British soldiers (Image: Getty)
The head of Britain’s armed forces has revealed plans to prepare the UK for war amid a dire warning that the country is “really quite close to the threat of an armed conflict”. Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton told Sky News an updated version of the Government War Book is being prepared.
The broadcaster reported on Friday that the plan would draw on lessons from the Cold War, but “in a modern context, with a modern society, with modern infrastructure”. Meanwhile, Dr Rob Johnson, Director of the Changing Character of Conflict Centre at Oxford University, raised the spectre of an approaching armed conflict.
Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton says the plan considers how civilians can help (Image: Getty)
A majority of indicators of conflict preparation and armed attack on the expert’s dashboard are now flashing, according to the broadcaster.
Dr Johnson said: “We’re about 94%, 95% complete. In other words, we’re really quite close to the threat of an armed conflict.”
Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton said he thought it was right when asked if the Government War Book was being revised.
The top-secret war book was first developed during World War I. It was maintained throughout the Cold War and detailed how the UK would mobilise society in a crisis, from deploying armed forces to the rationing of supplies.
It was phased out in the early 2000s, following the Soviet Union’s collapse in December 1991.
Sir Richard told Sky News the plan would consider how to protect water, energy and transport infrastructure from enemy action.
He said it would also consider how to educate the public about the growing threats to the UK and how to help civilians understand their role in supporting the country and Britain’s armed forces.
Dr Johnson said governments would take extraordinary steps. This might include restricting movement, rationing food and fuel, as well as using the media to promote patriotism and demonise enemies.
He went on to criticise Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, accusing him of failing to respond to current conflicts by rapidly increasing defence spending.
He told Sky News: “The lack of preparation I find astonishing. Actually, no, I use the word breath-taking.”
Sir Keir and Defence Secretary John Healey have pledged to increase defence spending to 3.5% by 2035.
The Government still has not released an investment plan for Britain’s armed forces. It details what weapons and capabilities the Ministry of Defence (MoD) will procure.
The Defence Investment Plan should have been published last autumn, but the Government has yet to confirm when it will be published
UK Announces Major Preparations for War as Britons Are Told to Get Ready for a Dangerous New Era
Britain is stepping up preparations for a more dangerous international environment, with military leaders warning that the country must be ready to respond to the possibility of a major conflict. The government is investing billions of pounds in defence, reviewing how the country would operate during a national emergency and examining the role that civilians, businesses and public services could play if a serious security crisis developed.
The developments have prompted renewed debate about whether the United Kingdom is preparing for a potential Third World War. However, while officials have warned about growing threats from hostile states, the government has not announced that a world war is inevitable, nor has it ordered the general public to enlist in the armed forces.
Instead, the message from defence and security officials is that Britain must strengthen its ability to deter aggression, protect critical infrastructure and withstand disruption should the international situation deteriorate further.
Why Is Britain Preparing for the Possibility of War?
The international security environment has changed considerably since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. European governments have increased defence spending, reassessed military capabilities and examined whether their infrastructure and emergency services could cope with a major security crisis.
Britain is part of this wider effort. Its national security strategy identifies Russian aggression, hostile activity by foreign states, cyberattacks and threats to critical infrastructure among the challenges facing the country. The strategy also recognises that a serious confrontation could affect the UK directly, rather than remaining confined to a distant battlefield. <Cite refs={[“turn711396news11″,”turn711396search6”]}/>
Modern conflict does not necessarily begin with tanks crossing a border or missiles striking military bases. It can involve cyberattacks, sabotage, disinformation, interference with communications and attempts to disrupt essential services.
A hostile operation against electricity networks, water supplies or transport infrastructure could cause significant disruption without a formal declaration of war. Government departments, emergency services and private companies would need to coordinate their responses while maintaining essential services.
This is one reason military planners increasingly emphasise national resilience alongside conventional military strength.
For ordinary Britons, the implications are not that they should expect an imminent attack. Rather, the government wants the country to be better prepared for a range of emergencies, including those that could arise from international conflict.
A Major Plan to Prepare the Whole Country
In April 2026, the head of the British armed forces, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, told Sky News that the UK was developing an updated plan to prepare the country for a possible transition to war.
The plan, described as a modern version of the Government War Book, is intended to consider how the military, police, hospitals, industry and other parts of society would respond during a major crisis. Knighton emphasised the importance of national resilience and the lessons that could be drawn from Cold War planning while adapting them to modern infrastructure and society. <Cite refs={[“turn711396search1″,”turn711396search2”]}/>
Such planning is not the same as announcing that war is about to begin.
Governments prepare contingency plans for events that may never happen because developing procedures during a crisis can be too late. Emergency planning helps identify gaps in communication, clarify responsibilities and establish how resources could be prioritised if normal services were disrupted.
The key questions include how hospitals would maintain treatment during a major emergency, how local authorities would communicate with residents, how essential supplies would be distributed and how government departments would continue operating if computer networks or communications systems were attacked.
Industry also has an important role. Modern armed forces depend on reliable supplies of fuel, food, equipment, communications technology and medical resources. A major crisis could place pressure on supply chains and require businesses to coordinate closely with government.
The purpose of national planning is to identify these vulnerabilities before an emergency occurs.
Billions of Pounds for Britain’s Armed Forces
The government has also committed substantial additional funding to defence.
On 30 June 2026, the government announced a further £15 billion for its Defence Investment Plan, with planned investment totalling approximately £298 billion over four years. The programme is intended to modernise military capabilities, improve readiness, strengthen the nuclear deterrent and accelerate the development and deployment of drone technology. <Cite refs={[“turn711396search4″,”turn711396search3”]}/>
The investment reflects the government’s view that the armed forces must be equipped to respond to increasingly complex threats.
Modern military readiness involves much more than increasing the number of soldiers. It also requires advanced aircraft, naval capabilities, air defence, intelligence systems, secure communications, ammunition stocks and the ability to sustain operations over an extended period.
Drones and other autonomous systems have become particularly important in contemporary warfare. The conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated how relatively inexpensive unmanned systems can be used for surveillance, targeting and attacks against military equipment and infrastructure.
Britain must therefore consider how to develop its own capabilities while protecting its forces against similar technologies used by potential adversaries.
Defence spending also has an industrial dimension. Manufacturing equipment domestically, maintaining specialist engineering skills and ensuring that supply chains remain reliable can contribute to national resilience.
Nevertheless, higher spending brings difficult choices. Defence investment competes with other demands on public finances, and the government must explain how its commitments will be funded and how success will be measured.
Britons Are Being Asked to Think Differently About Emergencies
The growing emphasis on national preparedness has encouraged debate about what ordinary people should do if Britain faces a serious emergency.
In July 2026, the government said households should take practical steps to improve their ability to cope with disruption to water, electricity and communications. The guidance addressed a range of potential emergencies, including extreme weather and cyberattacks, rather than focusing exclusively on military conflict. <Cite refs={[“turn711396news9″,”turn711396news23”]}/>
Basic preparations can make a difference when services are temporarily unavailable. Households may benefit from keeping essential medicines, drinking water, non-perishable food, a torch, a charged power bank and important contact details readily available.
People can also consider how they would contact family members if mobile networks were disrupted and where they could find reliable official information during an emergency.
These are ordinary resilience measures, not evidence that a war is imminent.
The distinction matters because dramatic headlines can create the impression that citizens are being instructed to prepare for immediate combat. In reality, emergency preparedness covers numerous possibilities, from storms and flooding to prolonged power cuts and serious cyber incidents.
The objective is to reduce the impact of disruption and give emergency services more time to concentrate on people who require urgent assistance.
The Threat from Russia and Iran
Security concerns have also intensified following warnings from British intelligence officials about hostile activity linked to foreign states.
On 13 October 2026, MI5 Director-General Sir Ken McCallum warned that Iran was increasingly seeking to target harder objectives, including military sites, rather than concentrating solely on more traditional targets. He also described growing threats associated with Russia and Iran, including sabotage and other forms of hostile activity. Iran has denied British allegations relating to specific incidents. <Cite refs={[“turn711396news21″,”turn711396news22”]}/>
These warnings illustrate why the government is placing greater emphasis on protecting military facilities and critical infrastructure.
The threat is not limited to conventional military attacks. Intelligence agencies must also contend with espionage, cyber operations, attempts to recruit people for sabotage and the spread of disinformation intended to weaken public confidence.
Such activities can be difficult to attribute immediately, particularly when hostile actors use intermediaries or digital platforms to conceal their involvement.
The response therefore requires cooperation between intelligence agencies, police forces, the armed services and private organisations responsible for essential infrastructure.
However, warnings about hostile activity should not be interpreted as proof that Britain is already fighting a world war. Governments and intelligence agencies distinguish between an existing threat, a possible future scenario and an event that has actually occurred.
That distinction is essential when assessing the significance of the latest preparations.
Will British Citizens Be Required to Fight?
The phrase “get ready to fight” can easily be interpreted as a warning that conscription is imminent. There is an important difference, however, between preparing the country for a possible conflict and requiring civilians to serve in the military.
The defence planning described by British officials includes the potential contributions of public services, businesses, local authorities and civilian organisations. It does not, by itself, establish a policy of compulsory military service.
Britain does not currently have a general system of peacetime conscription requiring all eligible citizens to join the armed forces. Any proposal to introduce compulsory service would raise major political, legal and practical questions and would require clear government action.
There are also many ways civilians can contribute to national resilience without becoming combatants. Medical staff can maintain healthcare services, engineers can repair damaged infrastructure, emergency responders can assist vulnerable communities and businesses can help sustain essential supplies.
In a major crisis, keeping hospitals open, maintaining electricity and protecting communications could be as important to the country’s overall resilience as any single military capability.
The message from defence planners is therefore broader than a call for citizens to take up arms. It concerns whether the whole country could continue functioning if faced with serious disruption.
Britain Is Also Preparing for Hybrid Attacks
One of the most significant developments is the growing recognition that future security crises may combine military pressure with cyberattacks, sabotage and information operations.
In July 2026, Britain announced plans for its largest domestic defence exercise in decades, scheduled for 2027. The exercise is intended to test the country’s ability to respond to hybrid threats, including attacks on infrastructure, disinformation and cyber operations. It is also designed to examine coordination between government departments and other public-sector organisations. <Cite refs={[“turn711396news23″,”turn711396search7”]}/>
Exercises of this kind allow officials to test plans under simulated pressure. They can reveal whether different organisations can share information effectively, whether emergency responsibilities are clearly defined and whether essential services can continue operating during a complex incident.
The results can help identify weaknesses before a real emergency occurs.
For example, a simulated cyberattack could test how quickly an affected organisation can restore services, how the public would receive emergency information and how government agencies would coordinate with private companies.
The exercise does not mean that officials possess confirmed intelligence about an imminent attack. Its purpose is to test preparedness across a range of possible scenarios.
Conclusion: Preparation Is Not a Declaration of War
Britain’s expanding defence programme and plans for national resilience reflect a more uncertain international environment. The government is increasing military investment, developing plans for a potential transition to war and examining how civilian organisations could help maintain essential services during a major emergency.
Warnings from intelligence and military leaders underline the seriousness with which the UK is treating threats from hostile states, cyber operations and attacks against critical infrastructure.
Yet it is important to separate these developments from the most dramatic claims about a coming Third World War. No official announcement has established that a global conflict is inevitable, and the preparations described do not amount to an order for the British public to enlist.
For ordinary households, sensible emergency planning can provide greater security without creating unnecessary fear. For the government, the challenge is to strengthen national defence, communicate risks accurately and ensure that preparations are proportionate to the threats the country faces.
Britain is preparing for a more dangerous era because the consequences of being unprepared could be severe. Whether these measures prove sufficient will depend on the country’s military capabilities, the resilience of its infrastructure and the ability of its institutions to work together under pressure.
The central message is not that war is certain. It is that the government believes the UK must be ready for serious possibilities while continuing to work with its allies to deter aggression and preserve peace.