Key Takeaways
- Former NATO Secretary‑General George Robertson warned that the UK is “running out of years” to meet its defence commitments.
- He criticised the government for lacking a clear pathway to spend 3.5 % of GDP on core defence by 2035, as agreed with NATO allies.
- Robertson predicted a “frosty” reception for Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the upcoming NATO summit in Ankara.
- The delay in publishing the Defence Investment Plan has deterred private investment and frustrated allied partners.
- Starmer’s Ankara visit is expected to be his last major foreign trip before a likely leadership handover to Andy Burnham in July 2026.
Robertson’s Critique of UK Defence Spending Plans
George Robertson, the former NATO chief and Labour peer who co‑authored Britain’s 2023 Strategic Defence Review, told a parliamentary committee that the current Defence Investment Plan falls short of what is needed to confront accelerating security threats. He argued that without a concrete roadmap to reach the 3.5 % of GDP target for core defence, the UK risks falling behind its NATO peers and undermining collective deterrence.
Details of the Government’s Defence Investment Plan
The plan unveiled by Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration proposes an extra £15 billion (approximately $20 billion) over the next decade to modernise depleted armed forces and prepare for future wars. This funding is intended to upgrade equipment, improve cyber‑capabilities, and enhance readiness across the Royal Navy, Army, and Royal Air Force. However, Robertson contended that the plan lacks the necessary milestones and accountability mechanisms to guarantee that the 3.5 % benchmark will be met by 2035.
NATO’s 3.5 % Defence Spending Target and Broader Security Commitment
At the 2025 NATO summit, alliance members agreed that each member should allocate at least 3.5 % of gross domestic product to core defence by 2035, with an additional 1.5 % earmarked for broader national security initiatives such as cyber defence, space, and resilience measures. The target was formulated in response to former U.S. President Donald Trump’s repeated calls for European allies to shoulder a greater share of the defence burden. Robertson highlighted that the UK’s current trajectory does not align with this collective pledge.
Robertson’s Pedigree and Role in Shaping UK Defence Policy
Robertson’s critique carries weight given his extensive experience: he served as Britain’s Defence Minister in the 1990s before becoming Secretary‑General of NATO from 1999 to 2003. He also helped draft the 2023 Strategic Defence Review, which set the foundation for the current defence investment ambitions. His insider perspective lends credibility to his assertion that the government is lagging behind the strategic timeline it helped establish.
Consequences of the Delay in Publishing the Defence Investment Plan
The months‑long postponement in releasing the Defence Investment Plan has had two detrimental effects, according to Robertson. First, it has discouraged private sector investment, as defence contractors seek clarity on long‑term procurement pipelines before committing capital. Second, the delay has signaled to NATO allies that the UK may be wavering in its commitment to the 3.5 % goal, thereby frustrating partners who rely on predictable burden‑sharing within the alliance.
Anticipated Frosty Reception at the NATO Summit in Ankara
Speaking ahead of Starmer’s travel to Ankara for the NATO summit, Robertson warned that relations could turn “frosty” when the Prime Minister meets with U.S. President Donald Trump and other allied leaders. He suggested that the perception of unpreparedness—exacerbated by the undefined spending route—might lead allies to question the UK’s reliability as a partner, potentially complicating discussions on collective defence measures and burden‑sharing arrangements.
Political Timing: Starmer’s Final Foreign Trip Before Leadership Transition
The Ankara visit is notable as it is expected to be Starmer’s last major foreign engagement before he is anticipated to hand over power to former Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham, with the transition slated for as early as July 20, 2026. This temporal context adds pressure on Starmer to demonstrate strong diplomatic and defence credentials, making Robertson’s public criticism particularly salient as the government prepares for a leadership change.
Broader Strategic Context: Evolving Threats to NATO
Robertson underscored that the security environment has deteriorated more rapidly than anticipated when he helped write the 2023 Strategic Defence Review. He cited intensifying geopolitical rivalries, renewed aggression in Eastern Europe, cyber‑threats targeting critical infrastructure, and emerging challenges in the Arctic and space domains as factors that have accelerated the need for robust defence postures. In his view, the UK’s current planning does not reflect the heightened urgency of these threats.
Implications for UK Defence Modernisation and Industrial Base
If the UK fails to articulate a credible path to the 3.5 % target, Robertson warned that modernisation programmes could suffer delays, leading to capability gaps vis‑à‑vis potential adversaries. Moreover, uncertainty over long‑term defence spending could deter investment in the domestic defence industrial base, reducing the UK’s ability to produce cutting‑edge systems independently and increasing reliance on foreign suppliers—an outcome that could compromise sovereignty in critical defence sectors.
Conclusion and Outlook
George Robertson’s admonition serves as a stark reminder that defence planning requires not only financial commitment but also clear, transparent timelines that allies can trust. As the UK approaches a pivotal NATO summit and an imminent leadership change, the pressure is on the Starmer government to produce a definitive Defence Investment Plan that outlines how it will achieve the 3.5 % GDP core defence target and the supplementary 1.5 % for broader security. Without such clarity, the UK risks eroding confidence among its NATO partners and weakening its own preparedness for the increasingly complex threats that lie ahead.