Britain cannot rely solely on others for its defence. Recent events in the Middle East have shown how quickly the world can spiral into conflict. When powers such as the United States, Israel and Iran exchange military strikes and deploy significant force, it reminds us that global stability can never be taken for granted. If Britain wants security, resilience and prosperity, we must rebuild our industrial strength particularly in the North of England and Scotland while maintaining close cooperation with our European partners.
Watching the escalation in the Middle East has been deeply unsettling. The region has seen missile strikes, drone warfare and major military mobilisation. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, global military spending reached $2.4 trillion in 2023, the highest level ever recorded. In an increasingly volatile world, it is worth asking a difficult question: if a major global conflict were to erupt, how prepared would Britain actually be?
The answer is uncomfortable.
For decades Britain has allowed its industrial base to decline. In the 1970s, manufacturing accounted for around a quarter of the UK economy. Today it represents roughly 9–10% of GDP. Entire regions that once powered the British economy have been hollowed out. Towns such as Middlesbrough, Hartlepool, Bolton, Burnley and Huddersfield were once major centres of British industry from steel and shipbuilding to textiles and heavy engineering.
Today many of these communities face fewer industrial jobs and slower economic growth than the national average.
Modern defence systems rely on complex supply chains involving advanced materials, electronics and specialised manufacturing. Yet the UK increasingly relies on international supply chains for key components. Britain currently spends around £60 billion per year on defence, one of the largest military budgets in Europe. But spending alone does not guarantee resilience if the country lacks the domestic capacity to produce critical technologies.
As a Liberal Democrat, I strongly believe in international cooperation. NATO remains essential for European security, and Britain should pursue deeper defence cooperation with the European Union. In an uncertain world, democracies are safer when they work together.
History shows that Britain’s resilience has always rested on its ability to innovate and manufacture at home. During the Second World War, British factories produced aircraft on an enormous scale, reaching more than 2,500 aircraft per month at the peak of production in 1944. Shipyards across the country built destroyers, submarines and merchant vessels at remarkable speed. Our industrial capacity was central to Britain’s survival.
Today, that capacity has diminished.
The answer is not simply to spend more money buying equipment from abroad. Nor should we accept the false choice that strengthening defence requires cutting support for children, education or public services. A strong defence strategy should strengthen the economy rather than weaken our social fabric.
That means rebuilding Britain’s defence industry through strategic public investment combined with private innovation. Defence is, by definition, a national interest. In critical sectors such as shipbuilding, advanced weapons systems, artificial intelligence and drone technology, government should play a strategic role alongside British and European companies.
Countries such as Norway, Sweden and Denmark demonstrate that this balance can work. These nations combine state investment with competitive private industries to maintain strong defence capabilities while remaining open market economies.
Britain should also rethink how its economy is geographically structured.
For too long the UK has been overly dependent on London as its economic engine. London produces around 23% of the UK’s total economic output, yet many regions have been left behind. If London is Britain’s financial capital, the North of England and Scotland could become the defensive and industrial backbone of the country.
A defence manufacturing corridor stretching across the North East, North West and Scotland could revitalise regions that once drove British productivity. Shipbuilding could expand along the Tyne, Tees and Clyde. Drone manufacturing and robotics could develop in former industrial towns with strong engineering traditions. Cities such as Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham could host artificial intelligence research centres linked directly to defence innovation.
This would strengthen national security while also helping to rebalance the British economy.
The nature of warfare is also changing rapidly. Modern conflicts increasingly rely on drones, cyber warfare and artificial intelligence alongside traditional military equipment. Turkey provides an interesting example. Despite having a smaller economy than many Western nations, it has become a significant producer of military drones such as the Bayraktar TB2, which has been widely used in conflicts including Ukraine and Libya.
Britain has world-class universities, engineers and scientists. With the right strategy, we could become leaders in the next generation of defence technology.
Our ultimate goal should always be peace. But peace is often preserved through preparedness. A nation that cannot defend itself risks becoming dependent on decisions made elsewhere. Britain should remain a strong partner in NATO and deepen defence cooperation with Europe. But at the same time, we must rebuild our own industrial strength and strategic autonomy.
* Mo Waqas is a vice chair of the Liberal Democrats' Racial Diversity Campaign and was the PPC for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Professor Joad sees his play at the Theatre Royal, Northampton
The DVLA's problem with number plates
Is Kier Starmer the new John Major?
Roland
David Raw
Chloe
Tom Bailey
13 Comments
I disagree.. It is time that the UK stopped trying to be a world power and accept that the days of Empire are over..
We will never match the weaponry of the USA and, anyway, that country has shown us that it will start wars with or without our participation or approval.. The Ukraine conflict has shown the world that, in conventional warfare, Russia is no threat to Western Europe with or without the USA; any nuclear war is a loss for everyone..
BTW, who, exactly, will start a war with the UK and for what?
If the excuse for ‘rebuilding the North’ is massive government investment in munitions then that rebuilding could be done by by the same investment in infrastructure and the manufacture of goods that will benefit a nation in times of peace rather that of a hypothetical war…
Warships now cost billions -drones to sink warships can cost less than a million. It is clear that our defence policy should be based on missile-defence systems to protect the country from incoming missiles and drone technology to provide anti-drone capability plus offence capability.
No more spending on aircraft carriers…
Well said expats. Russia is bogged down in Eastern Ukraine – it poses no threat to our territorial borders. Post industrial towns require huge investment in transport and infrastructure. The days when the Royal Navy sailed down the Yangste are well and truly over. Meaningless tub thumping from geo political minnows.
Expats – I see no evidence that we are seeking to be a world power. The reality is that we have inadequate resources to protect ourselves. To believe that there are not threats to the UK is so naïve as to be almost unbelievable.
Mo – I think your article is excellent, a well balance contribution. Thank you.
I agree that we have to remain integrated in NATO and need to deepen defence links with the EU. This will keep the potential front line further away. But we will need to start investing more in counter drone and missile technology. None of this will be cheap so we will have to find the money somewhere. Social Security spending would be a good place to start.
Perhaps we could mothball HMS CallTheBreakdownService, seeing as we only have enough escorts for 1 carrier group.
@Expats and Crag Lavine
We certainly have to ensure that additional money spent on defence is will spent but I do hope you agree that we have to spend more. The idea that we don’t have to contribute to the defence of middle-Europe because it is a far off land of which we know nothing has unfortunate connotations at best and in Trump’s world where the US guarantee of European security seems doubtful seems to me to be highly dangerous.
Let’s not forget that 4 years ago everyone expected Ukraine to collapse quickly. She has kept going thanks to enormous courage and sacrifice, and also thanks to support on the form of money arms and expertise from the west.
Graham Jeffs 9th Mar ’26 – 11:06am….Expats – I see no evidence that we are seeking to be a world power. The reality is that we have inadequate resources to protect ourselves. To believe that there are not threats to the UK is so naïve as to be almost unbelievable….
HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, even when out of dock, are a delusional pretension of past glories?.
You mention threats but fail to identify the source and form of such threats.. Again, who, exactly, will start a war with the UK and for what?
BTW.. I accept that there are threats to the UK; however, those threats are almost certainly cyber threats or terrorist actions. Countering those are the actions that will keep this nation safe for it’s inhabitants..
You are right, Mo! If’s not a question of exercising military/naval power across the globe, it’s a question of protecting ourselves (in conjunction with our European partners) in a world where the USA, even post Trump, has became isolationist once again and is unlikely to want to protect us. Remember that it took the US over two years to join in the fight for democracy during WW2, and eventually did so only when they themselves were attacked. Please realise that the UK is a nation of 70 million people which produces enough food for 40 million people, so needs to import food for half its population even in the event of conflict.
Who are our current threats? Well, Russia in particular, because they (not only Putin!) see having hegemony over all of Europe as being essential to their own cultural security. I have Russian friends who have a pro-European outlook (and American ones too), but I do appreciate that as a society Russia is paranoid and believes that control over all its own destiny requires that they exercise that control over a sphere of influence that stretches to the middle of the Atlantic. China is a competitor in the longer term, and has raised its economy with resources put into the projection of national defence (incidentally, China now has the world’s largest navy – in spite of Trump’s self-delusion – capable of blue-water power projection, although as yet only second in terms of aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines, in which it is swiftly catching up.
Its not just in the UK that we’ve seen manufacturing decline. Steve Keen points out that the same thing has happened in the US too. We’ve all become far too reliant on being able to buy what we need on the world market often from countries like China. We’re all dependent on Taiwan for our semiconductors. We all agree that Taiwan is another China so what will happen if mainland China decides there should only be one China?
It has been very short sighted of us to allow our manufacturing industry to decline in the way it has.
https://profstevekeen.substack.com/p/this-is-the-end-of-the-us-global
Joan Summers 9th Mar ’26 – 10:25am:
Warships now cost billions – drones to sink warships can cost less than a million. It is clear that our defence policy should be based on missile-defence systems to protect the country from incoming missiles and drone technology to provide anti-drone capability plus offence capability.
Enter the DragonFire…
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3wjzIz67ds
Tim Rogers 9th Mar ’26 – 1:39pm:
I agree that we have to remain integrated in NATO and need to deepen defence links with the EU.
NATO yes, but getting (re)entangled in EU bureaucracy would not be helpful. One of the many benefits of Brexit is being able to make our own procurement rules. The Procurement Act 2023 was instrumental in enabling DragonFire to be expedited…
‘How have post-Brexit procurement reforms accelerated DragonFire deployment?’:
https://www.google.com/search?q=How+have+post-Brexit+procurement+reforms+accelerated+DragonFire+deployment%3F&udm=50
The temptation is to use defence spending as a means of improving employment, national income and growth rather than defending our nation. We can only successfully defend ourselves by working with others to build capacity. The government needs to work out how much we are prepared to invest in defence and work with others to build the necessary capacity. This of course implies reduced self-reliance and more cooperation. We could start by dismantling our nuclear deterrent.