DIS
The publication of the Defence Industrial Strategy (DIS) is to be welcomed. In many ways it resembles a previous iteration, produced by Lord Drayson for the last Labour government in 2005. At the time this report was well received. But like the 1998 Strategic Defence Review authored by George Robertson, it was not funded by the government of the day. Many will be asking if history is about to repeat itself.
The DIS lays out the importance of having adequate manufacturing and scientific capacity to generate the equipment needed for the UK to be a reliable ally and partner. This is all the more urgent given the war in Ukraine. The UK and its NATO allies must ensure that its deterrence is credible and that Putin understands that the Alliance is ready to respond to any aggression against its members.
So far, so good. Unlike the Robertson SDR and the Grayson DIS, there is now a real threat and the government has committed funds to increase defence expenditure. The question as to the adequacy of this funding and the speed with which it will be delivered has been mentioned before in previous editions of Commentary. Inadequate and too slow – more on this below.
Alongside the 2025 SDR and DIS, the government has undertaken to reform the way that MOD does its business, although the slow pace of recruiting a National Armaments Director (NAD) does not look like an organisation that is in a pre-war phase.
Growth
DIS fits neatly into the government’s Big Idea – growth. If only the economy can grow, the government can inject additional resources into public services, research and development and other good things. The DIS refers to reform of bureaucracy and a whole of government approach, but this needs to be driven not by the MOD but by the centre – more on this below.
DIS rightly refers to the defence sector as an engine for growth. “… Defence is uniquely positioned to use its buying power to support economic growth, given its significant market size, ability to purchase at scale through co-ordinated procurement, and a constantly evolving need for technology”, and so on. This brings us neatly to…..
DSEI 2025
Howard Wheeldon was a great supporter of DSEI, showcasing as it does the excellence that exists in the UK’s defence sector. It stands as a reminder to the government that the sector is vibrant and that it can assist the government’s growth agenda if it gets the orders it needs. It also allows UK defence companies to advance their offerings for the export market. DSEI UK has expanded from the 2023 version, filling up Excel’s new extension.
- 18 of the West’s top 20 defence companies were represented
- The event housed over 1,750 exhibitors, the Tech Zone was the fastest growing sector for DSEI with 101 companies signed up.
- Amazon Web Services (AWS) are one of the headlining exhibitors – appearing at DSEI for the first time.
- 42% of customers were new exhibitors/sponsors, showing DSEI is a draw for technology and non – traditional defence companies.
- 32 countries were represented through the international pavilion programme
Walking the halls at DSEI one refrain was heard above all the happy talk – speaking about the MOD; give us some orders, show us the money!
A big shout out to Quakers for Peace, who were quietly making their point outside the Excel centre where DSEI is held. Exactly what one would hope for in a modern democracy. The other noisy, shouty protesters did themselves and their cause no good at all.
Tony Radakin’s speech at IfG on 15th September
Having had the chance to meet the former CDS on several occasions whilst he was in office, his remarks at the Institute for Government on 15th of September, were of more than passing interest. Notwithstanding the usual carping about former senior officers who waited until they were out of the service to speak up, his comments fit into some of the points mentioned earlier in this Commentary. He is offering both a warning about what could happen if defence reform is not radical enough, as well as a menu for how matters can be improved.
“Successive Prime Ministers rightly talk of the need for Defence Reform. It is probably true of the whole of government. But it’s not happening as strongly and as quickly as it needs to. We need to understand why and we need to put it right. Because if we don’t, we will: squander the additional investment; not look after our amazing people or unlock their potential; miss the technological opportunities; and not keep the nation as safe as we could.”
He goes on….
“You are much more innovative if you think you are about to be shot. Whitehall is too remote and lacks the incentive to do differently. Delegate. Empower. Mix tacticians with technicians. Preference the front line not the back room. Again, it’s about outcomes and not coherence and tidiness and control.”
He offers a possible way through the maze of bureaucratic inertia….
“Fortunately, we adopt much of what I say for Ukraine through our Project KINDRED. We spend billions at pace to equip Ukraine with drones and other technology and enable much more innovative approaches. We have even achieved that rarity in Defence of a complimentary NAO report and recognition that we are achieving increased value for money for the taxpayer. We do that by having fewer senior people in charge, a small team, less control and the willingness to take both operational and financial risk. The bad news is that the same does not apply for our own Armed Forces.”
Comment
Commentary will not engage with the Westminster gossip mill, discussing the performance of the government. Suffice to say that after one year in office it is struggling to make headway with its ‘growth’ agenda. The speech by the former CDS puts the matter in plain terms, MOD must do better at getting things done. The same seems to be true with the whole of the machinery of government, but when it comes to defence policy it is a matter of life and death.
The recent incursions by Russian aircraft and drones into NATO airspace tell us that Putin is testing our resolve. He is not playing a game, he is judging our response. He will calibrate his next steps accordingly. So far, so good and the UK is playing its part in NATO’s Eastern Sentry operation. This could be an open ended commitment; the MOD must also calibrate its response so that we can play the leadership role in the Alliance that the government wishes.
Growth matters – in the defence arena, in the sense that the UK needs capability to deter Russia, and other states that might be tempted by what they see as weakness in the west. This analysis is not new, but what matters is that military capability makes its way to the frontline, and quickly. Despite what is going on in the world it looks like the MOD is taking a very relaxed approach to increasing the UK’s capability.
It may be argued that the MOD can only move at the speed of the resources it has been given. In which case it needs more resources to make things move faster. This is a decision for the prime minister. Whether he likes it or not, the PM is a war time prime minister and he must act as such. Churchill famously had a stamp ‘action this day’ which he applied to urgent matters. Business as usual this is not. This may sound like a familiar refrain to Commentary readers – but it is the squeaky wheel that gets the oil!
NPW 24 09 25
Nick Watts
07714 246478