UK ‘Rapidly Developing’ Plans to Prepare for War as Threats Intensify Across Europe
Key Takeaways:
- War preparedness is now a national priority — The government’s rapidly developing plans signal a shift towards a whole-of-society approach to defence, recognising that modern conflicts extend far beyond the battlefield.
- Hostile state activity is intensifying — A more than 50% rise in spying, cyber attacks and other intelligence threats against the UK underlines the growing risks posed by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.
- Public awareness and resilience are critical — Ministers acknowledge the need to better inform civilians about their role in national defence, balancing realism about threats with the need to avoid public alarm.
The UK government is “rapidly developing” plans to prepare the entire country for the possibility of war, according to the armed forces minister, as senior defence and intelligence figures warn that Europe is entering its most dangerous security environment in generations. The stark assessment comes amid a sharp rise in hostile intelligence activity against Britain and growing concern that the public remains largely unaware of the sacrifices a major conflict would demand.
Speaking at a top-secret military intelligence base, Al Carns said the UK must urgently rethink what national readiness looks like in an era defined by renewed great-power rivalry, hybrid warfare and the increasing risk of direct confrontation with Russia and other hostile states.
“The shadow of war is knocking on Europe’s door once more,” Mr Carns said. “That’s the reality. We’ve got to be prepared to deter it.”
A Worsening Security Environment
The warning follows remarks by NATO secretary-general Mark Rutte, who told alliance members that Europe must prepare for conflict on a scale not seen since the world wars — invoking the experiences of “our grandparents and great-grandparents.” His comments reflect a growing consensus among Western security leaders that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine represents not an isolated conflict, but a broader challenge to the post-Cold War security order.
For the UK, the threat is no longer theoretical. Government figures revealed on Friday that hostile intelligence activity directed at Britain’s armed forces and the Ministry of Defence has surged by more than 50% over the past year. This activity includes espionage, cyber intrusions, disinformation campaigns and physical threats to personnel and infrastructure.
Russia is widely seen as the primary aggressor, but officials have also pointed to China, Iran and North Korea as major actors engaged in coordinated intelligence operations against the UK. Together, they represent what defence officials increasingly describe as a persistent, multi-domain threat rather than isolated incidents.
Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence Overhaul
In response, the government is launching a new defence counter-intelligence unit designed to detect, disrupt and deter hostile state activity. The unit will strengthen Britain’s ability to protect sensitive military information, personnel and assets, particularly at a time when espionage increasingly blurs the line between peacetime competition and wartime operations.
At the same time, the Ministry of Defence has moved to enhance its own intelligence-gathering capabilities by merging previously separate military intelligence branches into a new organisation: the Military Intelligence Services. The new structure brings together intelligence from the army, navy and air force alongside Defence Intelligence, streamlining analysis and decision-making.
Notably, the organisation adopts the familiar “MI” designation — echoing MI5 and MI6 — a symbolic shift that underscores the growing importance of military intelligence in an era where cyber warfare, space capabilities and information dominance are as critical as tanks and aircraft.
Mr Carns, a former special forces colonel, visited RAF Wyton in Cambridgeshire — one of the UK’s most sensitive intelligence hubs — alongside fellow defence minister Louise Sandher-Jones to announce the changes. The visit was also intended to send a message: that Britain is no longer assuming strategic warning will be plentiful or that conflicts will remain distant.
War Is No Longer Just a Military Problem
Perhaps the most striking element of Mr Carns’s comments was his emphasis on the role of civilians in any future conflict. While armed forces may fight battles, he said, it is societies — not just soldiers — that ultimately determine the outcome of wars.
“Armies, navies and air forces respond to crises,” he said. “But societies, industries and economies win wars.”
This reflects a growing recognition within NATO that modern conflict would not be confined to the battlefield. Critical national infrastructure, energy supplies, transport systems, food security, communications networks and financial systems would all be targets in a major war. Cyber attacks, sabotage and disinformation campaigns could disrupt daily life long before a single shot is fired.
Asked whether the British public needs to be better informed about the sacrifices they may be required to make, Mr Carns acknowledged that more work is needed. His comments came after France warned its citizens they may need to accept the loss of children fighting a war with Russia — a stark message that has yet to be echoed publicly in the UK.
“There’s a whole load of work going on now between us, the Cabinet Office, and a whole-of-society approach,” he said. “What conflict means, what everybody’s role in society means if we were to go to war and in the build-up to war.”
He added that preparedness is not simply about deploying troops abroad, but about protecting “every inch of our own territory” and mobilising the nation to support a military endeavour.
Reviving a Lost Doctrine of Preparedness
The UK was once among the most prepared nations in the world for the transition from peace to war. During the Cold War, the government maintained the Government War Book — a vast and detailed set of contingency plans covering almost every aspect of national life.
The War Book outlined how schools, hospitals, police forces, transport networks, broadcasters, local authorities and even museums and art galleries would function in wartime. It specified lines of authority, emergency powers, rationing systems and civil defence measures. Maintaining this level of preparedness was costly, but it reflected the existential stakes of potential conflict with the Soviet Union.
Following the collapse of the USSR, much of this infrastructure was quietly dismantled. Defence spending was reduced, civil defence planning was deprioritised, and the assumption took hold that large-scale war in Europe was a thing of the past.
Mr Carns’s remarks suggest that this assumption is now being fundamentally reassessed. While officials have not confirmed whether a modern equivalent of the War Book will be reinstated, there is growing evidence that the government is exploring new frameworks for national mobilisation, resilience and public preparedness.
A Public Disconnected From the Threat
One of the greatest challenges facing policymakers is public perception. Despite Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine and its impact on energy prices and economic stability, many people in the UK remain insulated from the sense of imminent danger felt by defence planners.
“The reality is that many people don’t see, hear or feel the dangers,” Mr Carns said. “We’ve got to bring that home — not to scare people, but to be realistic.”
This disconnect poses risks. Without public understanding and support, it becomes harder to justify higher defence spending, infrastructure protection measures, or the kinds of behavioural changes that national resilience may require. It also leaves societies more vulnerable to disinformation campaigns designed to sow confusion, division and apathy.
Security experts argue that transparency is key. Rather than dramatic warnings, governments must explain clearly how modern threats work, why deterrence matters, and how ordinary citizens contribute to national security — whether through cyber hygiene, resilience planning, or supporting defence industries.
A New Era of Threats
The warnings from Mr Carns align with assessments from across the UK’s intelligence community. The heads of MI5 and MI6 have both described the current global environment as the most dangerous they have seen in their careers, characterised by state-on-state competition, proxy wars and aggressive intelligence operations.
Russia’s actions in Ukraine have also exposed vulnerabilities in Western defence readiness, particularly in ammunition stockpiles, industrial capacity and logistics. As NATO countries rush to rearm, the lesson has been clear: deterrence depends not just on military capability, but on industrial strength and societal resilience.
The UK’s renewed focus on preparedness reflects this reality. Defence is no longer viewed solely as a matter for uniformed personnel, but as a national endeavour requiring coordination across government, industry and civil society.
Preparing Without Panic
While the language used by defence leaders has grown more urgent, officials stress that the aim is deterrence, not alarmism. Preparing for war, they argue, reduces the likelihood of conflict by demonstrating resolve, resilience and unity.
“The goal is not to scare people,” Mr Carns said, “but to be realistic.”
That realism now includes acknowledging that the peace dividend of the post-Cold War era has ended. In its place is a world where conflict may not begin with tanks crossing borders, but with cyber attacks, economic disruption and covert operations — all aimed at weakening societies from within.
As the UK rapidly develops its plans, the challenge will be balancing preparedness with public confidence. Rebuilding national resilience will take time, investment and political will. But defence officials believe the alternative — complacency in the face of escalating threats — is no longer an option.
In a world where the “shadow of war” is once again stretching across Europe, the message from Britain’s defence leadership is clear: security is no longer just a military issue. It is a societal one — and everyone has a role to play.
Related Reading:
2025 Standard Crime Contract: Welcome Packs, Key Changes, and Resources for Providers
