This article by Lynda Walker first appeared in Unity, the weekly publication of the Irish Communist Party.
IT is good to feel safe and secure in our homes and our countries but more and more this is less the case. The drive towards war in Britain and Europe is generally increasing. Recently there was the proposal to bring back national service –still an option- and now there is open talk about war with Russia. But it is a catch 22 as with the development of nuclear warfare they say we have to be ready for war with Russia, but that preparation brings on the war.
Programmes aired on Ch4 and Ch5 last week were shocking in both content and production. The first one Platoon 24 Preparing for War (2nd Feb) showed 30 ‘soldiers’ comprising 13 Platoon, D Company, 5th Battalion The Rifles, assemble for the first time. According to the Mirror “They hail from diverse backgrounds and regions across Britain, with most possessing little beyond their fundamental military training.” Typically working class they had one A level between them all, not that education means the be all and end all. But leading them is 22-year-old Platoon Commander Lieutenant Tom Drew, recently graduated from the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst and Infantry Battle School (wouldn’t you know) with four weeks’ experience in barracks.
Listening to them talking they come across as possessing little, and maybe like many recruits in years past- -the uniform, the gun, the travel and the ‘Kings shilling’ was a factor. And in the words of the song: Ah but when the sky darkens and the prospect is war They’ll give us a gun and push us to the fore. And expect us to die for the land of our birth. Although we never owned one handful of earth.
The programme was described by the Mirror as “ ‘Hard hitting’ war docuseries shows brutal army training like never before.” (2nd Feb) But it was more like a pathetic recruiting Sergeant for the British army.
The second programme Frontline (6th Feb Ch5) was less pathetic and more alarming as it showed British women and men in the Gulf of Finland practicing storming the beach, with 10,000 personnel, 1,500 vehicles Harrier jets and more (Of course no opposition). Estonia, Rumania Greece, Germany, Nato HQ and other places were all featured in what is a Nato collaboration.
The narrative was given in breathless-excitement style opinion as we were told the “battle to deter Putin has begun. Behind the scenes with NATO’s troops, support teams and commanders through 2025, as they prepare for a war that seems closer by the day.” If Russia is mentioned once it is mentioned twenty times, alongside the war in Ukraine. No mention of Nato aggression, or Ukraine fascism. There was no mention either of the cost of defence-the cost to the countries social services. The collective spending on Nato amounts to trillions, US spent $935 billion UK $84-90 billion in 2024-2025. No questioning, no mention of peaceful solutions.
Jack Teal writing in the Guardian gave a realistic review of the second documentary in this case describing it as “an advertisement for Nato’s hypothetical prowess that will interest viewers with a fetish for military jargon and an aversion to serious analysis.” (6th February).
He says that this documentary about “Nato’s readiness for war seems intended to provoke a mix of terror and arousal in the goggling, flag-hugging viewer.” He concludes by saying “Frontline has serious business to conduct: it ends with both General Shirreff, (Nato’s former deputy supreme allied commander in Europe) and the programme itself nakedly advocating for an expansion of British military capabilities.” He suggests that viewers opposed to the ideology would probably have switched off.
And most likely, “the only casualty here will be the Russian military analyst, in a chilly bunker somewhere, who has to study this programme in case it contains useful intel. They are about to have a rather dull day at work.”
A comment that leaves a smile on your face. But for anyone who does not want to see death and carnage, who would rather see the £/$ trillions spent on welfare not warfare, then it is not funny.
NATO tells us that it “also promotes a peaceful resolution of disputes. However, if diplomatic efforts do not work, the military alliance is used for crisis-management operations.” What it does not tell us is that NATO- helps create the wars.
Neither the Commons document nor the documentaries gave critical analysis to Trump and his actions, at home and abroad, Cuba, Venezuela, Greenland etc, but there is a section in the Commons Reports that deals with “US Prioritisation.”
The Platoon TV programmes (more of them to come) talk of National Service, preparing for war, military opinions and army on the airwaves, are part of the “Engagement with the public plans” as noted in the House of Commons Defence Committee.
The UK contribution to European Security Sixth Report of Session 2024–26. (HC 520 and Jan 30 2026 HC 1658)
Here it is recorded by Lord Robertson, (former Secretary of State for Defence and former General Secretary of Nato from 1999 to 2003) “Lead Reviewer, that the population have to be engaged and must understand the threats that both the UK and wider Europe currently face.” Speaking elsewhere, he emphasised that it had “to be led from the top, and there must be no restraint on military and other people articulating the case to the country.” The Ministry of Defence’s view of its own role within the national conversation includes working with the Department for Education to promote understanding of the Armed Forces among young people in schools and expanding in school and community-based cadet forces across the country by 30% by 2030. (problem for schools in Northern Ireland!)
This alongside a greater focus within the cadets on developing STEM skills and exploring modern technology: giving the Defence Academy and other defence training centres greater commercial freedoms to operate and, by 2026, the Defence Academy establishing a plan for inviting company leaders, from FTSE 100 companies and wider, onto defence courses as appropriate.”
Bringing in the profiteers!
The reports are extensive in the views of promoting warfare-specially against Russia, but China, Korea, and Iran are also mentioned.
There is also reference to “Disruption from protest and sabotage.” (Re. Brize Norton & Palestine Action) But no recognition of the death and destruction that British weapons have caused in Palestine or the Ukraine. Or the genocide that Israel is creating.
EU
A section on the EU concludes: “The UK’s security and defence partnership with the EU is a welcome recognition of the importance of both parties to the defence of Europe. At present, the partnership is somewhat aspirational, awaiting the outcome of negotiations on a Framework Participation Agreement; access to SAFE; and movement on the UK’s Administrative Arrangement to join the PESCO Military Mobility project.” (page 27 HC 520 )
At the end of the report there are details regarding written evidence received from about 30
organisations which can be viewed on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.
An attempt to view one of the submissions resulted in the “security warning” below. However I did get a look at one or two of the submissions that shows a political viewpoint that clearly ignores crucial facts relating to Ukraine.
GE Aerospace start by saying “The UK plays a pivotal role securing the Euro-Atlantic, contributing through its nuclear capabilities”. It goes onto say: “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has fundamentally reshaped Europe’s security environment, underscoring the importance of alliances in ensuring collective defence. Strong and coordinated defence and security cooperation in Europe and NATO, supported by resilient defence industrial bases, has never been more crucial.” Something missing from this analysis? Proxy wars? Coups? Et al.
Thirty of the written submission were provided, in HC520 a sample of them are here.
2 AERALIS Ltd UKCES0019
3 ATRI UAB UKCES0001
4 Airbus UKCES0015
5 BAE Systems
6 Futter, Professor Andrew (Professor of International Politics, University of Leicester UKCES0003
7 GE AerospacUKCES0024
8 13 Gibdock Ltd UKCES0008
9 14 Human Security Centre UKCES0002
10 Legatum Institute UKCES0021
11 Lockheed Martin UK UKCES0013
12 17 London Politica UKCES0005
(Page 66/67 HC520)
The words of Lenin come to mind when he argued that “while war causes ruin, it acts as a means for massive financial gain through the “adaptation” of industry to war conditions and the expansion of capital.”
And whilst we are anti-imperialist and not pacifists we are opposed wars-they are the biggest threat to the environment and the of cause massacre of millions of human beings. Nato/EU is not the answer-social change is.
If they have not already done so the Commons Reports must be read by political party’s, trade unionists, women’s and community organisations. Fight this brainwashing.
Lynda Walker provides a vital analysis of the current drive toward war. It is concerning to see our media acting as a recruiting tool while ignoring the social cost to our communities. As a trade unionist and a worker in public sector I see daily how our public services are underfunded.
We are told there is no money for proper pay or healthcare yet billions are found for military expansion. This article rightly points out that the working class are the ones pushed to the front while the profiteers at the top benefit. We must continue to demand that our resources go toward welfare and not warfare