If Britain found itself under missile attack tomorrow, how ready would we be? According to a new report by the Council on Geostrategy, the answer isn’t reassuring. With up to 800 Russian missiles posing a direct threat to the UK, our current air and missile defences may not be enough to hold the line.
This alarming analysis, led by William Freer, warns that Russia’s Northern Fleet has undergone a major modernisation, making it more lethal than ever. While smaller than its Cold War counterpart, it now packs an arsenal of advanced missile systems carried by 26 submarines and 11 major surface combatants. In simple terms? This is the most significant missile threat Britain has faced in decades.
But it’s not just Russia’s growing firepower that should concern us. NATO’s defensive capabilities have shrunk, with the Royal Navy’s frigate fleet plummeting from 38 in 1990 to just eight today. Even the US Navy has scrapped its dedicated anti-submarine warfare frigates, raising serious questions about the alliance’s ability to counter Russia’s resurgence.
A Smarter Approach to Defence
So, what’s the solution? Some experts suggest an all-encompassing Integrated Air and Missile Defence (IAMD) system, but the report dismisses this as impractical and eye-wateringly expensive. Instead, it calls for a targeted and strategic approach, focusing on three key priorities:
- Securing vital UK military infrastructure, which the report describes as “too vulnerable” in its current state. If these sites were hit, Britain’s defence capabilities could be crippled.
- Defending overseas bases, essential for projecting power globally and keeping Britain’s forces operational.
- Leveraging NATO’s missile defence network to protect deployed British troops rather than attempting to shield them with UK-exclusive resources.
Beyond just defending against missiles, the report also suggests disrupting enemy launch platforms at their source, a proactive strategy that could ease the burden on the UK’s defence systems by limiting the number of missiles launched in the first place.
Shifting Focus to Russia’s Northern Stronghold
For years, NATO has focused its defence strategies on the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) gap, a key chokepoint for Russian naval movements. But the report argues that the real pressure point lies further north, the Svalbard-Tromsø gap.
This region is crucial to Russia’s “bastion” strategy, where Moscow prioritises defending its nuclear-armed submarines in the Barents Sea while keeping other forces mobile. If Britain and its allies increase military pressure here, Russia may be forced to divert resources away from offensive operations, reducing the risk of missile strikes before they even begin.
Spending Wisely, Not Recklessly
The harsh reality? A full-scale missile defence system is simply not affordable. The report states that achieving such a defence shield would require “a vastly increased investment in defence”, which isn’t financially realistic.
Instead of throwing billions at an impossible goal, the UK must prioritise efficiency, investing in adaptable IAMD solutions that target the most significant threats and protect critical infrastructure. In other words, Britain doesn’t need to block every arrow in the sky, it just needs to stop the archer from firing in the first place.
The Clock is Ticking
While Britain’s geography provides a natural buffer, the Council on Geostrategy makes it clear: that’s no longer enough. With the Northern Fleet expanding its missile capabilities and NATO’s own defences shrinking, the UK must act fast.
The choice is simple: adapt, invest strategically, and disrupt threats before they materialise, or risk being caught dangerously unprepared in the face of one of the greatest missile threats since the Cold War.
