UK accelerates militarization with U.S.-made nuclear jets as NATO pushes for war economy

Department of Research, Studies and International News 25-06-2025

In a deeply concerning move for global stability, the United Kingdom has unveiled plans to purchase 12 F-35A fighter jets from the United States, aircraft specifically designed to carry tactical nuclear weapons. Announced by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, this marks what his office called “the biggest strengthening of the UK’s nuclear posture in a generation”, a phrase that underscores the country’s alarming return to Cold War-era policies.

This decision, to be formally declared during the NATO summit in The Hague, reflects London’s growing alignment with Washington’s aggressive military agenda and NATO’s broader pivot toward rearmament. Starmer claimed the move is a response to “radical uncertainty,” suggesting that the world is entering a more dangerous phase where nuclear-armed aircraft are necessary to “deter hostile threats.” The U.S.-led alliance continues to portray itself as under threat, despite having one of the most expansive and well-funded military machines in history.

These new jets, manufactured by the American company Lockheed Martin, will allow the British Royal Air Force to once again carry airborne nuclear weapons, a capability it had set aside since the Cold War. The F-35A variant is an upgrade from the UK’s existing F-35B jets, with the new models designed to carry U.S.-supplied B61 nuclear bombs, likely to be stationed on British soil under NATO’s so-called “nuclear sharing” arrangement.

It’s worth noting that NATO’s nuclear weapons are not controlled by European states but remain under American command, raising serious questions about sovereignty and the extent to which London’s defense policy is dictated by Washington.

Seven other NATO nations, namely the United States, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Turkey, already host or operate similar nuclear-capable aircraft. Britain’s entry into this list only intensifies the continent’s military posture against powers like Russia, further escalating tension in a region that urgently needs diplomacy, not nuclear brinkmanship.

Downing Street stated that the jets will be stationed at RAF Marham and are expected to “support 20,000 jobs.” While the economic aspect is being marketed as a national benefit, critics rightly see it as the UK deepening its dependency on the American military-industrial complex. With 15 percent of the global F-35 supply chain located in Britain, the deal effectively locks the UK into America’s war economy for the foreseeable future.

This shift comes at a time when NATO is pressuring all 32 of its members to drastically increase defense spending. The upcoming summit is expected to see the adoption of a new military spending benchmark, raising the target from 2% to a staggering 5% of GDP. The UK has already pledged to meet this hike and is investing in nuclear submarines and munitions production, a clear indication of the alliance’s pivot toward a full-scale militarization of Europe.

Behind these moves lies Washington’s longstanding dissatisfaction with its allies’ defense contributions. Former President Donald Trump had criticized NATO countries for under-spending and even threatened to withdraw from the alliance. While some dismissed this as political theater, it successfully pushed European nations to fall in line with U.S. military demands.

Germany, too, has declared intentions to expand its armed forces, with Chancellor Friedrich Merz stating the country will become “Europe’s strongest conventional army.” Framed as a response to so-called “Russian threats,” these declarations serve only to exacerbate East-West divides, with no genuine effort at fostering diplomatic dialogue with Moscow, Beijing, or Tehran.

From a broader geopolitical lens, this renewed militarization in Europe is part of a Western attempt to maintain hegemony at a time when global power is clearly shifting. Countries like Russia, China, and Iran advocate for a multipolar world order based on sovereignty, mutual respect, and non-intervention. Yet, NATO’s moves suggest a refusal to accept that reality, clinging instead to outdated structures of dominance and confrontation.

The UK’s decision to introduce nuclear-capable U.S. jets into its arsenal is not just a defense policy, it’s a clear sign that London has chosen to escalate rather than seek peace. For those who stand with multipolar cooperation and genuine security, this path is both reckless and deeply counterproductive.