Digest opened free editor

Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

When Sir Kerr Starmer promised this week to “rebuild the industry throughout this country” with public investments “to provide safe jobs and skills for the next generation,” he might have been talking about the clean energy engine that the Labor Party built the economic statement.

The Prime Minister was not. His government is rapidly moving from green to gray warships by setting defense now at the heart of its approach to technology and manufacturing. With President Donald Trump forced Europe to protect itself with less support in the United States, the UK’s priorities have changed.

This was implicit at Starmer Declare Defense spending increased to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2027 and aspiration to reach 3 percent in the next parliament. It became very clear at the end of last week when she was Rachel Reeves, Chancellor, He said That the transformation of the National Wealth Fund be changed to allow it to invest in defense, as well as its original green priorities.

Defense spending is essential and security, and has similar attractions to clean energy as an industrial center, especially for the administration supported by unions. There are many manufacturing functions in building nuclear submarines, combat aircraft and making ammunition, largely outside London and southeast.

The defense also has the advantage of being directly related to growth, rather than moving. While investing in wind and nuclear energy farms creates jobs, reducing North Sea oil or trying to curb production from combustion motor vehicles risk on the contrary.

There are 430,000 jobs in aviation, defense, security and space industries, with productivity is 42 percent higher than the UK average. It can be close to the unprecedented type of growth path. Malcolm Chalmers, Deputy Director General of the Royal United Services Institute, says if defense spending reaches 3 percent of GDP, it will be “transformed”.

If we leave aside weapons production ethics, which deter some investors, there is a lot that you like in defense as an industrial strategy. “I am more optimistic than I have been a decade.” But even before the money arrives, difficult questions for purchases and the sector are on the horizon.

First, how much should the UK tend from the United States, not only in politics but in the degree that industries are confused? The main examples of BaE Systems, the largest contractor in the United Kingdom, who builds nuclear submarines and parts Lockheed Martin F-35 combat aircraft. The United States of the United States, BAE, produced 44 percent of its revenues last year, much more than its operations in the United Kingdom.

The US decision to temporarily suspend military support to Ukraine Fear fears About whether in the future the F-35 and the other systems managed by NATO allies can be disabled. The United Kingdom joined Italy and Japan in the development of (through Bae) a surreptitious fighter from the next generation, but it will be difficult and costly to end its dependence on American military technology.

Second, is the Ministry of Defense able to buy weapons efficiently? The United Kingdom has suffer Repeated budget excesses, and there is historically a intermittent relationship between the Ministry of Defense and its contractors. The government recently cited “excessive design” and technology in intellectual property departments as obstacles to innovation with technology progress.

This raises a third question: Should the UK continue to focus heavily on very expensive or expensive weapons systems, or should you learn from the experience in Ukraine and spend more on drones and new technology? You may need to transfer resources to startups such as Anduril, American drone maker who has submitted a request of 30 million pounds (through its arm in the United Kingdom) this month.

These questions have no clear answers. There will be embarrassing differentials between the preference of job occupants or startups, choosing partnerships with the United States or inside Europe, and insisting on full sovereignty or saving money by buying from abroad. They will become tougher.

The government has the comfort of a group of defense articles, including Bae, Rolls-Royce, Babcock International and Thales UK. But he must rebuild its forces and regenerate ammunition while trying to expand. The United Kingdom’s share of global arms exports has decreased in the past decade, leaving the United States, France, Germany and Italy.

There is a lot for reform and many options in a volatile world. It is sufficient to make energy transmission look like a simple relationship.

john.gapper@ft.com