Will Starmer’s Defence Plan Meet NATO’s Spending Targets?
Samael.lol – On 11 June, former Defence Secretary John Healey resigned from Sir Keir Starmer’s government, citing concerns over the delayed release of the Defence Investment Plan (DIP). The plan, now officially published, outlines the UK’s future defence commitments and aims to address long-standing gaps in military funding. Prime Minister Starmer has framed the document as a pivotal step, calling it a “huge historic shift for our nation.” BBC Verify has analyzed the plan’s implications, focusing on whether the proposed increases will position the UK to fulfill its NATO-related spending pledges.
NATO’s 2035 Commitment
The UK has pledged to allocate 5% of its GDP to defence and security by 2035, with a specific target of 3.5% for NATO-qualifying core defence spending. This commitment was made at a NATO summit in The Hague in June 2025, where member states agreed to collectively raise their defence budgets to meet this benchmark. The alliance’s goal includes funding efforts to protect critical infrastructure, enhance cyber resilience, and bolster the defence industrial base, alongside traditional military expenditures.
According to the DIP, the UK’s current NATO-qualifying defence spending stood at £70bn in 2025, equivalent to 2.4% of GDP. Starmer announced that the plan would push this figure to 2.5% by 2027 and 2.6% by 2027, after incorporating the activities of the country’s security and intelligence agencies into the definition of qualifying spending. However, the plan also sets a broader ambition: to reach 3% of GDP in the “next parliament.” This target, while ambitious, remains a challenge given the current trajectory.
The MoD Budget and Spending Projections
The Ministry of Defence’s budget for 2026-27 is projected at £68.3bn, according to the DIP. This figure, however, does not capture all state spending on defence. NATO-qualifying defence spending includes additional costs such as military pensions, which are managed by the Treasury rather than the MoD. As a result, the total defence expenditure under NATO’s broader definition is higher than the MoD’s direct budget.
Starmer’s government has committed to raising NATO-qualifying spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027. This target, though significant, requires a steady increase in funding over the coming years. The DIP estimates that the UK will reach 2.7% of GDP by 2027-28, with the proportion remaining stable at that level through the rest of the decade. This suggests the current plan may not be enough to meet the 3.5% core defence target by 2035, as the rate of growth appears flat beyond 2027.
Healey, who resigned after the DIP was released, criticized the government’s approach, arguing that the plan only commits to 2.68% of GDP by 2030. He emphasized that this level of spending is inadequate to counter rising global threats, particularly in light of ongoing conflicts and geopolitical tensions. “The DIP falls short of defending the country at this time,” Healey stated in a post on X, calling for a “target date” and a “clear plan” to achieve the 3% GDP goal earlier than the next parliament.
Defence Spending Increases
The DIP marks an additional £15bn boost in defence spending over the next four years, compared to the original 2025 Spending Review. This figure includes both MoD budget allocations and contributions from other defence-related activities. The total cash spending for the MoD over the current parliamentary term is estimated at £270bn, a record high according to Starmer. He argued that this represents “the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the 1980s.”
However, the original DIP had proposed an increase of £13.5bn over four years. The £15bn adjustment, which Starmer announced, suggests the government has found an extra £1.5bn for defence since Healey’s departure. This additional funding could help close the £28bn “shortfall” previously reported in January by the Times, though the exact nature of this deficit and its allocation remains under scrutiny.
Analysts are divided on whether the DIP’s targets are achievable. While the plan includes incremental increases, the projected 2.7% GDP spending rate by 2030 does not indicate a significant acceleration in growth. If future spending reviews fail to commit more funds, the UK may struggle to meet the 3.5% core defence target by 2035. Starmer has insisted that the DIP “takes us to 4.2% under that commitment,” but critics argue that the plan’s specifics may not align with this assertion.
Global Context and Strategic Priorities
UK defence spending has been a focal point of international discussions, especially as NATO members face pressure to meet their collective targets. The alliance’s 2025 summit highlighted the need for increased investment in both traditional military capabilities and emerging security threats. The DIP’s inclusion of intelligence agencies’ activities as part of qualifying spending reflects a shift toward integrating broader national security efforts into the NATO framework.
Despite the plan’s stated goals, challenges remain. The UK’s current spending is projected to grow to 2.7% of GDP by 2027-28, a modest increase from 2.4% in 2025. If this rate holds, the country would reach 2.7% by 2030 without further acceleration. Starmer’s ambition to hit 3% by the next parliament hinges on whether future budgets will prioritize additional investments. Without a clear timeline or detailed breakdown of funding allocations, the path to 3.5% by 2035 appears uncertain.
Revisions and Uncertainties
Healey’s resignation and subsequent criticism have raised questions about the government’s commitment to defence. While the DIP acknowledges the need to meet NATO targets, its current projections may not be enough to ensure long-term success. The plan’s stability in the 2.7% GDP range suggests that the UK’s approach is more incremental than transformative, potentially leaving room for further revisions in future spending reviews.
Starmer’s team has defended the plan, emphasizing that it sets a “trajectory” for achieving the 3% target. The prime minister’s statement highlights the importance of sustained investment in national security, particularly as the UK navigates a complex global landscape. However, the DIP’s lack of year-by-year estimates for the 2027-2030 period has drawn skepticism. Critics argue that without detailed planning, the government risks falling short of its commitments.
As the UK works toward its NATO goals, the DIP provides a framework but leaves many questions unanswered. The plan’s success will depend on how effectively future budgets allocate resources to address both traditional and emerging threats. With the global security environment evolving rapidly, the government must balance immediate needs with long-term strategic objectives to ensure the UK remains a key player in NATO’s defence agenda.
“The measures in the DIP take us to 4.2% under that commitment,” Starmer said, underscoring the plan’s progress toward the 2035 target. However, the path to 3.5% remains unclear, and the government’s ability to secure additional funding will be critical in the coming years.
In summary, while the DIP represents a step forward in addressing the UK’s defence spending shortfall, its long-term effectiveness depends on continued investment and clear policy direction. The government’s ability to maintain the current pace or accelerate it will determine whether the nation can fulfill its NATO obligations by 2035.
