Britain maintains the most overseas-oriented military among European NATO members, funnelling nearly a quarter of its defence budget into international commitments spanning five continents. A sobering analysis published by the Transition Security Project warns that this global footprint risks exacerbating deep-seated inefficiencies within the armed forces as the government ramps up expenditure to meet a target of 3.5% of gross domestic product by 2035.
A Heavy Price for Global Reach
The study calculates that roughly 23% of the UK military budget for the 2024/25 financial year went toward overseas commitments, totalling just over £14bn, with actual expenditures likely exceeding that baseline. This sprawling international posture includes approximately £2.8bn spent outside Europe alone, sustaining strategic military hubs and active bases in countries such as Cyprus, Kenya, and Oman designed for power projection.
This reliance on international positioning contrasts sharply with the intended pivot toward continental deterrence. Under the Defence Investment Plan (Dip) unveiled in July during the final phase of Keir Starmer’s premiership, the national budget is slated to double in nominal terms, jumping from £70bn in 2026 to £151bn by 2035. The planned spending surge follows notable political friction, including the resignation of John Healey as defence secretary over initial disagreements regarding a 3% target by 2030—a benchmark since shelved as Healey assumed the role of chancellor.
Yet researchers argue that simply injecting capital into an entrenched procurement and deployment system will amplify waste rather than enhance security. Since 2001, the UK has poured upwards of £51bn in modern terms into military interventions across Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. The Transition Security Project characterises this strategy as an outdated, destructive foreign policy built on global policing that frequently leaves the wider world less safe.
Prioritising Domestic Defence Over Foreign Interventions
Co-authored by Kevin Cashman, the report contends that Britain continues to anchor its military apparatus to United States-led operations abroad, driving up domestic costs while foreign interventions destabilise international security. Co-director Khem Rogaly points to the billions squandered annually on global deployments as symbolic of an obsolete geopolitical posture.
Britain should end its support for these attempts at global policing. Instead, it should focus its military resources on defence and its public investment on health, housing and the climate emergency.
Within defence circles, officials acknowledge the acute risk of financial waste, noting that an arbitrary race to hit strict spending milestones can worsen procurement bottlenecks. Current strategic priorities increasingly emphasise preparing the nation for potential large-scale conflict in Europe. However, the structural inertia of maintaining a global network of bases and force-projection capabilities poses a persistent challenge to reallocating those billions toward homeland security.
