Ipsos research reveals a country increasingly alarmed by security threats but deeply reluctant to take up arms, as ministers face pressure to explain how rearmament will be paid for ahead of the Budget.
Britain wants to spend more on defence. It just does not necessarily want to fight for the country it is trying to protect.
Nearly one in two Britons say there are no circumstances in which they would be willing to take up arms and go to war for Britain, according to new Ipsos polling that exposes a striking contradiction at the heart of the country’s national security debate.
The survey found that 48 per cent would refuse to fight under any circumstances, rising to 56 per cent among women and standing at four in 10 among men. The reluctance crosses party lines: 48 per cent of Labour voters, 45 per cent of Reform UK supporters and 40 per cent of Conservative voters gave the same response.
Read more related news:
British bosses given secret Whitehall briefings on Russian attacks
Burnham embarrassment exposed as majority of Brits fear UK cannot withstand Russian attack
NATO chief warns Russia we are ‘ready to fight tonight’ as ex-general raises conscription alarm
Former NATO commander asks ‘is the West asleep?’ as Russian shadow war is underway
Yet the public appears considerably more willing to finance a stronger military. Some 51 per cent support increasing defence spending even if it requires cuts to public services, higher taxes or additional borrowing.
The figures present ministers with a formidable political challenge. Britain faces mounting concern over the international security environment, but public backing for military investment does not automatically translate into confidence in the armed forces — or a willingness to serve in them.
Fewer than three in 10 people, just 29 per cent, consider the state of the armed forces good. More than a third, 36 per cent, believe it is bad. Only 51 per cent are confident the military could defend Britain against an attack, compared with 73 per cent who believe it can play a useful role in domestic emergencies such as flooding.
The findings arrive at a sensitive moment for the Government, with Chancellor John Healey preparing to deliver his first Budget on October 28 amid pressure to demonstrate that national defence is more than a political slogan.
Former Army chief Lord Dannatt argued that ministers must spell out the threats facing Britain if they expect voters to accept the case for greater spending.
“The Government needs to give a firm lead on defence issues in order to build a consensus within the country,” he told Express, calling for a “clear statement of the threats to our security” and the reasons for increasing the defence budget.
Without that explanation, the Government risks asking the public to fund a military expansion without establishing why the sacrifice is necessary.
The polling suggests the argument could be won more easily when defence spending is presented as an economic opportunity rather than a bill for an increasingly dangerous world. Three-quarters of Britons would support higher military investment if it created more jobs, including apprenticeships for young people.
But enthusiasm fades when the Treasury reaches for the tax lever.
Forty-six per cent support a tax increase on earnings above £125,000 to fund defence. Just 4 per cent would back higher taxes on earnings between £12,570 and £50,000, while only 3 per cent support a VAT increase. Although 39 per cent would accept higher tobacco and alcohol duties, fewer than three in 10 would be likely to buy war bonds.
The message is unmistakable: voters want greater security, but they would prefer somebody else to bear much of the cost.
There are also growing questions about whom Britain should rely on. Support for a closer defence relationship with the European Union has risen nine percentage points since April last year to 50 per cent, while backing for closer ties with NATO has climbed 10 points to 49 per cent. Support for a closer relationship with the United States stands at 37 per cent, up four points.
Trust in the military’s ability to care for its own personnel is another weak point. Only 35 per cent are confident the armed forces provide good-quality mental healthcare for serving personnel and veterans, while just 52 per cent believe the military offers value for money.
Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge accused Labour of putting welfare spending ahead of national security and demanded a plan to raise defence spending to 3 per cent of economic output.
The Ministry of Defence, meanwhile, said more people were joining the armed forces than leaving, arguing that confidence in the opportunities offered by military service was growing.
Ipsos research director Caroline Paskell cautioned that public support remained finely balanced when voters confronted the real trade-offs involved. Ministers, she said, would need to explain how investment in security could coexist with protecting public services and supporting economic growth.
That is the political fault line running through Britain’s defence debate. The public recognises the need for protection, but remains divided over the sacrifices required — in taxes, public spending and, most starkly, personal risk.
The Government’s task is not simply to find billions for defence. It must persuade a reluctant country that the threats are real, the money will be well spent and national security is a responsibility extending beyond the armed forces themselves.
Until ministers make that case, Britain’s rearmament ambition risks colliding with a hard national truth: the appetite for a stronger military is considerably greater than the willingness to fight.
Leave a Comment