How the Tories’ £10bn ‘Britannia Shield’ would protect UK from attacks

U nmanned drones would hover over Britain 24/7 at points of high tension, under the Conservatives’ plans for a defence system known as “Britannia Shield”. Rigging up half a dozen drones with radar and putting them in the sky would create “airborne early warning” coverage for the whole of the UK, the Tories argue. Most commented 1 Starlink deliberately slowed in Ukraine, says Zelensky Russia-Ukraine war 1,073 comments 2 Katie Zacharia departs as Trump’s press secretary after less than a week US politics 690 comments 3 Hundreds of British troops to rehearse Ukraine mission Politics 310 comments 4 Scotland plane crash: boy, 16, and man, 80, killed Scotland 48 comments 5 All Blacks leave Australia chasing shadows in dazzling first half Rugby union 29 comments The move is contained in the blueprint for the system, designed to detect and intercept missile and drone attacks on the UK, and shared with The Sunday Times. Top stories 1 US inflation hotter than expected as Iran war stokes fuel costs Economics The Tories, in concerns echoed by former military chiefs, fear that Britain’s protection from airborne attacks is not fit for today’s threats and must be urgently improved. How the Royal Navy shrank to its smallest ‘since English Civil War’ Advertisement James Cartlidge, the Conservative shadow defence secretary, said: “Obviously we all hope it’s very unlikely that we would face an attack like this. Top stories 1 Theo Paphitis: I bought a £100m business for £1 and two packs of Benson & Hedges Family Finances 2 Premium Bonds are fun – until you realise what they are costing you Saving & Investing 3 Will Lyons: my vintage wine tour of South Australia Inspiration “But the reality is we’ve had threats to our airbases, there have been drone threats on mainland Europe, there’s been a drone attack on [the UK military base in] Cyprus and we’ve got a lot of sabre-rattling around the Falkland Islands. Given that, and Russia still being very aggressive, this is the moment to upgrade our defences.” At their party conference this month, the Conservatives announced their aim to build the defence system, though full details about how it would work were not unveiled. There were mixed messages then about the degree to which the plans aped Israel’s “Iron Dome” , which is designed to stop all short-range rockets and drones fired across the border. Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepting rockets in October 2023 Amir Cohen/Reuters The Tory proposal is for “shield” defence capabilities that could be moved to meet the threat, rather than a “dome”, which would give blanket coverage of the UK — although Israel’s “Iron Dome” has helped shape thinking. The inspiration for the name comes from the image of Britannia herself. In one hand is a trident, manifested in military terms by the UK’s nuclear deterrent of that name. The shield by her other side would become this new air defence system. Advertisement The idea is a simple one: that the UK has a web of military assets that together are able to spot anything fired at Britain, ensure a decision on what to do can be made and then intervene to neutralise the threat. A Trident ballistic missile launched from a submarine Alamy In military terms, these three elements are known as “sense”, “decide” and “effect”. The Tories have plans for improving the UK’s abilities on all three. Britannia Shield is an attempt to counter missiles, long, medium and short-range, fired at the UK, as well as drones attacking from overseas or launched on UK soil. To improve radar coverage, the Tories are proposing taking six of the 16 General Atomics MQ9B Protector UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles), which are already being purchased by the RAF, and fitting them with radar. They would then be sent up into the air at a moment of high threat, working with a radar-enabled plane called an E-7 Wedgetail, to provide total vision across UK airspace. That, the Conservatives argue, would allow for all incoming attacks to be picked up. Advertisement Next would come a system robust enough to allow for military leaders, and if necessary political figures, to make a decision on what to do: the “decide” element. Currently, the Tories argue, the various systems for detecting what is incoming and acting are not fully integrated. They plan to fix that, essentially via behind the scenes rewiring. The third element, “effect”, is where most of the money would be spent. That would involve not just increasing stockpiles of missiles but expanding the variety of options for intervention. A Protector UAV on exercise … Alamy … and an E-7 Wedgetail Alamy Long-range interceptor missiles called Aster would be placed on Royal Navy Type-45 destroyers and vehicles that could be moved across the UK depending on the threat. DragonFire, a laser used to take out drones , would also be rigged up not just on Royal Navy ships — a capability due to be in place from next year — but for sites on the land too. Interceptor drones would be stationed in potential targets of attacks, ready to be launched on kamikaze missions to take out incoming drones. Proof of concept has come from Ukraine, where they have been used to great effect to counter Russian attacks. Investment would also be piled into radio frequency weapons, a capability still being developed but which if successful would “fry” drone swarms attempting to overpower a target. Advertisement The proposed cost is £10bn, £1bn a year for 10 years, with welfare cuts generating the funding. The Tories have insisted that their system would be up and running in an early version after five years. James Cartlidge Gary Roberts/SOPA Images/Shutterstock Suggestions from former military experts that the bill would be more like £100bn are not accurate, Cartlidge insisted, because he said that they misunderstood the proposals and were yet to see the full detail for efficient spending. Rather than a “dome” covering every square mile of Britain, the “shield” would focus on military sites and critical national infrastructure. It would morph on geographical focus depending on the threat. Most members of the opposition do not want the government taking their ideas, but Cartlidge did not share that view when asked if Labour should steal his proposal. “Totally, 100 per cent,” he said, knowing it could be three years before the Tories get their chance of a return to office. Time, in this instance, is of the essence.