A co-author of Britain’s strategic defence review has added to criticism of Keir Starmer’s approach to military policy, warning that there is a “bizarre” lack of urgency in defence planning.
Fiona Hill, a former White House chief adviser on Russia, echoed concerns raised by George Robertson, her co-author with Gen Richard Barrons on the strategic defence review (SDR). Robertson had previously described the prime minister’s stance as “corrosive complacency”.
Hill’s intervention comes amid renewed scrutiny of the government’s preparedness for growing security threats and the pace of decisions around defence. Her comments suggest concern not just about the direction of policy, but about the urgency with which the UK is responding to the international security environment.
The strategic defence review is intended to shape Britain’s long-term military posture, and Hill’s remarks add further weight to calls for stronger planning and faster action. The criticism places additional pressure on Starmer as questions continue over whether the country is moving quickly enough to adapt its defence priorities.
Hill, Robertson and Barrons were involved in the review process, and their comments underline a shared warning that defence policy needs to be treated with greater seriousness. The language used by Hill and Robertson points to a broader concern that complacency could leave the UK poorly prepared at a time of heightened risk.
The debate over defence planning has become increasingly prominent in Westminster, with senior figures urging the government to sharpen its response and show clearer commitment to military readiness. Hill’s remarks fit into that wider discussion, reinforcing the view that ministers must move with greater speed and purpose.
As the review continues to attract attention, the criticism from its own co-authors is likely to intensify pressure on the government to explain how it plans to strengthen Britain’s defence posture and why the pace of decision-making has been so slow.
