On 16 March 2021 the British Government published its long-awaited Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy. Media coverage of the Review tended to focus on two key objectives: an increase in the nuclear weapons stockpile and the pivot East to the Indo-Pacific region. While both objectives are worthy of attention, they are not altogether surprising. Prior to its publication, the review had been billed as the most radical and comprehensive to have been undertaken since the end of the Cold War. In reality, it serves merely to consolidate the conceptualisation of and approach to security that had been evident in previous National Security Strategies (NSS) published in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2015. Those documents had highlighted and tracked the increasing complexity and volatility of the security environment and proposed changes to the UK’s security architecture. The proposals contained within the 2021 Review, therefore, should be viewed as part of a continuum, rather than as novel.
Planning for this review commenced prior to the onslaught of COVID-19, however it is evident that the pandemic had a significant impact on UK strategic thinking. The Review acknowledges that the implications of COVID-19 for security are far-reaching and long-term. The casual reader of the Review may miss the reference to the importance of “human security”, but its inclusion in this document is significant. Human security is a term coined by the UNDP in 1994; its focus is on those elements that are required for an individual’s survival: access to food, clean water, education, health care, a living wage and housing. If individuals are insecure then so too are the states in which they reside. Historically, the British government has sought to promote the human security agenda abroad through support of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. Never before within a NSS has emphasis been placed on the promotion of human security at home. Reference to this form of security within the 2021 Review is in line with the Conservative Government’s pledge to “level-up” Britain and is linked to policy objectives for prosperity and resilience.
There is further evidence that the Government has embraced a broader understanding of security. Previous NSS had acknowledged that the UK was increasingly vulnerable to climate change, terrorism, serious organised crime, and threats from state and non-state actors, all of which would require a whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach to counter, yet the Strategic Defence and Security Reviews that accompanied the publication of those NSS tended to focus primarily on the Defence response, with passing reference being made to the Home Office and its associated agencies, the Foreign Office and the Intelligence Services. This document more clearly articulates the linkages between the different dimensions of security and the agencies that will need to respond.
Responding effectively, however, will require resources: financial, human and technical. The Government emphasises the importance of Science and Technology for future prosperity and security, and promises that investment will be made into the sector. Some bold pledges are also made regarding investment in the capabilities of the intelligence agencies, customs and border services, police, focusing on counter terrorism and serious organised crime, and defence, with the latter receiving the lion’s share of £24 billion. That investment, however, is dependent on how well and how quickly the UK recovers from both the pandemic and the disruption caused by its departure from the EU. In time honoured fashion, the Government has indicated that the timing and extent of funding will be determined by future spending reviews.
In our submission to the House of Commons Defence Committee’s (HCDC) 2020 inquiry into the Integrated Review we suggested that the Government should clearly articulate its concept of security. That recommendation was included in HCDC’s final report published in August 2020, a link to which is available on this website. We are pleased, therefore, to see that the Government has acted on our recommendation. The Review makes a number of bold statements about how this broader interpretation of security will be achieved. Ensuring coherent delivery of that agenda will require effective management across departments, initiatives, technologies, industry, academic and other stakeholders. That in turn will require the development of management processes, systems and skills. Therein lies the real challenge to delivering security.
