Crossing the Channel: A new security and defence pact
The Cable | No. 20.2025
Welcome to the 43rd Cable, our weekly roundup of British foreign and defence policy.
It has been a busy few weeks for Britain’s trade negotiators, as the United Kingdom (UK) prepares to finalise its third major trade agreement in the last month. In a worsening geopolitical environment, and with protectionism on the rise, these new agreements with the United States (US), India and now the European Union (EU) show that Britain remains a desirable economic partner on the world stage – a fact which has not been lost on Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer, who claimed that the UK is now better placed on trade ‘than any other country in the world’.
Welcome back to The Cable!
UK-EU agreement: A win-win?
On 19th May, Sir Keir Starmer, Prime Minister, hosted Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, António Costa, President of the European Council, and Kaja Kallas, the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, for the long-awaited summit between the UK and the EU. During the day, the details of the broad agreement between the two powers emerged. The deal covers a plethora of sectors, including fishing, agricultural products, trade, defence, illegal immigration and energy, while other more thorny policy areas continue to be negotiated over, such as a proposed youth mobility scheme.
Of particular note is the Security and Defence Partnership, which will allow the UK defence industry to participate in the recently announced €150 billion (£126.3 billion) Security Action for Europe (SAFE) loan programme for defence procurement, albeit at the cost of Britain having to make contributions to the EU budget. Likewise, British and EU officials will meet every six months to discuss defence and foreign policy – part of the growing effort to enhance European security in an era of increasing geopolitical confrontation.
Both Sir Keir and von der Leyen have hailed this agreement as a significant milestone in UK-EU relations, with the Prime Minister calling it a ‘win-win’ and the European Council President stating that the deal was the start of a ‘new chapter in our unique relationship’. However, some commentators have criticised the deal for its lack of depth, while timeframes and costs remain opaque. Most importantly, it is unclear whether the EU will be able to deliver on becoming a more serious defence partner for the UK; internal divisions remain within the bloc over Russia, the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and many other issues.
Key diplomacy
On 12th May, David Lammy, Foreign Secretary, hosted the Weimar+ ministerial meeting in London – the first time the UK has done so. The meeting was focused on repelling Russian aggression and bolstering European security, with the group releasing a statement in which they reiterated their support for Ukraine, including the provision of ‘robust security guarantees’, acknowledged the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) as the ‘the bedrock of our security and prosperity’ and called on Russia to agree to a 30-day ceasefire.
Representatives from His Majesty’s (HM) Government attended a meeting of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in Jeju, South Korea, on 16th May, following which the trade bloc issued a joint statement. They reaffirmed their shared commitment to a free and open global trading system and stated three overarching priorities for the CPTPP in 2025: increasing trade through deeper integration, improving and streamlining trade processes, and spreading the benefits of trade and sustainable growth.
Lammy flew to Pakistan on 16th May – his first visit while in office and the first official foreign secretary trip to the country since 2021 – to meet Shehbaz Sharif, Prime Minister of Pakistan, and other high-ranking members of the Pakistani government to push for the current ceasefire with India to evolve into a durable peace.
Defence
On 12th May, John Healey became the first Secretary of State for Defence to close the day’s market at London Stock Exchange, where he also announced a new Defence ‘Tech Scaler’ pilot initiative to drive innovations in the sector. Speaking to key stakeholders, he called for an end to prejudice against defence investment and outlined how defence is a driver of economic growth and national security. Alongside the Tech Scaler, Healey announced several other policy measures, including procurement reform and a new defence innovation organisation with a ring-fenced budget of £400 million this financial year.
On 15th May, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) announced that Gen. Sir Gwyn Jenkins would be appointed as First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff. Following the announcement of his appointment, Sir Gwyn said ‘I feel extremely privileged to lead the exceptional sailors and marines of the Royal Navy at this pivotal time for UK defence.’
Healey also met with Boris Pistorius, his German counterpart, in Berlin last week, where the pair released a joint statement on the progress with the Trinity House Agreement. Of particular note was the announcement that the UK and Germany will work together to develop a new long-range strike capability with a range of over 2,000 kilometres.
Environment and climate
The Great British Energy Bill passed in Parliament on 15th May, bringing the publicly owned energy company one step closer to fruition. Great British Energy – backed by £8.3 billion over the course of this Parliament – will invest, alongside the private sector, to get new technologies up and running, and speed up the delivery of energy projects.
How Britain is seen overseas
The French Institute of International Relations released an article focused on Britain’s energy transition. It states that the UK has led the way in cutting its emissions and pioneered technologies such as offshore wind and Carbon Capture Usage and Storage (CCUS). However, it points out that since Brexit, Britain and the EU have diverged in their green energy policy. The article suggests that a stronger UK-EU relationship would help overcome political and technical challenges in the energy transition while enhancing energy security and industrial competitiveness in both Britain and the EU.
How competitors frame Britain
TASS reported on a statement released by the Russian Embassy to the UK, asserting that Britain is trying to disrupt ceasefire negotiations by threatening Russia with additional sanctions. Additionally, the Embassy accused Britain of ‘torpedoing’ peace talks in 2022 – a common Kremlin talking point. Such statements only aim to deflect – Russia could stop the war in a heartbeat. It is the aggressor, after all.
The PRC has criticised HM Government for its new trade deal with the US, accusing Britain of aligning with the US, which could compel British companies to exclude Chinese products from supply chains. In a statement to the Financial Times, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said ‘cooperation between states should not be conducted against or to the detriment of the interests of third parties.’ What happened to the PRC’s preference for sovereignty and non-interference?
How Britain views EU defence
The UK has had an awkward relationship with efforts to transform the EU into a geopolitical actor. This is because the British people have been unwilling to transfer sovereignty on defence to the EU level, while HM Government has long seen NATO as the cornerstone of the defence of the Euro-Atlantic theatre. Historically, Britons have seen efforts to bolster the EU as a foreign and defence policy actor in four ways:
Enthusiasts, while largely a fringe group, see the EU as a potential great power which the UK should play a key role in creating. They believe all European countries, even Britain, have declined in relative power to the extent that a new agent is needed to protect their collective interests. At their most ambitious, these enthusiasts are willing to transfer the British nuclear deterrent and decision making powers to the European level. They also want to create a powerful EU defence industrial base to generate EU armed forces.
Shapers are less ambitious than defence enthusiasts, but have seen EU defence initiatives as positive, so long as they do not undermine or seek to replace NATO. Active shapers want the UK to be involved in EU defence efforts, if only to moderate the more excessive proposals of some EU members. They see benefit in having an alternative to NATO, should the US, in particular, disfavour involvement in particular crises.
Umpires are indifferent to EU defence initiatives, but seek to shape them in accordance with national interests. They are happy for some EU members to push ahead with giving the EU a strategic identity; they only seek to prevent such initiatives from harming their own objectives.
Finally, antagonists are hostile to helping the EU become a foreign and defence policy actor, competencies they believe should remain with the democratic European nation state. At their most extreme, defence antagonists seek to block or degrade other members’ efforts to transfer or establish defence competencies to the EU level.
While the UK was a member of the EU, it often fell between the perspectives of shaper and umpire. It was most ambitious from 1997 to the early 2000s, when Britain played a key role in the St. Malo Accords and getting the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) off the ground. However, differences with France over the direction of ESDP and the failure of other EU countries to take defence seriously, combined with British support for the US during the so-called ‘War on Terror’, distracted Britain. Now outside the EU, the UK seeks a new relationship with the bloc – one where it retains influence over the direction it takes, but without the associated costs.
This section is named after Gould Francis Leckie, author of An Historical Survey of the Foreign Affairs of Great Britain (1810) – the first modern geopolitical text.
If you found this Cable useful, please subscribe or pledge your support!
What do you think about this Cable? Why not leave a comment below?
The agreement does *not* allow for UK participation in the SAFE procurement scheme on its own. That will require further agreement.