Not since the Cold War have we faced such a mire of threats. Russia’s aggressive ambitions continue to menace the West. Tensions between China and the US grow fraught over Taiwan. The crisis in the Middle East has become never-ending.
In the face of these perils, love him or loathe him, Donald Trump is absolutely right – Europe is in grave danger and it is crucial that Britain hikes defence spending without delay.
Yet deep within her bunker in No 11, Rachel ‘from Accounts’ Reeves has made it clear that Labour’s vow to raise defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP is off the agenda. Some reports suggest the proposed increase could even be pushed back to 2032.
‘We can’t afford 2.5 per cent,’ the Chancellor might exclaim.
However, the point of governing is to choose and set the right priorities. What priority is more pressing than fending off the nation’s enemies?
No doubt this question would have been posed by Lord Robertson and John Healey, former and current defence secretaries, in a recent meeting with Sir Keir Starmer.
Ahead of the Strategic Defence Review into our Armed Forces, the Chancellor’s refusal to raise spending is farcical. The defence duo no doubt said as much – with a dark portrayal of what otherwise lay at stake.
What a stark contrast to Starmer’s phone call with President Trump on Sunday, which was described as ‘warm and personal’. But that glowing review is unlikely to last if Labour axes its pledge on defence.
Trump has called for Nato allies to raise defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP –a number which has not been plucked at random for effect. This was the same level the UK spent during the mid-1980s, paying for nuclear and conventional deterrents that stopped the Cold War from turning hot.
Any less would have spelled disaster.
Just look at the situation in 1935 when Britain was spending less than 3 per cent of GDP on defence – while the new German Fuhrer was threatening bloody vengeance on Europe.
Once war broke out in 1939, when Neville Chamberlain was prime minister, that surged to 19 per cent. That shot up again to 46 per cent a year later, when Winston Churchill was in power and we were fighting for our very survival.
That is the disastrous, gargantuan cost of fighting a war. So why not spend what is needed to deter one?
In her bunker, the Chancellor may feel protected from reality. But a glance at Chamberlain’s track record must surely show her that history cannot repeat itself.
So who does the Labour Government fear most? Vladimir Putin or Donald Trump? The threat from Putin is staring us in the face, but it looks as if Trump will beat us with the threat of trade tariffs if we do not increase defence spending significantly. No more ‘warm and personal’ phone calls with the Prime Minister – and the Chancellor’s stuttering drive for growth would likely turn into recession.
Can Starmer find the statesman within himself and square up this dire threat to our security?
No one likes to make sacrifices – but we will like the iron boot of Russian domination even less.
It is a principle of international diplomacy that the best formula is to speak softly and carry a big stick. Neville Chamberlain merely carried an umbrella during the Munich Crisis of 1938, which paved the way for Britain’s near defeat to the Nazis.
Is Starmer a Chamberlain or a Churchill? This is his opportunity to show us.
General Lord Dannatt is a former Chief of the General Staff and co-author of Victory To Defeat – The British Army 1918 to 1940, and Churchill’s D-Day.