UK Military Readiness: Assessing Capacity for Sustained Conflict
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, now approaching its fifth year, coupled with increasing "hybrid warfare" incidents across Europe, has prompted UK military leaders to emphasize the necessity of preparing for potential conflict. This comes after Russian President Vladimir Putin stated on December 2 that Russia stands ready for war if European nations initiate it, while also accusing them of impeding US peace efforts in Ukraine. While a direct, standalone conflict between the UK and Russia is considered highly improbable without the involvement of NATO allies, Putin's remarks underscore the possibility of a wider conflict involving NATO members.
Modern Warfare Considerations
A potential conflict scenario includes disruptions to critical infrastructure. Such disruptions could manifest as widespread mobile phone signal loss, affecting essential services like banking, food distribution, and electricity. Modern societies are significantly reliant on a global network of undersea cables and pipelines that facilitate data transfer, financial transactions, and energy supply.
Russian spy vessels, including the Yantar, are widely reported to have surveyed these undersea assets for potential sabotage. In response, the Royal Navy has invested in a fleet of underwater drones equipped with integrated sensors. In the event of hostilities, covert actions against this infrastructure, combined with efforts to disrupt Western satellite systems, could significantly hinder the UK's military capabilities and impact civil society.
Sustaining Prolonged Conflict
A recent conference in London, "Fighting the Long War," organized by the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi), convened military and political figures to discuss the UK armed forces' capacity for a protracted conflict. Hamish Mundell of Rusi noted limited evidence of a UK plan to sustain a war beyond a few weeks. He highlighted deficiencies in medical capacity, slow reserve regeneration pipelines, and the lack of sufficient "depth" in current British force design, referring to the personnel, platforms, and logistical chains needed to absorb losses and maintain combat operations over an extended period.
Russian Military Capacity and Production
Justin Crump, CEO of Sibylline, a private intelligence company, identified shortfalls in Russia's military regarding ammunition, artillery, vehicles, air defense, and personnel regeneration. The conflict in Ukraine has emphasized the critical role of drones and the importance of military "mass" – sheer volume of personnel and hardware.
UK Defence Intelligence estimates that Russia has incurred over 1.1 million casualties (killed, wounded, captured, or missing) since February 2022, with conservative estimates placing the number of killed personnel at 150,000. Despite these losses, Russia's large manpower pool has allowed it to replace an estimated 30,000 monthly battlefield casualties. The Russian economy has been operating on a war footing for over three years, with an economist now heading the Defence Ministry. According to a report by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Russia's monthly production includes approximately 150 tanks, 550 infantry fighting vehicles, 120 Lancet drones, and more than 50 artillery pieces. Analysts state that Western European factories would require years to achieve similar production volumes.
National Service Discussions and Policy
France and Germany have recently reintroduced voluntary military service for 18-year-olds. In 2024, General Sir Patrick Sanders, former Head of the British Army, suggested training a "citizen army" for future land conflicts, a proposal subsequently rejected by No. 10. Ed Arnold, a senior research fellow at Rusi, observed that the UK, having discontinued national service in the 1960s, lacks the institutional memory prevalent in countries like Sweden, Germany, and France. Efforts to initiate a national conversation on military service in the UK have generally not gained widespread support.
Defense Spending and Current State of Readiness
Sir Ben Wallace, who served as Defence Secretary from 2019 to 2023, stated that the armed forces require more than political rhetoric. In response, a spokesperson for current Labour Defence Secretary John Healey cited a £5 billion increase in defense spending for the current year, the signing of 1,000 major contracts since the election, and a 6% above-inflation increase in Ministry of Defence spending with British businesses in the past year. The spokesperson also highlighted a new defense agreement with Norway, a £300 million investment in the Royal Navy's laser weapon, and a £9 billion investment in armed forces housing, indicating government investment in force transformation and personnel.
However, concerns remain regarding the long-term underfunding of UK defense, potentially leading to vulnerabilities, particularly in air defense. Defence contracts are often characterized by prolonged timelines and inefficiencies, such as the Ajax armored vehicle project, which has faced delays and ongoing issues. NATO officers have warned that Russia could be in a position to launch an attack on a NATO country within three to five years.
In 1990, at the end of the Cold War, the UK allocated 4.1% of its GDP to defense, subsequently deploying over 45,000 troops during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. Today, the government aims to reach 2.5% of GDP by 2027, while Russia's defense spending approaches 7% of its GDP. The British Army's nominal strength is approximately 74,000 personnel. Rusi's Ed Arnold estimates its actual deployable strength to be 54,000, which is less than Russia's average casualties over a two-month period in Ukraine. Justin Crump suggests that the British Army, once committed to a land conflict, could experience significant degradation within weeks.
Potential Flashpoints and Hostile Acts
Some observers have characterized the current situation between the UK and Russia as "hybrid" or "grey-zone" warfare, encompassing deniable actions such as cyber-attacks, disinformation campaigns, and alleged drone activity near military and civilian infrastructure in NATO countries. NATO military chiefs have expressed concern that a successful outcome for Russia in Ukraine could lead to further aggressive actions.
Potential geopolitical flashpoints include:
- Suwalki Gap: A 60-mile stretch of border between Poland and Lithuania, connecting Russian ally Belarus with Russia's Kaliningrad exclave. Control of this corridor would provide Moscow direct access to its Baltic strategic base.
- Baltic States: Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, all former Soviet republics and current NATO members, contain Russian-speaking minorities. There are concerns of potential Russian intervention under the pretext of protecting these populations. The eastern Estonian town of Narva, which has a Russian-speaking majority and is situated opposite a Russian fortress, is cited as a potential target. A UK battle group of approximately 900 military personnel has been stationed in Estonia since 2017, with plans for reinforcement to brigade strength (around 3,000 or more) in a conflict scenario.
- Svalbard: An Arctic archipelago administered by Norway, where Russia maintains a presence in the coal mining town of Barentsburg.
Hostile acts on UK soil linked to President Putin include:
- Alexander Litvinenko: The 2006 murder of the former KGB officer in London with Polonium-210. A public inquiry concluded that Putin "probably" approved the assassination.
- Sergei Skripal and Dawn Sturgess: The 2018 attempted murder of former Russian military intelligence officer Sergei Skripal in Salisbury using Novichok, which subsequently led to the death of Dawn Sturgess. A recent inquiry concluded that Putin was "morally responsible" for Sturgess's death and authorized the Skripal operation. Russia has consistently denied involvement in these incidents.
NATO Alliance and Future Outlook
As a core member of the NATO alliance, a direct, isolated conflict between the UK and Russia is considered unlikely by analysts like Justin Crump, who deems it "not likely and can be disregarded, practically." Crump suggests that Russia would most likely initiate conflict only if it perceived a fracturing within NATO. The potential policies of US President Donald Trump introduce an element of uncertainty regarding US commitment to NATO defense, despite assurances from NATO's Military Committee chairman.
Keir Giles of Chatham House stated that the UK's actual capabilities are highly dependent on the specific challenges posed by Russia. He suggested that the British public should acknowledge that their accustomed rights, freedoms, and prosperity are under threat, and that maintaining freedom necessitates costs and potential societal adjustments, attributing the root cause of these challenges to Moscow rather than solely to domestic government policies.