Macron called for the UK to make high contributions to take part in the scheme (Image: Getty)
Britain has turned its back on the European Union’s rearmament scheme following demands from France. It is reported that the Government decided to quit Security Action for Europe (SAFE) after France called for the UK to pay £5.7billion.
The programme is set to provide up to €150 billion (£130 billion) in long-term loans to member states for defence spending and large-scale investments. Sir Keir Starmer previously said SAFE would benefit the UK’s defence industry, but has now pulled the plug on involvement. However, the UK will still be able to participate as a “third country”, meaning it will be competing against the likes of the United States for a limited number of defence contracts.
Get exclusive defence news and analysis from our experts and more Invalid email
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
Nick Thomas-Symonds, minister for Europe, said: “Negotiations were carried out in good faith, but our position was always clear: we will only sign agreements that are in the national interest and provide value for money.
“While it is disappointing that we have not been able to conclude discussions on UK participation in the first round of Safe, the UK defence industry will still be able to participate in projects through Safe on third-country terms.”
Meanwhile, a European diplomat told The Times: “Britain really did not want to accept the logic of Safe and what they offered was really peanuts, unacceptable.”
SAFE is based on EU loans, and French President Emmanuel Macron insisted that the UK must make high contributions to participate in the scheme. A source claimed that the UK was not prepared to pay significantly into the programme and offered a figure lower than £1 billion.
Nick Thomas-Symonds said the UK will still be able to participate on third-country terms (Image: Getty)
Mr Thomas Symonds continued: “We continue to make strong progress on the historic UK-EU May agreement that supports jobs, bills, and borders. In the last fortnight, we have launched negotiations on a food and drink deal and energy deal that will bring down bills and slash red tape for business.”
It is reported that 19 of the 27 EU countries have applied for SAFE loans so far. The deadline for EU countries to apply for the first funding round is Sunday (November 30).
The money is expected to be issued early next year, with Poland set to receive the highest share with €43.7 billion. Meanwhile, Romania will receive €16.6 billion, with Hungary and France each given €16.2 billion.
Britain’s SAFE Withdrawal Sparks Fresh Debate Over UK-EU Defence Relations
The decision by the British Government to step away from the first round of the European Union’s Security Action for Europe (SAFE) programme has triggered a major political debate over the future of Britain’s relationship with Brussels, particularly in the sensitive area of defence cooperation.
The move comes at a time when European nations are facing growing security concerns, with the war in Ukraine continuing to reshape defence priorities across the continent. Many European governments have argued that closer cooperation, joint procurement and increased military investment are essential to strengthening Europe’s ability to respond to future threats.
However, Britain’s decision not to join SAFE as a full participant highlights the continuing tensions that remain between London and Brussels following Brexit. While the UK has sought closer cooperation with European allies on security matters, ministers have insisted that any agreement must provide clear benefits for British taxpayers and the country’s defence industry.
A Government source said that Britain had always been open to working with European partners but could not accept arrangements that were considered financially unfair. Officials argued that the UK already spends heavily on defence and maintains one of the largest military budgets in Europe, meaning any additional contribution to EU programmes would need to deliver significant returns.
The disagreement reportedly centred on the financial terms demanded by France and other EU countries. French officials argued that countries outside the bloc should make substantial contributions if they wanted access to the full benefits of SAFE, particularly because the scheme is designed primarily around EU-backed loans and industrial cooperation.
Supporters of the Government’s decision welcomed the move, claiming that Britain had avoided committing billions of pounds to a programme where it would have limited influence over decision-making. They argued that the UK should instead focus on strengthening its own defence manufacturing sector and expanding bilateral partnerships with key allies.
Critics, however, accused ministers of missing an opportunity to secure greater access to European defence contracts and influence the future direction of the continent’s military industry. They warned that by stepping away from the main SAFE framework, British companies could find themselves at a disadvantage when European nations begin placing large-scale defence orders.
The UK defence sector has long been closely linked with European supply chains, with companies producing aircraft components, naval equipment, advanced technology systems and other military products for international customers. Industry leaders have stressed that maintaining access to major defence programmes is vital for protecting skilled jobs and supporting economic growth.
A senior defence analyst said that the decision reflected a wider challenge facing Britain after Brexit: balancing national independence with the practical need for cooperation in areas where countries share common interests.
“Security threats do not respect borders,” the analyst said. “The UK remains one of Europe’s most capable military powers, but modern defence increasingly depends on partnerships, shared technology and coordinated investment.”
The Government has attempted to reassure the defence industry that British companies will still have opportunities through SAFE under third-country arrangements. Ministers argue that this approach allows UK firms to compete for contracts without committing large sums of money to the EU loan system.
However, some industry figures remain concerned that third-country status may leave British businesses competing on unequal terms against firms from EU member states that have direct access to the programme’s funding structure.
The controversy also comes as Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer continues efforts to rebuild relations with European governments while maintaining the political commitments made after Brexit. Labour has repeatedly promised a closer working relationship with the EU but has ruled out returning to freedom of movement or rejoining the single market.
The SAFE dispute demonstrates the difficulty of achieving that balance. While both sides have expressed a desire for stronger cooperation, disagreements over money, sovereignty and decision-making continue to create obstacles.
European leaders are increasingly focused on expanding defence production as concerns grow over the future of international security commitments. With uncertainty surrounding the role of the United States in European defence, many countries believe they must increase their own military capabilities.
For Britain, the challenge will be ensuring that it remains a central player in European security discussions while protecting its ability to make independent decisions. The Government insists that national interest will remain the guiding principle, but opponents argue that cooperation with allies requires compromise.
As European countries move ahead with their defence spending plans, the consequences of Britain’s decision will become clearer in the coming years. Whether leaving SAFE proves to be a strategic success or a missed opportunity will depend largely on whether the UK can secure alternative partnerships and ensure its defence industry remains competitive in an increasingly uncertain world.