming as an absolute bare minimum. Old “bang up the tweeters” Kier can gob off about various nonsense partnerships with Poland regarding defence but he knows it’s just window dressing and means fuck all! FFS we really have got the dregs in Government at the moment, a real UK hating B team.
Spot on mate, sadly.
Some will see the negatives even after major support for Ukraine and can’t create a balanced argument, due to their biases.
Hear Hear!
1. freegear trying to spend it’s way out of a crisis, labour always resort to tax and spend, t’s in their DNA
2. the problem for the ukraine is manpower, not kit, the new battalions being trained in france fell apart becuase of the desertion rates
I’m all for maintaining peace by preparing for war but Ukrainians security is our security is Gov’t bolloxsprachen.
We do know corruption will funnel off, at a very conservative estimate 50% of any monies/assets the Eastern barbarians can get anywhere near, don’t be surprised if we get f¥€£ed by our own sold on and rebadged/forged ordinance.
The way this is being sold to us is very Goebbelesque in my humble opinion and looks like a new Dunquerke ain’t far off, it’s the lions led by donkeys syndrome playing out before our eyes.
Make peace you imbeciles ❤️☮️
Russia should never have been made an enemy, they should have been included into the European union, last century . Nato expansion had bullied Russia into existential responses. But if Russia is on verge of losing, then they have no choice but to use nukes. Is Ukraine really worth a nuclear war?? Let Ukraine and Russia, cousins and family, heal and solve their own problems. Others getting in a family fight makes things worse. When US warred on Vietnam, Korea, they falsely believe commies would control the world, but of course nothing of the sort happened. Same, with Ukraine, Nato falsely believe Russia will take all of Europe. Sadly, the reality is incompetent Russia can’t even beat Ukraine, a 3rd rate power. However making Russia as a super threat is important for huge military spending, and strengthens the American Empire. The M I complex easily fools the public.
It’s going to take more than using an English sounding name to convince us you’re not another Russian troll.
Your English is laughable.
More incoherent nonsense….
Monro, I doubt we can deploy a brigade overseas for an extended period. We need 5 similarly structured brigades to do that – and we have not got that.