The government has announced a £6 billion defence investment amid rising threats from Russia, including cyberattacks and fears of real-world aggression.
The UK must be “prepared” for a possible real-world attack by Russia, Defence Secretary John Healey said today, as he unveiled a major £6 billion boost to Britain’s military capabilities. The funding will be directed toward new weapons factories, drones, ships, and long-range missile systems.
Around £1.5 billion of the total funding will go into constructing at least six new weapons factories across the UK. These facilities will produce explosives and pyrotechnics and operate on an “always on” basis, allowing for rapid production increases if needed.
Additional investment will also target cyberdefence technology to counter tens of thousands of Russian cyberattacks. Mr Healey said Russia is actively targeting the UK, with state-linked actors launching around 90,000 cyberattacks in the last two years.
The new investment comes as Russia’s war with Ukraine continues, marked by escalating violence even as peace efforts persist. Healey said the funding sends a “message to Moscow” and ensures the UK remains a difficult target for adversaries.
“This change will equip our forces for the future,” he added, noting that the investment is expected to create around 1,800 jobs across the country.
Appearing on BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Healey said NATO must also be prepared for Russian aggression, citing President Vladimir Putin’s efforts to redraw international boundaries by force.
When asked if he anticipated a real-world Russian attack on the UK in the coming years, Healey responded: “We have to be prepared. NATO has to be prepared.”
On Monday, the government is set to release the long-awaited Strategic Defence Review. The report, commissioned a year ago when Labour took power, will detail the UK’s defence posture and plans to counter global threats.
The document will outline a commitment to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, with an “ambition” to reach 3% in the next parliament. The increase follows pressure from NATO allies, including US President Donald Trump, who has pushed for member states to spend at least 5%.
A new cyber command will also be established as part of the strategy to address online threats and boost national security.
Another £1.5 billion from the new funding will go toward urgent repairs to military housing, including fixing boilers, leaky roofs, and dealing with damp, longstanding issues affecting armed forces personnel.
However, the new plans do not currently include increasing the size of the British Army.
The number of soldiers continues to shrink, with more leaving than joining. Healey said reversing that trend is the first step before any plans to grow the force can be implemented in the next parliament.
As of January this year, there were 71,151 regular soldiers in the British Army—below the 73,000 target set by the former Conservative government as part of the 2021 ‘Future Soldier’ reforms.
Mr Healey acknowledged that Army numbers had fallen further and said he didn’t anticipate significant progress in reversing the decline until the next parliament.
Meanwhile, Defence Minister Alistair Cairns announced plans to expand cadet numbers by 30% to provide more opportunities for young people to join the armed forces.
The new defence plans have drawn mixed reactions from political parties and experts.
While some Conservative MPs welcomed the spending, Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick told Sky News he remained “sceptical” about whether the money would be delivered. He said, “We think that 2034 is a long time to wait given the gravity of the situation.”
However, some lawmakers have criticised the focus on military spending. In February, the Green Party wrote an open letter to John Healey, urging greater emphasis on diplomacy, peace-building, and overseas aid.
Green MP Ellie Chowns said she found it “horrifying” that cuts to the international aid budget were being used to fund defence increases.
“How many people will fall ill or die because they cannot access health services; how many more will go hungry? And how many children will be denied an education as a result of this decision?”
She warned that reducing aid could fuel global instability, stating: “Cutting aid risks making the world more volatile and more dangerous, not safer. Real security means tackling hunger, poverty, and climate chaos.”
