The rocky deployment of the HMS Dragon in March to protect Cyprus from Iran brought a new blow to the UK’s global military prestige. Unfortunately, this was just the latest in a series of setbacks pointing to a force that is, on the whole, in decline. This observation is causing concern in London and has led British Armed Forces to turn to long-range strike capabilities to address the new face of warfare and bridge their own gaps.
While teams worked tirelessly to ready the HMS Dragon, then-Defense Secretary John Healey said he was “not happy with the situation we have with British warships,” and Navy Lookout argued, “The real scandal is the 30 years of underfunding and decline that have left the navy with a lack of vessels, people, munitions, and spares…” Unfortunately, the Royal Navy (RN) is not alone in this dilemma, as land and air forces face similar circumstances, and the scandal surrounding the deployment of the HMS Dragon is just the latest in a long series of alerts.
British military prowess at sea, on land, and in air used to be feared and revered across the world, but, as with many European neighbors, defense capabilities declined during post-Cold War peace. This is alarming for the UK and Europe as a whole, as global conflicts intensify and military generals warn of a potential attack on a NATO member by 2029.
Rupert Pearce, National Armaments Director, told the House of Commons Defense Committee last December that “warfighting readiness is not where we need them to be” and that investments are needed to “fill the gaps that have emerged in our Armed Forces capabilities as a result of years of underinvestment, naturally through a peace dividend but also through emptying our warehouses” to supply Ukraine.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
Limits on British Defense
This is particularly worrying following former Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s pledge to send British troops to Ukraine as part of a multinational peacekeeping mission (only France has made a similar commitment) if a peace agreement is signed. Furthermore, General Roland Walker, Chief of the General Staff, said it would only take 6-12 months to decimate the regular British army in an all-out war with Russia, which is why he argues, “We cannot wait for a perfect army in 2035—we must transform the army we have now.”
That requires investments, but Air Chief Marshal Richard Knighton, Chief of the Defense Staff and responsible for delivering the Strategic Defense Review (SDR) published in June 2025, told the PM that the Ministry of Defense is short £28 billion to fund programs needed to get Britain “battle ready.” There was apparently a “tug-of-war” over funding between the MoD and the Treasury, causing publication of the Defense Investment Plan (DIP) to be repeatedly delayed as savings were pursued. For the UK, ‘savings’ typically means programs being delayed or cut, which the Defense Committee is generally opposed to. Last November, the committee issued a report with Chair Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi arguing, “Accelerating the speed of industrial change is essential, and readiness must be at the top of this government’s agenda.”
Change of Strategy: Strike Further
In the pursuit of ‘readiness,’ leaders must contend with two key hurdles: British forces are comprised of merely 70,000 soldiers with little hope for big increases, and the government only committed 2.5% of GDP to defense by 2027, meaning limited resources to address aging equipment. Given this reality and having witnessed what has given advantages in Ukraine and Iran, military leaders are changing tactics to be able to do more with less in the event of conflict with Russia by focusing on long-range missiles with heavy payloads that can cause significant damage.
The army’s website says, “To fight future wars, the British Army and its NATO Allies must be able to see further and strike further.” British officials and military leaders now consider long-range DPS conventional weapons and targeting technology that guides strikes as vital for avoiding drawn-out combat and for deterrence, as Russia would know any attack could be met with equal destruction. British defense contractors are working on these needs, often in collaboration with European partners, but were stalled by the DIP’s delayed release and a lack of confirmed government orders to accelerate development and production.
This is the case for the STRATUS program being developed with France and Italy to ultimately replace Storm Shadow/SCALP missiles as well as Harpoon and Exocet anti-ship missiles. After a 2017 launch, the program entered the development phase in March for two complementary air- and sea-launched missiles: STRATUS LO, which is long-range and stealth, and STRATUS RS, a highly supersonic and maneuverable cruise missile. Both will perform SEAD/DEAD missions, a capability Europe currently relies on American technology for. The UK announced plans to invest £1.4 billion in STRATUS and to purchase LO missiles, with Luke Pollard, minister of state for defense procurement and industry, saying they “provide a long-range anti-ship strike weapon with land attack capabilities, compatible with the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System.” Orders for the RS could help give more momentum to the program.
The government also announced initial progress on the Deep Precision Strike program for “stealth cruise and hypersonic weapons” with Germany, but there are concerns because missiles will not enter service until the late 2030s while such capabilities are needed urgently. Those complex programs are just at their very beginning.
As for ground-launched capabilities, the MoD has issued a new Request for Information (RFI) for a medium-range precision strike capability in addition to upgrades being made to the M270 MLRS.
The DIP also allocates £190 million to procure American Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM) with a 500 km range that are compatible with MLRS launchers, but after American forces used up a third of their stocks in Iran, their orders will take priority, so it will be interesting to see when and where production and deliveries will happen.
The Ministry of Defense said, “The investment in PrSM gives the British Army a deep surface-to-surface ballistic missile capability that will complement the Army’s One-Way Effector (OWE) drone and ground-launched cruise missile capability.” As a capability bridge until the beforementioned UK-Germany project is ready, an alternative ground-launched option with an even longer range than PrSM could be the upcoming one (testing expected in 2028). Land Cruise Missile (LCM) based on MBDA’s ship-launched, long-range MdCN missiles. This would provide interoperability for the France/UK Combined Joint Force (CJF) formed under the Lancaster 2.0 agreement, but no announcement has been made regarding this potential.
British military leaders across domains are looking to increase long-range DPS strike capabilities to give what General Sir Gwyn Jenkins, First Sea Lord, says is the “advantage that if an aggressor is foolish enough to strike us, they will know we can strike back.” And Britain is not alone as countries across Europe also strive to increase stocks of DPS missiles because, as Ukraine has experienced, being able to defend one’s country is important, but being able to strike back equally is the only way to make a difference in modern warfare or to deter potential aggressors.
