Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Rishi Sunak has declared that the UK remains “prepared to back our words with actions”, signalling Britain could participate in further western strikes against the Houthi rebels as the group continued to launch attacks in the Red Sea.
The prime minister told the House of Commons on Monday that while the RAF mission targeting Houthi military bases in Yemen last Friday was intended as a “single, limited action”, the government “will not hesitate to protect our security and our interests where required”.
He declined to speculate on any potential future action but defended his decision to approve strikes without consulting parliament in advance.
His statement came as the Houthis continued their missile attacks in the region in defiance of the strikes, targeting a US-owned commercial ship on Monday.
Sunak condemned the rebels’ January 9 assault against HMS Diamond, a Type 45 destroyer, as the “biggest attack on the Royal Navy for decades”, and said the UK’s participation in strikes was a “limited” action taken in self-defence that was “not escalatory”.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer stressed his support for the UK strikes last week, but warned Sunak to “avoid escalation across the Middle East”.
Earlier in the day, Grant Shapps, the defence secretary said in a speech at Lancaster House in London that the post-cold war “peace dividend” was over and that western countries needed to prepare for further conflicts involving China, Russia, North Korea and Iran over the next five years.
Shapps warned that the world had moved to a “prewar” phase as he called on allies to lift defence spending to meet the rising threat.
“The era of peace dividend is over,” he said as he set out his priorities for 2024. “In five years’ time, we could be looking at multiple theatres [of conflict] involving Russia, China, Iran, North Korea.
“Looking at today’s conflicts across the world, is it more likely that the number grows or reduces? I suspect we all know the answer — it’s likely to grow,” he added.
The peace dividend that followed the end of the cold war enabled politicians to spend billions on health and education instead of their armed forces. But Shapps said that period had ended, with enemies of the west rearming themselves and each other.
“We find ourselves at the dawn of a new era . . . moving from a postwar to a prewar world,” he said. “Old enemies are being reanimated. New foes are taking shape . . . the foundations of the world order are being shaken to their core.”
While all 31 members of Nato are notionally committed to spend 2 per cent of gross domestic product on defence, only 11 do so at present, according to figures from the military alliance.
Shapps said Britain was spending more than £50bn a year — or just over 2 per cent of GDP — on defence, and had increased funds to modernise the UK’s nuclear deterrent and replenish stockpiles of weapons supplied as military aid to Ukraine.
However, he made no calls for extra UK spending on defence, other than to reiterate that it was the government’s “aspiration” to spend 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence as economic conditions allowed.
He also referred to Sunak’s announcement during an unexpected visit to Kyiv last week that UK military aid to Ukraine would increase to £2.5bn in the next financial year.
“If [Russian president Vladimir] Putin thought that we would be distracted by events in the Middle East . . . then last week his hopes were surely dashed,” Shapps said.
Meanwhile, home secretary James Cleverly on Monday announced the UK government’s intention to proscribe Hizb ut-Tahrir, which has organised protests in London alongside pro-Palestinian marches in recent months.
Cleverly branded the Lebanon-headquartered group — which operates in more than 30 countries with the aim of establishing a caliphate under Islamic law — “antisemitic” and said it “actively promotes and encourages terrorism”.
Cleverly’s draft order will come into force on January 19 if approved by MPs. The ban would outlaw support for and membership of the group, and would apply to all its branches worldwide.