Keir Starmer has announced drastic cuts to Britain’s international aid budget to help pay for a major increase in defence spending, amid fears over Donald Trump’s commitment to European security.
The prime minister said the UK government would increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 – three years earlier than planned – as he prepared for what is likely to be a diplomatically fraught visit to Washington DC this week.
Starmer also announced an ambition to increase defence spending to 3% during the next parliament, saying that “tyrants” such as Vladimir Putin would respond only to strength and that the UK must respond to the changing picture on Ukraine since Trump came to power.
However, the prime minister confirmed that the rise – about £13.4bn more every year from 2027 – would be paid for by a “painful choice” to cut the aid budget, from 0.5% to 0.3% of GDP. The move has been met with fury from some Labour MPs and the development sector.
“That is not an announcement I am happy to make,” Starmer told MPs. “We will do everything we can to return to a world where that is not the case, and rebuild a capability on development, but at times like this the defence and security of the British people must always come first.
“That is the number one priority of this government.”
The Guardian first reported the prime minister’s plan just before he took to his feet in the Commons on Tuesday. He immediately announced a leak inquiry.
The total budget for defence spending, including the intelligence services, will amount to a 2.6% share of the economy from 2027, which remains some way short of the 3.4% the US spends on defence, making it the third-largest contributor to Nato last year after Poland and Estonia.
“We must change our national security posture, because a generational challenge requires a generational response,” Starmer told MPs. “That will demand some extremely difficult and painful choices.”
The prime minister discussed the move with his cabinet before announcing it, officials said, and secured “agreement” before going ahead – though Downing Street would not say what the tone of the conversation had been.
His visit to the White House, the second time he has met Trump, will take place days after the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, amid tensions after a UN vote and during a turbulent period in transatlantic relations.
It will be the biggest test yet of his diplomatic and negotiating skills, as he tries to balance the UK’s security and economic interests with retaining good relations with the unpredictable president, who has repeatedly pushed for Europe to increase defence spending.
Starmer has come under sustained pressure to rapidly lift defence spending even further than Labour’s manifesto pledge of a rise to 2.5%, after he said the UK would “play its full part” in deploying troops to Ukraine for a peacekeeping force in the event of a durable deal after Russia’s invasion.
Defence sources have said that an increase of at least £13.4bn a year to 2.5%, from 2.3%, would still be far short of what is required to rebuild and transform the armed forces.
They have stressed that an ultimate rise to at least 3% of GDP would be necessary in order to help boost military capability after Trump’s administration said it was scaling back US support from Ukraine.
There were questions over whether the increase would in fact mean £13.4bn more a year for defence a year, when economists said that a 0.2% rise, funded by aid cuts, would provide only an extra £6bn.
Ben Zaranko, an economist at the Institute of Fiscal Studies, said the higher figure was reached only if the defence budget was frozen between now and then, giving a lower baseline.
He said the methodology was “remarkably reminiscent” of the last government’s plan to increase defence spending to 2.5%, which was met with scepticism at the time.
Labour had promised to raise the aid budget from 0.5% to 0.7% when “fiscal conditions allow”, and aides said that commitment remained in place. But, in recent weeks, officials have begun to look at cutting it instead as a way to help pay for defence.
David Lammy, the foreign secretary, told the Guardian earlier this month that Trump’s plans to make dramatic cuts to the US’s international aid budget could be a “big strategic mistake” that would allow China to step in and extend its global influence.
The government will prioritise remaining aid funds on Ukraine, Sudan and Gaza, as well as on the climate crisis and through multilateral organisations, though officials said other programmes would also be allowed to continue.
Simon McDonald, a former head of the Foreign Office, has said such a move would damage Britain’s global reputation. However, domestic polling suggests cutting the aid budget could be popular with the type of voters inclined to back Reform UK who Labour needs to retain.
Sarah Champion, the Labour chair of the international development committee, said: “Aid and defence are linked, but they build upon each other to keep everyone safe. Cutting one to fund the other will have dire consequences for us all as it will make the world less stable.
“Conflict is an outcome of desperation, much better to support people around the world to feel safe, secure and prosperous than deal with the consequences. The deep irony is that development money can prevent wars and is used to patch up the consequences of them; cutting this support is counterproductive and I urge the government to rethink.”
Richard Dannatt, the former head of the British Army who previously urged the government to increase defence spending, said the boost was “a significant step in the right direction” that could ease Starmer’s conversations with Trump.
However, Lord Dannatt told GB News: “In the wider world, it’s disappointing that we’re probably going to plunder the international development budget, because the UK’s influence in the world often comes through a combination of our hard power and our soft power, our diplomacy and our development funds. But priorities have to be established, and a priority that’s urgent now is spending more on defence.”
Romilly Greenhill, the chief executive of Bond, which represents British aid organisations, said: “This is a shortsighted and appalling move by both the PM and Treasury. Slashing the already diminished UK aid budget to fund an uplift in defence is a reckless decision that will have devastating consequences for millions of marginalised people worldwide.
“Following in the US’s footsteps will not only undermine the UK’s global commitments and credibility, but also weaken our own national security interests. Instead of stepping up, the UK is turning its back on communities facing poverty, conflict and insecurity, further damaging its credibility on the global stage.”
The Tory MP Andrew Mitchell, a former international development secretary, criticised Starmer’s plan as “short-sighted and damaging”.
He said: “Balancing the books on the backs of the poorest people in the world isn’t just wrong, it also makes the UK weaker and less secure. In taking this decision, the government risks cutting off its nose to spite its face.
“While there is an unanswerable case for increasing defence spending, the evidence shows that doing this at the expense of international aid increases health and security risks to the UK in the long run.”
