Latest news with #NationalSecurityStrategy
AllAfrica
a day ago
- Business
- AllAfrica
‘Special relationship': preparing Britain and America for new era
The Council on Geostrategy has just launched 'The 'special relationship': preparing Britain and America for a new era' at a roundtable hosted by the US Embassy in London. This paper focuses on the alliance in a time of immense change and we tasked ourselves with providing an honest, non-emotive read out of the state of the alliance, focusing on converging or diverging interests – and not values. Here are our big three take-aways. 1. We still have many convergences: the US and UK broadly agree that the economic trading order has hurt their economies and led to de-industrialization, but they are unclear as to the future direction. Is a Bretton Woods II needed or a G7/D-10 that creates a group of like-minded economic powers as occurred during the Cold War? Certainly, the US has decided on its trajectory and is moving out on that trajectory, but the UK remains uncertain… 2. We have a long-term divergence in terms of theatre priority, the shift of US focus to the Indo-Pacific has been taking place since 2011, when the Pivot was first announced. The UK should not be surprised. This divergence is, we feel, manageable through the framework that the two theatres are 'interconnected' and that what China and Russia each do in those separate theatres impacts both. This is already true in Ukraine and may become true in other areas. 3. We are more concerned about a divergence in threat priority. For many years, the UK has 'muddled through' on China and though the Strategic Defense Review, National Security Strategy, and China Audit all point to a shift in approach, there are strong indicators that this government – like those preceding it – is being careful to manage relations with Beijing carefully as it is seen as a driver for growth. The US shift on Moscow is also of concern to London, which is skeptical of an attempt at a 'reverse Kissinger' in which the US, to counter China, aligns with Russia. We have made a series of recommendations for both sides – particularly on defense industrial cooperation where we see great potential. You may download the full report here. The executive summary follows: Context: While historical foundations and ties have helped to reinforce the 'special relationship' between the United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US), it was common geopolitical interests which bound the two nations together. Chief among these has been to prevent others from dominating the most industrialised and productive regions of Eurasia. As a result, both countries have co-constructed the prevailing international order. Their strength, determination and foresight after the Second World War created alliances and institutions which saw the collapse of the Soviet Union. But the enlargement of that order and the offshoring of manufacturing have empowered adversaries while weakening UK and US strategic industries. Geopolitical changes, especially growing Russian and Chinese aggression, as well as political and strategic changes in Britain and America, have led to fresh questions being asked about the future of the special relationship. Questions this report addresses: What were the fundamental interests which brought the UK and US together, and do they remain cogent? How can the two reinforce convergent interests while simultaneously managing divergent interests? How can policymakers within the two countries redefine the alliance for a new era of geopolitics and revision of the international order? Key findings: In the 2020s, areas of converging interests include: Accepting limits on globalization: This convergence is currently implicit rather than explicit, though both countries recognise the need to rectify the negative impacts which globalisation has had on their own economies and societies. Rising to the geopolitical challenge: Both countries express aspirations of leadership and have shown the will to address systemic challenges, although to differing degrees in their respective theatres. Rebuilding the defense industrial base: Both nations have identified an urgent need to rebuild production capacity and invest in future technologies. Areas of diverging interests include: Theater priority: For the first time in decades, there is a strong possibility that the UK and US will prioritise different regions, with Britain focused primarily on the Euro-Atlantic and America on the Indo-Pacific, though both also retain an interest in the Middle East. Threat precedence: The UK's stance towards the People's Republic of China (PRC) frustrates Washington, while London worries about a softer US approach towards Russia. Cooperation preference: The two countries are somewhat divided on their approach to multilateral institutions, including on climate change and trade arrangements. These areas of divergence notwithstanding, Britain and America have made similar diagnoses of the geopolitical problems they face, even if they are starting to focus on them from different directions. The two nations also share clarity of purpose in many areas: they require closer and continued strategic dialogue to realign growing divergences. One problem, particularly for the UK, is that while US power has surged ahead, the UK, like many other allies, has fallen behind. Britain has a special interest in strengthening itself – economically, diplomatically and militarily – otherwise its voice will weaken in Washington. However, each country is likely to remain the other's most powerful ally well into the 21st century. This necessitates closer cooperation. While the US has other important allies and partners, none of these look set to be more powerful than the UK by the early 2030s, especially if British naval and deterrence capabilities are regenerated. Recommendations: To repurpose the special relationship, the UK and US should: Create a new vision of the future of the international order: Britain and America largely agree on the damage done to their economies and industrial bases by neoliberal economic policies. But they lack a vision and strategy to respond. To chart a way forward with the support of a wider group of key allies, they should: Review the level of rival co-option occurring in existing geoeconomic organisations in order to create new ones where necessary, to deal with trade abuses and to coordinate sanctions more effectively; Explore ways of establishing a new geoeconomic order, designed to reinforce the prosperity and resilience of free and open countries, which seeks to limit the ability of adversaries to compete at the geoeconomic level; Strengthen the alignments between the UK and US scientific and technological bases to generate collaboration on regulations for emerging technologies, such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Quantum technologies, behind which like-minded partners can follow. Britain and America largely agree on the damage done to their economies and industrial bases by neoliberal economic policies. But they lack a vision and strategy to respond. To chart a way forward with the support of a wider group of key allies, they should: Plan for a modulated multi-theatre posture: There have been signs from American officials that the US will be far less focused on European security. To mitigate the impact of an American reprioritisation away from Britain's primary theatre, the two governments should: Work together – and within the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) – to create a clear timeline for the move of key US assets from Europe to the Indo-Pacific theatre over the next five to ten years. The aim should be to allow the UK and other allies to replace those assets in an orderly manner, rather than during a geopolitical emergency in the future; Prepare for the UK to provide leadership and enhanced deterrence in Europe; Reinforce UK support for US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) in the Indo-Pacific; Develop strategic dialogues on the most pressing issues to foster alignment on key national priorities; Forge a better understanding of how and where both nations could contribute to a simultaneous multi-front crisis if one were to materialise. There have been signs from American officials that the US will be far less focused on European security. To mitigate the impact of an American reprioritisation away from Britain's primary theatre, the two governments should: Coordinate military production: There is consensus in both countries that greater defence industrial capacity is needed to deter and contain aggressors. The realisation that adversaries are now fielding Chinese technologies will help shape priorities. The UK and US should: Commit to spend at least 5% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defence by 2030, with 3.5% on military capabilities and 1.5% on strategic infrastructure, as per the recommendation of Mark Rutte, Secretary General of NATO; Ensure that there is clear direction and prioritisation for transatlantic defence industrial collaboration; Prioritise rare earth metal supply chain cooperation; continued PRC control over this vital supply chain is simply not sustainable for future UK-US military industrial expansion and operations; Support efforts which contribute to leadership in critical technologies; Build up the production and co-production of munitions at the bilateral, minilateral and multilateral levels; Cooperate more on co-sustainment, particularly to enable British shipyards to support the US Navy. There is consensus in both countries that greater defence industrial capacity is needed to deter and contain aggressors. The realisation that adversaries are now fielding Chinese technologies will help shape priorities. The UK and US should: William Freer is a research fellow in national security at the Council on Geostrategy in London. John Hemmings, PhD, is deputy director (geopolitics) at the Council on Geostrategy. James Rogers is co-founder (research) at the Council on Geostrategy.
Metro
3 days ago
- Politics
- Metro
Every phone in the UK is going to get an emergency alert warning very soon
Millions of phones will blare with the sound of a 10-second siren this year as part of a drill to prepare the UK for potential danger. The announcement about this year's test alert comes as the government issued a warning about the UK needing to 'actively prepare' for the possibility of the country coming under 'direct threat'. It also comes after the world has been watching the Middle East amid fears of a wider conflict igniting after tensions between Iran and Israel boiled over. The Emergency Alert System (EAS) is designed to warn the public if there is a danger to life nearby. When it was last tested, the message that appeared on phones said: 'This is a test of Emergency Alerts, a new UK Government service that will warn you if there's a life-threatening emergency nearby. In a real emergency, follow the instructions in the alert to keep yourself and others safe. 'Visit for more information. This is a test. You do not need to take any action.' After this year's alert (the exact date will be announced in the future), the system will be tested once every two years. The practice test of the system comes as the government's National Security Strategy stressed the importance of Brits being prepared for any emergency – weather, war, and more. Earlier this year, the European Union went as far as warning the nearly 450,000,000 people who live within its borders to stockpile emergency supplies to last 72 hours in case of war or natural disaster. The advice, issued to nearly half a billion people across 27 countries, includes telling people to buy bottled water, energy bars, a torch, and waterproof pouches for IDs. And EU households could get a handbook to help them prepare for 'various crises, from potential conflict to climate disasters, pandemics and cyber threats.' The EU's announcement came after France decided to issue 20-page survival manuals, with 63 measures on how the French can protect themselves from armed conflict, natural disasters, industrial accidents and nuclear leaks. It also included the essentials needed in these scenarios, like six litres of water, canned food, batteries, a torch, paracetamol and bandages. More Trending But the French government insisted it was not released because of the looming threat of Vladimir Putin. Instead, it said the manual has been in the works since 2022, after the COVID-19 pandemic, to prepare the country for a similar type of scenario. Many countries in the EU are already well prepared for natural disasters, including Finland, where Metro toured one of the underground bunkers which will serve as a refuge for Finns in case of war or emergency. The nation has an astounding 50,500 bomb shelters in case of emergency or conflict – a stark contrast to those available and operational in the United Kingdom. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Fraudster made £500,000 by conning luxury brands into buying fake 'Scottish tea' MORE: Glasgow city council hit by cyber attack that 'may have stolen residents' data MORE: I stayed in the 'rundown dump' named the UK's worst city to visit — it stole my heart
Daily Mirror
3 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Is all this talk about war an attempt from Starmer to impress Donald Trump?
So Sir Keir Starmer is ramping up the rhetoric and re-upping on the UK's defence weaponry. The Prime Minister has announced a £1billion deal to buy 12 nuclear-ready F35A jets from the US. That will warm the hearts of the millions of UK citizens unaware of where their next meal will come from. Or the voters bracing themselves for welfare cuts. As the legendary rapper Tupac Shakur once said: 'They got money for wars but they can't feed the poor." The government is warning us to prepare for war on home soil for the first time since the German occupation of the Channel Islands during the Second World War. But why? The National Security Strategy document, out earlier this week, is suggesting there are threats from nukes, troops, terrorism, chemical warfare and so much much more. A country like the UK would have threats against it all the time. But if there is a specific, credible worry to us then surely they should be telling us, shouldn't they? Because it smells worryingly like an attempt to confect an appetite for war. Anyone able to think for themselves could be forgiven for noting a similarity with the flawed dossier used in 2003 to justify joining the US-led Iraq war. And it really does appear that we in this country have learned nothing from that devastating conflict. On the basis of 'sexed up' evidence - parroted on TV, radio and in print by every lapdog politician and his or her dog back then - Tony Blair's Labour government joined George for a conflict that the then-United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, would later describe as 'illegal'. Around 150,000 people - 120,000 of them civilians - died as a result. It was a war that would create new martyrs, new terrorists, new dangers, death and destruction in the west. Dissenters at the time were dismissed as unpatriotic as this country leaned into the bloodlust of which the current climate is frighteningly reminiscent. So, again, the question now is the same as it was then. Where is the evidence? Or was it an attempt to roll up his sleeve and flex his bicep to prove to US President Donald Trump that Starmer too is able to flex? Because, on the basis of historic Anglo-American foreign policy, a number of countries around the world have been burning flags and saying unkind things about the west for decades now. Far from ideal, but there you go. So what else? Iran, which hasn't attacked anyone directly for decades, has supposedly been three months away from a nuclear bomb for 30 years. They weren't even involved this whole caboodle until Israel starting bombing them last week. Now we hear that the US intelligence reports suggest the bombing raids over the weekend were nowhere near as successful in 'obliterating' the core component's of Iran's nuclear capability as Donald Trump has been suggesting. The US President has stuck to his guns and has adopted his favourite strategy of shooting the messengers, the media contingent willing to point out that actually, the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes. But sadly, while he and his ago remain intent on hunting down a Nobel Prize, the appetite here appears to be to foment that appetite for conflict. Even to characterise the Iranians as a clear and present danger - even though precisely nobody was talking in those terms even a month ago - is fascinating. Starmer seems determined to turn some of the attention onto himself, and it feels like an attempt to elbow his way into a conversation that doesn't concern this country. Throw in the fact that we in Britain love to invoke wartime rhetoric, and that Starmer can frame himself as the PM able to keep this country safe, and here we are. But we are whipping up fear when the facts completely contradict the narrative that our leaders in this country, across Europe and Stateside are pushing. And, worryingly, it has left Iran doing exactly what many feared: pulling out of talks to keep weapons inspectors apprised of what they are up to. You'd have to assume they will also carry on exploring the nuclear option after being told they cannot have one by the west - most of whose countries have one themselves. If Iran wanted to create any kind of WMD, for example, they'll have had the capability to do so - and use one - for years, wouldn't they? And even if you didn't want to surmise, what about the actual US Intelligence stating (until Trump's intervention) that there was no evidence the Iranians were knee deep in malign intent? What about the International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi who remains adamant that the Iranians had not been building a nuclear weapon? At what point did we stop listening to the experts in favour of the leaders keen to evoke war - euphemistically described as 'peace through strength' - on vibes? The big picture is that Mark Rutte, the Secretary General of NATO, is so desperate to keep Trump from pulling America out of the Alliance that his performance at Wednesday's media briefing was embarrassing. So much so that he needed a torch to climb out of the President's tradesman's entrance. It was little surprise, then, to see him soothing the ego of Trump by insisting the President and his utterly unqualified acolytes were right, you can bomb a mountain and wipe out materials buried so deep underground you'd need to enter another time zone to find them. It is the theatre of the absurd but whatever the truth of the matter, Starmer should be better than this. Much better. Ends
Daily Mirror
3 days ago
- Science
- Daily Mirror
China unveils mosquito-sized stealth operation drone as UK 'prepares for war'
A tiny 2cm-long drone used for 'special missions on the battlefield' has been unveiled by Chinese scientists - while the Prime Minister has warned of how technology could embolden an attack on UK soil China has unveiled a futuristic mosquito-sized drone on the same week the British government warned that rapidly advancing technology is 'transforming the nature of war'. The tiny flying device - developed by the National University of Defence Technology (NUDT) in China 's Hunan province - is designed for "covert" military operations, and marks the latest war-ready device shown off by Beijing. Modelled after a mosquito, it has two wings, a black body, and three hair-thin legs, allowing it to carry out "special missions on the battlefield" without being detected. Researchers from the university showed off the gadget this week alongside a host of other robots, including humanoid machines and tiny drones, on state-run media. The mosquito drone is just two centimetres (0.7in) long and 3cm wide (1.18in), weighing less than 0.2 grams. Another prototype of the device, which had four wings, appeared to be controlled via a smartphone. Explaining how it could be deployed in battle, Liang Hexiang, a student at NUDT, told CCTV: 'Here in my hand is a mosquito-like type of robot. Miniature bionic robots like this one are especially suited to information reconnaissance and special missions on the battlefield.' China has invested heavily in the use of AI-powered gadgets for military purposes, and plans to introduce the largest drone carrier in the world by the end of this month. The 'drone mothership' will being able to launch huge swarms of 'kamikaze' devices upon enemy targets. It comes after Keir Starmer warned that Britons must prepare for possibility of an attack on our own soil amid high tensions on the international stage. Speaking this week as he unveiled the UK's National Security Strategy, the Prime Minister said: "Russian aggression menaces our continent. Strategic competition is intensifying. Extremist ideologies are on the rise. Technology is transforming the nature of both war and domestic security. Hostile state activity takes place on British soil." One part of the 53-page document, authored by the Government, tells of how "adversaries are laying the foundations for future conflict, positioning themselves to move quickly to cause major disruption to our energy and or supply chains, to deter us from standing up to their aggression. It adds: "For the first time in many years, we have to actively prepare for the possibility of the UK homeland coming under direct threat, potentially in a wartime scenario." China was identified as a particular potential threat as the country tries to devlope AI capability allowing them to release 'swarms' of drones in an attack. With the right programming these would be extremely difficult to shoot down or disable if they flew in overwhelming numbers, controlled by artificial intelligence responding at lightning speed.
Daily Record
3 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Record
What conscription could look like as Keir Starmer warns UK 'must prepare'
A newly published National Security Strategy has raised questions about bringing back conscription in the UK. An expert has revealed how conscription could work on home soil as an alarming government dossier warns that Brits "must actively prepare" for war. The expert has explained that a "well-trained resourceful UK land army of young and spirited Brits will deter Putin where nukes fear to tread", reports the Mirror. According to the newly published National Security Strategy report, facing the danger of nuclear weapons will be "more complex than it was even in the Cold War" - a prospect that will no doubt send a shudder down the spine of those who lived through these uncertain times. Some of the dossier's references date back even further than the days of the Iron Curtain, harking back to the famed Blitz spirit of World War II. Describing the nation as being in a period of "radical uncertainty", Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to spend five per cent of GDP on national security within a decade, in a bid to bring together civilian and military priorities "in a way not seen since 1945". Although national conscription was not mentioned in the document, Brits are now asking important questions as the threat to national security feels closer than ever. Reflecting on this newly published strategy, Professor Anthony Glees, an expert on European affairs from The University of Buckingham, said: "It's revealing and depressing that the National Security Strategy outlines, correctly, the grave danger the UK now faces, but does not mention 'conscription' once. Not once. "It tells us, correctly, that we 'need to actually prepare for the UK Homeland coming under direct threat in a wartime scenario'. We need, it says, to 'strengthen our approach to domestic security, restore security to our borders'. "It describes the threat to us here in the UK posed by Russia and Iran in particular - and outlines our need to 'gain the upper hand' when confronting their frequent cyber attacks, their landgrabbing tactics in Europe and beyond, their intrusion into outer space, cyberspace (ie undersea data-carrying cables)." "But one of the most important and cheapest ways we have of countering and addressing these myriad real threats to our way of life, increasing the size of our armed forces through some form of conscription, is totally ignored." For decades, the topic of National Service has been floated in public discussions; however, successive governments have repeatedly ruled out the possibility of military conscription, the main argument here being that armed forces are best staffed by those who have volunteered to put themselves forward to defend the country, with all the skills and training such a rigorous task. However, in recent years, the security situation has changed significantly, and there are those who believe National Service is now "absolutely vital". This includes Professor Glees, who expressed concerns that the government"self-evidently does not believe that increasing the size of our armed forces has anything to do with the stated aims of the Strategy." He warned: "This is totally reckless, particularly given the widely reported view of General Sir Richard Shirreff, a former NATO deputy supreme commander, Europe, just a few months ago, that we should immediately begin to conscript 30,000 young Brits each year to bring our army up to the crucial 100,000 mark. "I've often said in the past that, as an academic, this seems absolutely vital to me. A well-trained, resourceful UK land army of young and spirited Brits will deter Putin where nukes fear to tread, because as his attack on Ukraine shows, our nukes do not deter him, any more than his nukes deter Ukraine." Expressing his thoughts on how such a scheme could work in 21st-century Britain, the expert said: "I favour conscription for national service for everyone capable of it. Not everyone should undergo military training as in weapons training; cyber skills, for example, for offensive and defensive purposes, are a form of weapons training. But those who are up for proper military training should be given it. "The EU, the UK and Norway have a population of 523m, more than four times as large as Russia with 144m. Our joint GDP is $24tr compared with Russia's $2tr." Highlighting some of the potential incentives such a scheme could introduce, amid a backdrop of rising living costs, he added: "We can afford to offer our young people fabulous inducements to commit to a year's national service, for example, cheap loans for mortgages, free university and college places. "In the National Security Strategy, the Prime Minister says we need to 'unleash a defence dividend, to use national security to strengthen our country'. Exactly so. That dividend is not simply AI and IT; it is our young people who need to understand that their future liberty relies on their willingness to serve. That is where conscription comes in." While fears over the potential for nuclear warfare are rife, Professor Glees believes any future European War "will be fought with conventional means, not nukes", which he emphasises "are last resort weapons". In this regard, "a strong land army" will be far more important than a formidable nuclear arsenal. He added: " Putin knows that if we were to use them to prevent him from taking over our country, we could destroy Russia in the bat of an eyelid. But he also knows that we would be committing suicide in doing so. That is why conventional strength is real strength. "A future war in Europe (just like the current war in Ukraine or the war between Israel and Iran) will be fought with conventional means, not nukes. Nukes are last resort weapons, but leave plenty of space for conventional forces to go past them, like the Maginot Line, which was meant to defend France from the Germans, but they simply went over the top of it. "Until recently, we've put just about all our defence eggs in our Vanguard-class Trident -carrying submarines. In fact, we need a strong land army to keep our shores safe, not least from the very things the Review outlines, which include the key demand that we properly protect our borders, which we are not doing at the moment." Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'.
