https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVCn0CnYeLs

Lord Dannatt, the former head of the British Army, told the Express that the Government needed to make a “clear statement of the threats to our security” to make the case for increasing the defence budget. Fewer than three in Britons (29%) believe the state of the armed forces is “good” and 36% now believe it is “bad”.

The findings land as Chancellor John Healey – who quit as Sir Keir Starmer’s defence secretary in protest at underfunding – prepares to deliver his first Budget on October 28. Three in four Britons would support increasing defence spending if it led to more jobs, including apprenticeships for young people.

Forty-six percent of Britons would support a tax hike on earnings above £125,000 to fund defence. But a mere 4% favoured higher taxes on earnings between £12,570 and £50,000 – and a paltry 3% would back a VAT rise.

Lord Dannatt said: “This poll suggests that the Government needs to give a firm lead on defence issues in order to build a consensus within the country. There needs to be a clear statement of the threats to our security and therefore the need to increase the defence Budget.

“This statement would also influence the proportion of the population willing to join the armed forces in extremis. The Government also needs to be very clear about the impact of security challenges on the population to promote resilience.

Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge said: “In an increasingly uncertain and dangerous world, with threats growing on multiple fronts, we need to get serious about funding defence and make the tough choices needed to protect our national security. That means cutting welfare spending and investing billions into improving our defensive capability.

Caroline Paskell, Ipsos’s research director, said: “Our latest polling underscores the continued public recognition of the demands facing Britain’s armed forces, with half of Britons backing an increase in defence spending despite wider economic pressures. However, the public mood remains finely balanced when faced with the direct trade-offs required to fund this expansion.

“While there is strong enthusiasm for military investment that delivers broader economic dividends, such as job creation and civilian infrastructure, resistance grows sharply when funding mechanisms touch personal taxation or cuts to cherished public services. The key challenge for ministers will be navigating these competing fiscal priorities, communicating clearly how increased security investment can coexist with public service protection and broader economic growth.”

A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: “In an increasingly dangerous world, we are stepping up to protect the UK. There has never been a more important time to join defence and with more people now joining the armed forces than leaving, that reflects the growing confidence in the opportunities and benefits that Service life offers. This Government is determined to build on that progress. A career in the armed forces provides incredible opportunities for people from all backgrounds to develop their skills, fulfil their potential and come together in the shared defence of our nation.”

Shock Poll Reveals How Many Brits Are Willing to Fight in the Army

A new poll has exposed a striking divide in Britain over military service, national security and the willingness of ordinary citizens to take up arms if the country faced a war. Despite growing concerns about international instability and calls for greater investment in the Armed Forces, almost half of Britons say there are no circumstances in which they would be willing to fight for their country.

The findings have reignited debate about Britain’s military preparedness, the public’s understanding of modern security threats and whether the country is ready for the sacrifices that a serious international crisis could demand.

According to research published by Ipsos on October 14, 2026, 48 per cent of British adults said there were no circumstances in which they would be willing to take up arms and go to war for Britain. By contrast, 36 per cent said there were circumstances in which they would be prepared to fight, while the remainder were undecided. The survey questioned 1,090 British adults aged 18 to 75 between September 29 and October 1. <Link url=”https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/rising-support-increasing-defence-spending” title=”Ipsos poll findings”/>.

The results arrive at a time when military leaders are increasingly discussing the need for Britain to prepare for a more dangerous international environment. Russia’s war against Ukraine, tensions involving Iran and growing strategic competition with China have all contributed to concerns about the future of European security.

Yet the survey suggests that public support for a stronger military does not necessarily mean people are personally willing to participate in a war.

Almost Half Say They Would Never Fight

The most striking finding is the proportion of respondents who said they would not take up arms under any circumstances.

The figure was 56 per cent among women and approximately four in ten men. The results also revealed differences between supporters of the major political parties. Around 48 per cent of Labour voters, 45 per cent of people who voted Reform UK at the last general election and 40 per cent of Conservative voters said they would never be willing to fight.

These figures challenge the assumption that concerns about national security automatically translate into a willingness to serve in the military.

However, the findings need to be interpreted carefully. Saying that someone would not fight does not necessarily mean that they are indifferent to Britain’s security or unwilling to contribute to national defence in other ways.

People may be prepared to support military personnel, volunteer in their communities, provide humanitarian assistance or help maintain essential services during a crisis. Others may have family responsibilities, disabilities or other circumstances that would affect their ability to serve.

The poll measured willingness to take up arms, not every possible form of national service or contribution to the country’s defence.

Nevertheless, the results raise an important question for policymakers: how can Britain strengthen its resilience when a substantial proportion of the public does not envisage participating directly in a war?

Support for Higher Defence Spending Is Growing

The survey also revealed a seemingly contradictory attitude towards defence spending.

While 48 per cent said they would never be willing to fight for Britain, 51 per cent supported increasing government spending on defence and the Armed Forces, even if that required additional borrowing, higher taxes or cuts to public services.

Only 12 per cent wanted defence spending reduced, while a quarter preferred it to remain at approximately its current level.

Support for increased spending has grown compared with June 2022, when 28 per cent backed an increase under the same broad conditions.

This suggests that concerns about international security may be influencing public attitudes towards military investment. People can believe that Britain needs better equipment, stronger air defences, improved intelligence capabilities and adequately trained personnel without believing that they themselves should serve on the battlefield.

But support becomes more complicated when people are asked how the additional money should be raised.

Among respondents considering increased defence expenditure, higher personal taxes and reductions in public services were significant sources of opposition. Many people want the country to be better prepared, but they also want the NHS, education, social care and other essential services to remain properly funded.

For the government, this creates a difficult financial balancing act.

Army Chief Warns of a More Dangerous World

The poll comes shortly after General Sir Roly Walker, the Chief of the General Staff, warned soldiers that Britain could soon need them to fight in a war.

Speaking to personnel at Catterick Garrison in October, Walker said the international environment had become increasingly dangerous and that the country needed to reconsider its approach to military readiness.

He also indicated that political leaders would need to have an honest conversation with the public about the sacrifices required to strengthen national defence. <Link url=”https://www.thetimes.com/uk/defence/article/uk-sacrifices-defend-itself-army-chief-warns-bwrnm2fzq” title=”Report on the Army chief’s warning”/>.

His comments reflect a broader concern among defence officials that Britain cannot assume the international security environment will remain stable indefinitely.

The country has relied heavily on its professional Armed Forces, intelligence services and NATO partnerships. These remain central to national defence, but military leaders have increasingly emphasised the importance of readiness, sufficient personnel and the ability to respond to several types of threat.

Modern conflict can involve far more than conventional fighting. Cyberattacks, sabotage, attacks on infrastructure, disinformation and disruption to essential services can all affect national security.

Preparing for these threats requires equipment and trained military personnel, but it also requires cooperation across government, industry and society.

Does Britain Need National Service?

The findings have renewed interest in proposals for national service, although the term can describe several very different systems.

Some proposals involve compulsory military training, while others focus on voluntary or paid programmes that allow young people to work with the Armed Forces, emergency services, charities and community organisations.

A separate survey reported in October found that 60 per cent of 18-to-24-year-olds would be willing to participate in a year-long, paid national service programme. The proposed programme would include a range of activities, not solely military service. <Link url=”https://www.thetimes.com/uk/defence/article/national-service-young-britons-survey-3c6c6w6nc” title=”Survey on young Britons and national service”/>.

The distinction is important. A person may be willing to take part in community service or emergency response training without wanting to become a soldier.

Supporters of national service argue that such programmes could improve practical skills, strengthen social connections and prepare communities for emergencies. They also suggest that voluntary opportunities could help young people understand the role of the Armed Forces.

Critics may question the cost, the impact on education and employment, and whether compulsory service would be appropriate in a country with a professional military.

Any proposal would need to explain its objectives, eligibility requirements, funding and whether participants would be expected to undertake military training.

The latest polling does not, by itself, demonstrate that the public supports compulsory conscription. Willingness to defend Britain, support for defence spending and enthusiasm for national service are three separate questions.

Why the Gender Divide Matters

The poll also highlighted a substantial difference between men and women.

A larger proportion of women than men said there were no circumstances in which they would take up arms. This difference may reflect a range of factors, including personal circumstances, attitudes towards military service and perceptions of the risks involved.

It would be misleading, however, to assume that the result demonstrates a lack of concern about national security among women. The question concerned participation in combat, not support for the Armed Forces or willingness to contribute in other ways.

Military service also involves roles beyond direct fighting. Logistics, medical support, engineering, intelligence, communications and cyber operations are essential to the functioning of modern armed forces.

The wider debate should therefore recognise that national defence depends on many kinds of expertise and contribution.

At the same time, the findings raise questions about how military careers are presented to the public and whether people have confidence that serving personnel will receive appropriate equipment, training and support.

Public Confidence in the Armed Forces

The poll’s findings also come amid concerns about the condition of Britain’s military.

In the Ipsos survey, 36 per cent described the state of the Armed Forces as bad, compared with 29 per cent who described it as good. This does not provide a complete assessment of military capability, but it illustrates that public confidence is not universal.

Britain’s military effectiveness depends on several factors, including recruitment, retention, equipment availability, training, logistics and the ability to work alongside allies.

Increasing the defence budget may help address some shortages, but additional funding alone cannot immediately resolve every problem. New equipment can take years to procure, while training experienced personnel requires time and investment.

The government has also committed to increasing defence spending over the coming years. The central question is how additional resources will be allocated and whether they will produce measurable improvements in readiness.

For the public, confidence may depend not only on spending announcements but also on evidence that service personnel have the tools and support they need to do their jobs.

The Cost of Preparing for Conflict

The government faces a difficult choice over how to finance stronger defence capabilities.

Higher taxes could provide additional revenue, but they may place pressure on households already concerned about living costs. Borrowing can support investment, although it adds to future financial obligations. Cuts to other budgets may release money for defence but could reduce the resources available for public services.

The Ipsos findings show that public support for higher spending does not mean there is agreement about these trade-offs.

Policymakers will need to explain the threats they believe Britain faces, the capabilities required to address them and the likely costs of different approaches.

They must also explain why particular investments are necessary and how their effectiveness will be evaluated.

A credible national security strategy should provide the public with a clear understanding of the risks without exaggerating the likelihood of war. It should also explain how military preparedness fits alongside diplomacy, intelligence cooperation and the country’s commitments to NATO.

A Debate Britain Can No Longer Ignore

The poll does not mean that Britain is unable to defend itself, nor does it establish that war is inevitable. It does, however, reveal a gap between the public’s support for military investment and the willingness of many people to fight personally.

That gap deserves serious discussion.

A country can maintain professional armed forces while encouraging citizens to understand national security and prepare for emergencies. It can also strengthen resilience through better infrastructure, cybersecurity, emergency planning and cooperation with allies.

The challenge for political leaders is to explain these responsibilities honestly, including the financial and personal sacrifices that a more dangerous world may require.

For now, the findings suggest that many Britons want their country to be better protected but are reluctant to imagine themselves taking part in a war. Whether that attitude changes will depend partly on how people perceive the threats facing Britain, the credibility of the government’s response and their confidence in the Armed Forces.

Ultimately, the debate is not simply about how many people would volunteer to fight. It is about what Britain expects from its citizens, what citizens expect from their government and how the country can prepare responsibly for an uncertain future.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.