
“Once we cut defence expenditure to the extent where our security is imperilled, we have no houses, we have no hospitals, we have no schools. We have a heap of cinders”
– Denis Healey MP, Secretary of State for Defence 1964 to 1970
These are the words of Labour’s longest serving Secretary of State for Defence spoken from a time when the wider Labour Party was far more confident in its ability to take a lead on defence issues. In comparison, for the last two decades the broader Labour Party has generally shied away from championing defence policy. The reasons behind this are numerous, but in addition to political reasons one key factor has been that a significant portion of the British population have been born in an age of relative peace: the large-scale military threats we now see are the first of their adult lives.
Yet it had not always been this way. The Labour Party should rediscover its spirit from the 1930s to the 1960s when defence policy was front and centre of the Party’s thinking. Labour politicians of that era knew that championing defence policy went hand in hand with their progressive agenda. Figures such as Ernest Bevin, Clement Attlee, Denis Healey and others all held Labour domestic policies close to their heart, but they also knew that if the debate became one of pitching ‘guns’ versus ‘butter’ the nation would end up with neither.
Comparisons of today’s deteriorating geopolitical environment with the situation the United Kingdom (UK) faced in the 1930s abound. Though often overplayed and sometimes bordering on fatalistic, there are a number of concerning parallels between the 1930s and 2020s. Foremost among these is the UK’s reluctance to see the world as it is. In 1933 when Hitler came to power the UK was spending 2.6% of GDP on defence, year by year Hitler’s intentions became clearer yet by 1938 spending had only risen to 3.8%. That year Nazi Germany was spending roughly 17% of GDP on defence, Italy 12%, and Japan 20%. Following the failure to deter the Axis powers, British defence spending would peak at over 50% during the course of the Second World War.
It is often forgotten that a number of Labour figures helped lead the charge on pushing for the re-armament programme of the late 1930s and in arguing against appeasement (though of course there was a spread of views in Labour at the time, including many pacifists). This was recognised at the time across the political divide. When Parliament debated the German invasion of Poland and Neville Chamberlain did not immediately honour Britain’s agreement to defend them, Arthur Greenwood announced he would speak for Labour in response (as Attlee was not present) which led to a cry of ‘Speak for England, Arthur’ from the Conservative benches! Many of the words spoken by Greenwood in that moment ring true today, in particular “I wonder how long we are prepared to vacillate at a time when Britain and all that Britain stands for… are in peril”.
Lessons were learnt and throughout the Cold War the UK would spend on average over 6% of GDP on defence. When an aggressive peer threat exists, as the Soviet Union then did, peace becomes more expensive. But paying those costs is far cheaper than allowing deterrence to fail. So strongly was this felt that the Attlee government, despite all the economic hardships which post-war Britain was tackling, would instigate another re-armament programme in the early 1950s.
This emphasis on national security did not get in the way of the progressive agenda of the Labour Party of those decades, quite the opposite. Many of the rights and benefits which we take for granted today, including vastly expanded worker’s rights and establishment of the National Health Service, were pushed forward in these decades.
The Attlee government, again with Bevin leading the way, also turned Britain into a nuclear power and founded the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Their ability to generate remarkable results from the tough hand they were dealt is a reminder that a strong will, self-confidence and innovative thinking are resource multipliers. Similarly, Healey’s ability – once again set to the backdrop of troubling fiscal conditions – to reshape Britain’s force posture and retrench from old colonial commitments whilst minimising potential geopolitical shocks is another reminder of this fact.
The Labour Party has come a long way on defence policy over the last few years, greatly helped by a growing number of Labour politicians with experience of or interest in defence policy. The next few months will be crucial in building on these foundations by placing defence at the forefront of the government’s agenda to simultaneously generate and shield the prosperity everything else it plans to do relies on. Kick-starting a meaningful re-armament programme to bolster our ability to deter adversaries and make good on claims of ‘ironclad’ support for Ukraine (especially should American military aid be reduced) should be immediate priorities.
If you enjoyed this piece, click here to read another recent piece on UK defence.
William Freer is Research Fellow (National Security) at the Council on Geostrategy. He tweets at @william_freer.
View all posts