On Monday, June 2, BAE Systems plc, the flagship of Britain's militarised economy and one of the largest exporters of weapons in the world, hosted the Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer at its Govan shipyard, Scotland. This is where Starmer chose to announce the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) [1] in his almost illiterate and provocative remarks before its publication and even before Parliament had seen its findings. The SDR has been led by Labour peer and former NATO secretary-general George Robertson.[2]

Starmer arrogantly announced in his speech that his Ministers (not Parliament, be it noted) had decided to implement the 62 recommendations of the SDR to make Britain "a battle-ready, armour-clad nation" at "war-fighting readiness", claiming this was in response to threats from abroad - particularly Russia and a rising China. He also claimed that this would be paid for by "increasing defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, with an ambition to reach 3% in the next Parliament" - something which even the media and opposition in Parliament later disputed.

Starmer justified his announcement in saying that "we are being directly threatened by states with advanced military forces" and that "the most effective way to deter them is to be ready and frankly to show them that we're ready to deliver peace through strength". He emphasised the SDR "whole-of-society approach-widening participation in national resilience, and renewing the Nation's contract with those who serve".

By claiming that Britain "is being directly threatened" and that the government response must be "peace through strength" and a "contract with those who serve", Starmer aims to turn Britain's already military-dominated economy into a fully militarised economy and to put British society on a war footing. In so doing, the arms manufacturers and military industries will receive billions of pounds in orders. Starmer is attempting to get people and society to "serve" BAE systems and the whole warmongering elite and go against their own well-being and interests for real peace and security.

To be clear, Starmer's so-called "threats from abroad" stated in the SDR are the "growing links between Russia, China, Iran, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea" as military threats to Britain. As many have said already, who is threatening whom? There are no threats to Britain from any of these countries either from the past, or now. Russia, China, Iran and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea have never threatened Britain with invasion. On the contrary, it is a matter of record that Britain has invaded all of these countries, Russia, China, Iran and Korea, colonising parts of China, and causing millions of deaths in all of these countries in the 19th and 20th centuries. Today Britain is supporting the NATO proxy regime in Ukraine against Russia, has been arming Israel and bombing Yemen in support of Israeli genocide on Iran's doorstep and is again sending its one working aircraft carrier, HMS "Prince of Wales", to pathetically stalk China in East Asia to try and build its AUKUS military alliance against China with Australia and the US.

Debacle of House of Commons debate

Keir Starmer at BAE Systems nuclear submarine facility in Barrow, 12-04-2024

Following Starmer's announcement, to the willing ears of BAE systems, the Strategic Defence Review was then later officially "debated" in Parliament. Defence secretary John Healey also emphasised the UK's shift towards "war-fighting readiness", again citing and claiming there were growing threats abroad from Russia and a rising China. The SDR recommendations, that the army "restores their readiness to fight, and reverse the 'hollowing out' of foundational capabilities" reflects indeed the whole state of the economy that has been hollowed out by successive governments, wrecking our health and social services by continuing to invest in these war industries and taking a direction for the economy that makes huge profits for the rich. In this dire situation, where society is being increasingly impoverished, the SDR claims they should build 12 nuclear-powered attack submarines as part of the AUKUS partnership with Australia and the US, that they would build at least six new munitions and energetics factories and will focus on drones, AI, and cyber warfare with a New Digital Targeting Web in 2027. The review also includes major defence investments including 7,000 long range weapons, £1.5 billion for at least six new munitions factories, £15 billion for a UK nuclear warhead programme.

At first the Defence Secretary's announcement in Parliament was overshadowed over hiding the SDR document from the Commons for as long as possible before MPs could read it. It was also revealed that Starmer and the Defence Secretary had given the SDR document to major defence companies on the morning of the debate. In fact, it took some points of order before the minister could be persuaded that his statement should be made available to MPs before he spoke. This, of course, gave no time for MPs to consider it, or even read it properly. Even so, almost all of the cartel parties' MPs who spoke backed the 130-page review out of hand claiming that it would support the "defence" and "security" of Britain and "provide jobs" and "investment". Only two MPs spoke out against it in the debate. Ellie Chowns, North Herefordshire (Green), said that "this Government seem to have confused security with spending more on weapons, but warheads do not buy a safer world-they make it more dangerous..." Jeremy Corbyn, Islington North (Independent), said that it was "disappointing that in the review there is no analysis, documentation or process for how we reduce tensions around the world, bring an end to existing conflicts..."

Apart from these two contributions, there was no attempt to discuss the Strategic Defence Review from the point of view of what peace and security for the British people entails. Any reading of the SDR reveals that it is disinformation to say it is about the defence, or security of the country. In fact, Defence Secretary John Healey instead emphasised that Britain's army needed to become "10 times more lethal" as Starmer had said, claiming there was an "immediate and pressing threat" from Russia and the rise of China. He said: "We are in a new era of threat, which demands a new era for UK defence." Starmer had said: "The new era of threats demands a new era for defence and security, not just to survive in this new world, but to lead. We will never gamble with our national security, instead we will act in the national interest."

Here, Starmer and Healey are referring to the SDR's complaint about the world and Britain's role in the failing ambitions of the Anglo-US west that is confronted by the "growing multipolarity" and that the "intensifying strategic competition will make it more difficult for the UK and its allies to shape the world and events in their interests". In other words, this militarising of Britain's economy and society is not about "defence" or "security" of the British people but rather for the ruling elite of Britain and its allies to attempt to shape the world in their interests. The perspective of "renewing the nation's contract with those who serve" is one of the most dangerous attempts in recent years to disinform the working class and people of Britain that their defence and security is in line with the predatory interests of the oligopolies and huge war industries like BAE systems where Starmer made the announcement. The reactionary ruling elites cannot accept that there is a changing world where Britain and its dominions and allies around the world face the reality of dealing with new powers and whole continents; nor can they take on board that, most importantly, the peoples and their resistance movements in Palestine and all around the world do not accept Anglo-US domination and dictate.

Fraudulence and warmongering of the Strategic Defence Review

The mendacious Strategic Defence Review is not about security for the British people and certainly not about peace. The fact is that peace and security are indivisible, and so militarisation that is aimed at imperialist interests abroad only leads to insecurity and war. The more the Starmer government, like the governments before it, promotes war preparation as providing "home security" or the "security of Europe", as Starmer and the SDR say, the more fraudulent these narratives become about the causes of these ongoing wars in the world. Saying that Putin is responsible for launching "unprovoked aggression" against Ukraine is an assertion against the facts of what led to Russia's military operation in Ukraine, which simply don't figure into the equation. It is enough for Starmer to say this is so because, presumably, Putin is a dictator who threatens world peace. This deliberately ignores everything that took place when the US violated all understandings following the collapse of the former Soviet Union and started expanding NATO eastward up to the borders of Russia, making NATO an existential threat to Russia in their eyes.

The premise of the Strategic Defence Review is that Britain must maintain its nefarious role in the world at all costs even if this threatens further wars that Britain cannot win and further impoverishes the British people. The SDR defends the arming of Israel by lauding the 20% of the US F-35 that is manufactured in Britain. It lauds the asset of the Akrotiri and Dhekélia sovereign base area of British overseas territory in Cyprus, from which it sends its cargo of death and its spy planes to Israel and Gaza as well launching its joint bombing attacks on Yemen that the SDR supports.

The Strategic Defence Review continues to blame Hamas for the deaths in Israel and Gaza when Britain has always refused to recognise the national rights of the Palestinians and been a major perpetrator of the occupation of Palestine and the suffering of the Palestinian people since the 1948 Nakba. The SDR claims that Britain's security guarantees are linked to the US, NATO, the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF), AUKUS and declares that the cause of peace is threatened by China, Russia, Iran and the DPRK, as well the resistance movements of the peoples of the world who are fighting for their right to be and to realise their aspirations for peace, freedom and democracy. The SDR labels them "non-state" actors against Britain's interest saying "the armed Forces remain optimised for conflicts primarily fought against non-state actors on Europe's periphery and beyond".

The call of the day

The Strategic Defence Review will have no takers among the working class and people who desire peace. It is necessary to take heed of the aims of the SDR and to organise against it and what it stands for. The lie about "renewing the nation's contract with those who serve" is a dangerous attempt to get British people to betray their own interests for peace and security and instead to serve the warmongers and must be opposed. Starmer and the government's attempt to further step up its militarisation and support for Israel's daily war crimes against the Palestinians is unacceptable and must continue to be opposed. The attempt of Starmer and the government to involve Britain further in NATO's proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is totally unacceptable and must continue to be opposed.

The call of the day is for the people to speak out in their own name for all that serves their own interests for peace and security. The context is the fight for a new direction for the economy and society that meets the needs of all and defends the rights of all. The context is for political renewal against the police powers of the cartel party system in Westminster and for modern democratic arrangements which empower the people, not those with power and privilege. The aim for the working class and people must be always to prepare the conditions to establish an Anti-War Pro-Social Government in Britain.

Notes
1. PM's remarks on the Strategic Defence Review:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pms-remarks-on-the-strategic-defence-review-2-june-2025
2. Policy paper - The Strategic Defence Review 2025 - Making Britain Safer: secure at home, strong abroad, June 2 2025
Full document 144 pages:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-strategic-defence-review-2025-making-britain-safer-secure-at-home-strong-abroad
Two Page document:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/683dbe63d23a62e5d32680de/The_Strategic_Defence_Review_2025_-_two-pager.pdf
Document in Welsh: Adolygiad Amddiffyn Strategol 2025: Adolygiad Amddiffyn Strategol 2025:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-strategic-defence-review-2025-making-britain-safer-secure-at-home-strong-abroad/adolygiad-amddiffyn-strategol-2025-gwneud-prydain-yn-fwy-diogel-yn-gadarn-gartref-yn-gydnerth-dramor
The SDR’s vision for UK Defence:
• Move to warfighting readiness—establishing a more lethal ‘integrated force’ equipped for the future, and strengthened homeland defence.
• Engine for growth—driving jobs and prosperity through a new partnership with industry, radical procurement reforms and backing UK businesses.
• ‘NATO first’—stepping up on European security by leading in NATO, with strengthened nuclear, new tech and updated conventional capabilities.
• UK innovation driven by lessons from Ukraine—harnessing drones, data and digital warfare to make our Armed Forces stronger and safer.
• Whole-of-society approach—widening participation in national resilience, and renewing the Nation’s contract with those who serve.

On Wednesday, June 4, following the announcement of the Strategic Defence Review (SDR), the government in attendance at the "Contact Group" on Ukraine in Brussels issued a Press Release [1]. It further demonstrated what had been outlined in the Strategic Defence Review, namely that these war preparations to put Britain at "war-fighting readiness" are to back up Britain's increasing participation in NATO's dangerous proxy war against Russia. Britain's military, special forces, private security and armament manufacturers are all using Ukrainians as cannon fodder and want to test-bed their dangerous military interventions in this war now and in the future. Now that US President Trump has called for an end to the war, Britain alongside France, Germany and others are in particular manoeuvring to ensure that their proxy regime in Ukraine keeps the war going whilst claiming now to be in favour of a "ceasefire". This claim is a hoax; these European states are doing all they can to sabotage negotiations to end the war and are continuing to arm Ukraine. They refuse to pay attention to the terms insisted on by Russia which that country views as necessary to secure a lasting peace and prevent a NATO-provoked war in the future also.

The press release stated that the "Ministry of Defence said it is increasing its drone supply to Ukraine tenfold, taking the total target for this year to 100,000." This followed what government claimed was a success as Kyiv's "Operation Spiderweb" which destroyed some of Russia's strategic nuclear bombers deep inside Russian territory. Defence Secretary John Healey boasted that "the UK is stepping up its support for Ukraine by delivering hundreds of thousands more drones this year and completing a major milestone in the delivery of critical artillery ammunition." This refers to the government's £4.5 billion package of military aid in 2025, and that the UK has completed a delivery of 140,000 artillery munitions since the start of the year. The press statements boasted that Ukrainian units have confirmed that UK-provided drones "currently kill more people than artillery on the frontline in Ukraine".

The SDR declares that Britain's "military deployments beyond the Euro-Atlantic" should be used for "match fitness" of the armed forces "able to return at speed to the Euro-Atlantic if necessary". It is the UK government which is more and more dangerously involved in threatening peace and security in Britain itself by involving its special forces and war industries, with its proxy regime in Kyiv targeting civilian infrastructure in Russia with its drones and missiles. These even hit Russian nuclear assets that are still covered by international conventions against nuclear war and are an extreme provocation against Russia. [2]

Previously, Anglo/US-led NATO staged coups d'état to achieve regime change in various countries, including Ukraine; it rehabilitated neo-Nazi elements first in Bosnia and other countries of the former Yugoslavia, expanded them into Iraq and Afghanistan by creating ISIS, and overthrowing one government after another, leaving nothing but devastation and misery in their wake. It is such a regime that the US brought to power in Ukraine, where the dregs of the anti-communist Nazi-collaborators of World War II played a particularly heinous role in the US-driven coup d'état, with Britain's full support and involvement [3], and their ambitions for regime change right across Eurasia and Russia.

What is not being discussed is that the period we are living in at this time is one of extreme transition, disequilibrium and rapid changes which affect the citizens of each country and the peoples of the entire world. There is recognition that this turning-point came into being with the collapse of the international system called a "bipolar system". Under that system, the world was supposed to be divided and decisions were made between two superpowers that built their own coalitions and alliances to carry out divisions, contention and collusion in the world on their own. The collapse of the state system of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the international system it was part of, the bipolar system, left the world situation in flux.

It was said that henceforth there would be one superpower whose image was no longer tied to a territorial base. The argument of nation states being autonomous and having their own sovereignty was given short shrift. The superpower turned out to be the United States. The logic was that the US was the "indispensable superpower" because of its economic capacity, military projection, cultural influences, and so on. The US is spoken about as a superpower that sits atop the world, not limited to a nation-state or its territorial integrity.

Not surprisingly, the ensuing years have seen the use of force to settle conflicts by bullying countries to submit or face destruction at the hands of the Anglo/US-led NATO countries. Extreme violence and crimes against humanity are the result today with Israel's genocidal war against the Palestinians, beyond the control of the United Nations and international rule of law. Britain's continued support for arming Israel and its involvement in attempting to take a lead in escalating NATO's proxy war in Ukraine is a matter of huge concern for the working class and people of Britain, and the people of the whole world.

It shows that, today, profound changes are required to create an international rule of law which holds countries to account for violating it.

Notes
1. Tenfold increase in UK drone deliveries for Ukraine at NATO contact Ukraine summit, June 4
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tenfold-increase-in-uk-drone-deliveries-for-ukraine-at-50-nation-ukraine-summit
2. Russia's nuclear assets are covered by international conventions that regulate nuclear weapons and prevent nuclear war. Russia is a party to several key treaties, including:
- Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) - Russia is one of the five recognized nuclear-weapon states under the NPT, which aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and promote disarmament.
- New START Treaty - A bilateral arms control agreement between the United States and Russia, limiting the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads.
- Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) - Russia has signed and ratified the CTBT, which bans all nuclear explosions for military or civilian purposes.
- Geneva Protocol & Biological Weapons Convention - While not directly related to nuclear weapons, Russia is also a signatory to treaties banning biological and chemical weapons.
3. Britain's Interference in Ukraine Can Never Be the Road To Peace, Workers' Weekly, April 2 2022
https://www.rcpbml.org.uk/wwie-22/ww22-07/ww22-07-01.htm

Thousands of demonstrators gathered outside Parliament in London on Wednesday, June 4, for the Red Line for Palestine protest, demanding a full arms embargo and sanctions against Israel. The protest was organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) and took place during Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) in the House of Commons.

Protesters, dressed in red, formed a human chain encircling Parliament, chanting slogans such as "Stop arming Israel" and "Full embargo now", wrapping Parliament with long red fabric. A large banner reading "Starving children is a red line" was displayed. Several MPs and celebrities joined the demonstration, including British actor Khalid Abdalla and MP John McDonnell, who called the protest "fundamentally important".

Prime Minister Keir Starmer addressed Parliament during the protest, describing Israel's military actions as "appalling, counterproductive, and intolerable". Although he stated that Britain had imposed sanctions, suspended free trade negotiations, and was considering further measures, this could not hide the government's complicity in US-Israeli genocide in Gaza, and Starmer's covering over Britain's supplying arms to Israel.

The demonstration lasted for several hours and throughout Starmer's entire speech to Parliament, with protesters forming a cordon stretching from Parliament to Westminster Bridge and back. Organisers emphasised that their "red line" symbolised the need for the government to establish clear boundaries regarding Israel's actions in Gaza.

The protest took place amid mounting international criticism of Israel's military offensive in Gaza, which has resulted in over 54,000 Palestinian deaths since October 2023. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The ongoing bin strike in Birmingham, led by Unite the Union, has taken a critical legal turn following the High Court's decision to extend an injunction preventing workers from obstructing bin lorries - indefinitely. This development comes amid a long-running industrial dispute between the commissioner-run Birmingham City Council [1] and refuse workers over severe pay cuts and job losses, which has left the city with more than 12,000 tonnes of uncollected waste.

The dispute, which escalated into all-out strike action beginning on March 11, 2025, stems from the council's attempt to restructure refuse services. Workers face proposed salary reductions of up to £8,000-£10,000 per year and the elimination of roles such as the Waste Reduction and Collection Officer (WRCO). These proposals are part of a wider £300 million cost-cutting plan, enforced by government-appointed commissioners following the council's bankruptcy in 2023. The Labour-run council is under pressure from austerity measures first initiated by the Conservative government and now continued by the Labour government under Keir Starmer.

Supporters at the Lifford Lane Depot, 09/03/2025 - Photo: Adam Yosef

Despite weeks of negotiation via the conciliation service ACAS, Unite rejected the council's April 7 offer, stating it was inadequate and diluted by political interference. A revised proposal arrived at the end of May, but Unite leadership, including General Secretary Sharon Graham, said it fell short of the expectations established during the ACAS-mediated talks.

On May 23, 2025, Birmingham City Council was granted an interim High Court injunction to restrict picketing activity. The council alleged that refuse workers had increasingly blocked bin lorries from leaving depots, posing a public health and safety risk by disrupting citywide waste collection.

What is not acknowledged is that these lorries are being used to break the strike through agency labour. The use of legal and police powers to suppress the pickets is an attempt to undermine the strike and deny workers the ability to organise in their own defence. Workers do not accept strike-breaking, and it is a matter of principle that they do not cross picket lines when others are in dispute.

Originally, the injunction was to remain in place until a scheduled hearing on May 30. However, on May 29, a "consent order" was agreed upon by the council, resulting in the High Court extending the injunction indefinitely. The order imposes strict limits on picketing: no more than six pickets per depot, all in high-visibility clothing, confined to designated zones. Tactics such as "slow walking" or sitting on roads are banned. Violations may result in contempt of court charges, including fines or imprisonment.

The council was reportedly pleased with the decision, which keeps the injunction in place without the need for further court proceedings.

Police break picket line, Atlas Road Depot - Photo: Nick Wilkinson, Birmingham Live

Unite, however, contends that the injunction was imposed unjustly. The union argues it was given insufficient notice of the original hearing and had no opportunity to present its case. It now plans to gather evidence and consult legal counsel to challenge the order in court. In the meantime, it has committed to peaceful and lawful picketing.

Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has also criticised the strikers, stating they cannot be allowed to block vehicles. In March, the government authorised the military to assist with strike-breaking logistics. This top-level intervention reveals the seriousness with which the state views the threat of successful worker-led resistance.

While complying with the injunction's terms for now, Unite does not accept the legitimacy of the court's actions. It maintains that the legal process was flawed and remains committed to challenging the injunction's foundation.

Government intervention in industrial relations is becoming increasingly assertive, and relations have broken down to unprecedented levels. The indefinite extension of the court injunction represents a significant escalation in this months-long conflict, with wide repercussions. The workers' movement - which has declared that Enough is Enough! - is now directly confronting the offensive against the working class.

The union has defined the strike as a "fire and rehire" situation. This signals that the contract that guarantees rights to a decent livelihood and living standards has broken down. It reflects a broader erosion of the security and dignity of labour. It also gives new emphasis to the fact that the ruling elite can no longer claim legitimacy to govern. By standing united and defending their dignity, the bin workers embody the spirit of Enough is Enough! Their determined struggle reflects a clear belief that there is a way out of the crisis - through resistance to the cuts and by fighting for an alternative. In doing so, they assert their own voice and perspective, showing what it means for workers to be in the driving seat. This dispute makes clear that people must have control over their livelihoods and living conditions. The fight of the bin workers is part of that wider demand.

(Sources: Unite the Union, Workers' Forum, news agencies)

Notes
1. As Workers' Weekly explained in March:
The public authority in Birmingham has been systematically wrecked in recent years, significantly including the effects of severe government funding cuts, culminating in its alleged "bankruptcy" in August 2023. How the council of Britain's second city can be declared financially bankrupt is the height of capital-centric irrationality. The massive value created by the services it provides could not be clearer as the effects of this strike unfold.
Rather, this so-called bankruptcy has been the excuse to appoint commissioners representing private interests, in what amounts to a coup at the level of local government. These commissioners were handed control of the council by the previous government in October 2023, which appointed six commissioners and two political advisors to oversee the council. The commissioners, led by Max Caller, effectively exercise control over the council via extensive powers, including amending budgets and appointing or dismissing senior staff. Their role is to guide the council through a "recovery" plan, which may involve selling assets, cutting services, and increasing council tax.
"Birmingham Bin Workers Militantly Strike", Workers' Weekly, March 23, 2025
https://www.rcpbml.org.uk/wwie-25/ww25-07/ww25-07-06.htm