“As drums of war beat ever louder, an alternative has never been
more urgently needed.”
By Alex Gordon
In July 2024, Keir Starmer launched a “root and branch” Strategic Defence Review1 (SDR) led by former NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson, promising ‘a bold new direction for UK defence policy’. Yet, his June 2025 report offered a continuation of the same old ‘nukes plus NATO’ defence strategy.
At US President Donald Trump’s behest, Starmer proposed a dramatic increase in UK military spending from 2 to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027, with a goal of 3 per cent in the next parliament and ultimately 5 per cent — a level not seen since WW2.
In response to Starmer’s militarisation agenda, CND and RMT published an Alternative Defence Review2 (ADR) in May 2025, offering an alternative defence vision rooted in human security, global solidarity and the urgent need to build peace, not war
Challenging the war narrative
The ADR challenges the ‘dominant war narrative’ cultivated by political elites, the military-industrial complex and mainstream media. The ADR argues militarisation distorts our national priorities, fuels global instability, undermines international law, harms the environment and diverts investment away from public services.
More weapons don’t mean more security. The ADR advocates a significantly demilitarised defence strategy prioritising diplomacy, global cooperation, conflict prevention and domestic investment in industrial and social infrastructure, housing, health, education, climate resilience and social care.
The ADR calls for an immediate halt to arms exports to countries involved in active conflicts or human rights abuses, including Ukraine, Israel and Gulf states.
The myth of military Keynesianism
The ADR shows that increased military spending is economically inefficient and socially regressive. The SDR posits military spending as an engine of growth and job creation. The ADR exposes this myth.
The ADR demonstrates that military spending has one of the lowest employment multipliers —70th out of 100 economic sectors. Agriculture, energy, transport and construction all outperform defence spending. Healthcare ranks highest of all for job creation. For every pound, healthcare, education and renewable energy produce more and better-quality employment than military spending.
Moreover, new research by the Transition Security Project shows Labour’s ‘Defence Investment Plan’ means £6.8 billion in planned cuts across government departments in the next four years, to fund a £15 billion military budget. Cuts are deepest in the Energy and Transport departments, which lose a combined £3.7 billion by 2029/30. If the Government funds further military spending through cuts, £4.7 billion will be taken by the end of the decade – between 10,000 and 20,000 job losses directly attributable to increased military spending.
Furthermore, up to a third of UK arms are purchased from the US, meaning military spending is siphoned out of the British economy. The ADR exposes the scale of lobbying by arms companies and penetration of UK government policy by US agencies. The peace dividend: What was it, and where did it go?
The concept of a ‘peace dividend’ emerged after the Cold War. As nations reduced defence spending and redirected resources toward domestic priorities, UK defence spending declined — a trend referred to as the peace dividend.
Yet the peace dividend was not simply a cost saving. It funded our entire welfare state. For a generation, British citizens enjoyed the benefits of reduced military expenditure without fully appreciating this was a dividend paid by peace.
Military top brass and arms firms are now intent on reversing those benefits. The head of the British Armed Forces acknowledged that ‘we have taken a peace dividend ’ over three decades and now face a difficult reckoning.
A credible alternative
The ADR provides a credible, democratic alternative. Central to this is ‘common security’ — a recognition that no nation achieves genuine safety at the expense of another. The ADR calls for a foreign policy addressing global challenges through cooperation rather than confrontation.
The ADR also insists on a Just Transition. Shifting away from military production will have real consequences for workers and those communities that currently depend on military contracts. The ADR argues for a meaningful Defence Diversification to transition into sustainable, socially useful employment.
Conclusion
Militarisation risks destroying life on this planet. In a world of an escalating climate crisis with wildfires across Britain and Europe and glacier melts and landslides in the Himalayas, soaring domestic inequality and intensifying global conflict, the ADR offers an alternative rooted in peace, sustainability and the real needs of our communities.
As drums of war beat ever louder, an alternative has never been more urgently needed.
- Alex Gordon is the former RMT President and General Secretary of the Communist Party of Britain. You can follow Alex Gordon on Twitter/X and CPB here.
- This article was first posted in GFTU’s Federation News September 2026 issue.
- You can read more articles like this on GFTU’s Substack.
- If you support Labour Outlook’s work amplifying the voices of left movements and struggles here and internationally, please donate here or become a supporter on Patreon.
