Speaker 1 (00:00):
... and essentially they will decide who goes in and out. Thank you.
John Healey (00:03):
Thank you. We welcome the ceasefire. We want it to hold. We will do our bit to try and strengthen it. We condemn the escalation in Lebanon. We want the Israel-Lebanon conflict to be brought within the terms of the ceasefire because we want to see greater stability returned to the whole of the Middle Eastern region. On the operation I'm setting out today, this was over a month where we and allies tracked every mile of the Russian subs. We recognized the Akula attack submarine as a likely decoy to distract us from the GOOGIE submarines. We watched the GOOGIE submarines as they spent time over critical infrastructure relevant to us and our allies in the North Atlantic.
(01:04)
We watched them. We were able to track them. We dropped sonobuoys to demonstrate to them that we were monitoring every hour of their operation. And because we were watching them, we wanted to ensure that we could warn them that their covert operation had been exposed and reduce the risk that they may attempt any action that could damage our pipelines or our cables. And I'm confident we have no evidence that there has been any damage, but with allies, we'll ensure that this is now verified. And the message to Putin is deliberate and it's clear. We see you. We see your activity over our pipelines and our cables, and we will not tolerate any attempt to damage what our way of life and our modern way of life depends on so much. Shehab Khan, ITB.
Shehab Khan (02:23):
Shehab Khan, ITB News. Just then you mentioned that you're confident there was no damage, but that still needs to be verified. You also mentioned when you were talking that there would be consequences for Russia and President Putin if this were to happen again. Can you elaborate what the consequences would be and what would be the reaction if you were to find that there was damage? And please forgive me, there's a second question from me as well. Considering there is now increased demand on military capabilities, not only because of the threat in the Middle East, but also as you've mentioned because of Russia, are you concerned about our military capabilities and do we have enough resource to deal with the threats that are happening across the world?
John Healey (03:04):
So we, having watched, monitored, tracked, we also have the ability to step up responses to the Russian incursions into our wider waters. And these were our wider waters in and out and around our exclusive economic zone, just to be clear, not our close by shore territorial waters. But clearly to divulge the operational options that are available to us as a UK military alongside allies is simply to make the Russians wiser, so I won't do that. We're confident and we've got no evidence that any damage has been done to the cables or pipelines. The UK has one of the most resilient undersea networks of any nation with inbuilt contingencies if there are damage, but we will ensure that with allies that we will verify the state of our infrastructure now that the Russian submarines have been seen off and that they're heading north back to their base.
(04:27)
Demands on defense are rising. We see that in the Middle East. We see that in the more direct threat that we continue to face from Russia as the UK, but as a member of NATO. It's a recognition that the Prime Minister set out in his important Munich speech at the Security Conference a month ago, where he said hard power is the currency of the age. And he recognized first, quite rightly, that this is a government that is spending more on defense now than ever before, that has increased defense spending since day one of coming into office, that this parliament will spend 270 billion pounds on defense.
(05:16)
But in the face of rising demands on defense, the prime minister said, "We must, and we know we must do more, spend more, more quickly," and that is exactly what we're doing. Next year, we will hit a level of spending in this country that has not been seen since 2010 was labor was last in government. And we do that to respond to the rising threats and to recognize the fact that for 14 years we had governments that cut our forces, that is in the words of one of my predecessors, hollowed out and underfunded the forces over those 14 years.
(05:58)
Deborah Haynes.
Deborah Haynes (06:01):
Deborah Haynes, Sky News. And just on the timing of this operation by Russia, do you think that it's deliberate that it took advantage of the fact that there was conflict in the Middle East to try to launch this sabotage potential operation against us? You talk about how you're seeing them, but why didn't you stop them? Why didn't you shoo them off the critical infrastructure? And then just finally, obviously we're seeing the Russia threat. There's conflict in the Middle East, there's war in Ukraine, there's Donald Trump mocking the UK's diminished military capabilities and threatening to withdraw the US from NATO. Yes, defense spending is increasing. You're talking about this 2.6% by next year, though obviously it's only 2.5% on core defense. Are you having those private, tough conversations with the prime minister, with the chancellor that this target to increase defense spending to 3% needs to be pushed forward much faster, potentially by the end of this parliament. And if you're still meeting hesitancy and reluctance, are you considering your own position, given how passionately you feel about the need to re-arm and get ready?
John Healey (07:12):
So a number of questions in there, Deborah. Look, first, I'm pretty clear that Putin would want us to be distracted by the Middle East. And what I'm setting out today demonstrates that we are not just exposing his covert operation, but we are saying to him that we recognize Russia as the primary threat to the UK and to NATO, and that we will not take our eyes off Putin whilst at the same time, we act to protect our British interests and our British allies in the Middle East. And on the question of this government's commitment to defense, I would just say to you, look back at the speeches that the chancellor has made. She has quite rightly argued a strong economy needs strong national security. Look back at the eight billion pounds we're now spending each year on defense above the level of the last government's last year in office.
(08:28)
Look at the commitment the Prime Minister is making to completing the defense investment plan. The recognition that, as I said at his Munich speech, he said hard power is the currency of the age, but alongside that, look at his record and the UK's record in this 20 months since the election, where you've got this combination of strengthening hard power, strengthening allies and alliances, and conducting short diplomacy. And it's that hard power, strong alliances, shore diplomacy that is a way of making Britain safer and our mission to make Britain secure at home and strong abroad.
(09:17)
Can I come to Jerome Starkey, The Sun?
Jerome Starkey (09:20):
Jerome Starkey from The Sun Newspaper, Defense Secretary, I think this is the second time you've told Putin that you see him. The last time is when you surfaced a submarine close to the Yantar. It doesn't appear to have deterred these submarine operations surveilling subsea infrastructure. And the concern is, of course, when he looks back in your direction, he might see a Navy that has five of its six hunter killer submarines stuck in port and the other one was in Australia, has now sailed, a Type 45 destroyer that took three weeks to get to Cyprus in response to a foreseeable security
Jerome Starkey (10:00):
Security emergency. What are you doing to make sure that for all the credit you give the armed forces personnel, but to make sure that they have the resources, the infrastructure, the kit that they need to do more than simply watch. I'd point out that the DIP, The Defense Investment Plan, this key document to set out what you're going to invest in, continues to be months behind schedule.
John Healey (10:34):
So first, I'd simply say to you, Putin's purpose is secret operations that remain undetected over our critical infrastructure. We've exposed those covert operations. We've made clear to him, and his submarines, that we've watched them every step of the way, and that were there to be any damage to our cables or pipelines, we would hold him responsible. I think the nature of the operation that I've set out today demonstrates that we have UK armed forces capable of detecting, capable of deterring, capable of responding, if required, in order to protect Britain and to protect our vital undersea infrastructure. And that we have a government here and a military that despite our commitments, quite rightly, in the Middle East, will not take our eye off Putin, that recognizes and responds to the fact that our primary threat to the UK and to NATO remains President Putin and Russia.
(11:52)
On the question of our navy and our forces, I think this operation demonstrates two things. First of all, just how capable it is of complex operations alongside allies, and secondly, that very often that what they do is not visible. I'm proud of what they are, I'm proud of what they do, I'm proud of the operation that I'm able to set out today. Of course, no one's pretending that over the last 14 years, that the Navy's not been hollowed out, that the last government cut the number of warships, cut the number of mine hunters, delayed the renewal of our nuclear deterrent. We can't turn that round, as a relatively new government, overnight, but we're spending 300 million more on ship building. We've doubled to £4 billion the amount we're spending on autonomy.
(13:02)
Despite the DIP still to be completed and published, which we will do as soon as possible, this is not stopping us getting on with the job. Since the election, we've let over 1,200 major contracts. We've made the investments, 86% of those contracts have gone to British-based firms. As I've argued consistently, we're taking the steps to rebuild the strength of our armed forces, reinforcing Britain's security and boosting Britain's economy and economic growth at the same time.
(13:39)
Larisa Brown.
Deborah Haynes (13:45):
Oh, sorry. What type of cables and pipelines were the Russians looking at? Why are you letting the Russian flag vessels go through the channel when you said that you were going to stop that happening? Just very lastly, Pete Hegseth has suggested that allies, such as the UK, should be taking lessons, taking notes from Israel. Are you doing that? Thank you.
John Healey (14:15):
I'm not going to disclose any details of the precise locations or the precise infrastructure networks over which the GUGI submarines were operating, but suffice to say we know exactly where they were. We've watched them 24/7. We have no evidence or reports of any damage, but we will ensure with allies that that is properly verified.
(14:46)
Secondly, the point you make, Larisa, is a way of reinforcing the argument that I'm making. Despite all eyes being on the Middle East, despite the fact that we've reinforced our ability to defend our British interest spaces and allies with the weeks ahead of the conflict breaking out and reinforced it further, as we've seen the extent of the widespread retaliation from the Iranians, nevertheless, our military is also defending the homeland, reinforcing the deterrence and defense of NATO. And as you'll see next week, when I chair the UDCG, standing firmly with Ukraine.
(15:27)
On the war ships, this is essentially making the argument that whilst all eyes may be on the Middle East, Russia still poses a threat, and we will continue to do what we've done as a matter of course, which is ensure that we can escort any Russian warships through our waters. In the case of this operation, to ensure that we can track any potentially malign activity, and that we can monitor and make clear that we have exposed any covert operations that Putin wants to mount, that may threaten our vital interests.
(16:12)
Tony Diver, Telegraph.
Shehab Khan (16:16):
Thank you. I want to ask you about the Russian shallow fleet being escorted through the channel, just to push you on that. Is the government comfortable with the Russian Navy operating an escort service for these ships in the English Channel? And if not, what can the government do about it? You've already said you want to stop these sanctioned vessels, but they're still traveling past the UK every day.
(16:37)
If I may, the government's been clear that the ceasefire in the Middle East should extend to Lebanon. Are you now considering further arms export restrictions on Israel, given their attacks on Lebanon yesterday?
John Healey (16:49):
On the first question, we're concentrating on what we can do alongside allies and the prime minister is in the region this week discussing with Gulf countries how we, and they, might reinforce the strength of the ceasefire and might create the conditions in which the Strait of Hormuz could be reopened.
(17:13)
On the question of the shadow ships, we've got a strong history as a country for sanctioning ships, individuals. With allies, we've seen two things in the last year. We've seen over 200 of the Russian sanctioned shadow fleet put out of action and forced to anchor, putting more pressure on Putin's ability to fund his illegal war in Ukraine. We've seen the oil revenues, that Russia takes from the illegal trade, drop by a quarter. There's more we can do, and as the Prime Minister has announced, we are ready, we have the military options, and we're ready to take action, not just in support of, but action with allies to interdict shadow fleet vessels.
(18:18)
I would just suggest to you, if the action we've already taken, the action that the Prime Minister has indicated we're ready to take, in addition, is making Russia reroute its shadow ships, as it has, or escort its shadow ships with its own warships, then the stance, the military posture, the determined work that we've done, particularly with JEF allied nations, is having an impact and making it harder for Putin to; pursue his illegal oil revenues, coordinate and run his shadow fleet, and fund his illegal war in Ukraine. We aim, with others, to put more pressure in the coming weeks and months on that activity.
(19:23)
Lizzy Buchan, Mirror.
Lizzy Buchan (19:27):
Yesterday Donald Trump said that NATO was not there when we needed them and won't be there again. Can I get your response to that? Are you concerned about the future of the alliance? Thank you.
John Healey (19:42):
First, I'm really not going to comment on social media posts. What I can reflect on are the conversations that I've had with his secretary of war, Pete Hegseth, both one-to-one, and when I sit next to him
John Healey (20:00):
[inaudible 00:20:00] at NATO defense ministers. He's clear about the US that they remain totally committed to NATO and to Article 5, but equally strong in requiring European NATO nations like the UK to step up, to step up on Ukraine, which we have, to step up on defense spending, which we have, and we are, and step up also on European leadership within NATO.
(20:34)
And that's, in many ways, exactly what we're doing with this operation. We're demonstrating and dealing, with allies, threats to NATO's northern flank and reinforcing the deterrence and the defense of our NATO alliance with this operation where the threats are greatest, which is from Russia and in the High North. Michael Shear, New York Times.
Shehab Khan (21:04):
Defense Secretary. Michael Shear, New York Times. President Trump has mocked the British Navy, calling them toys and old and decrepit. I wonder if you think this operation is a sort of response to that and what do you think the members of the British Armed Forces would want you to say to President Trump about that assessment by him? And if I might, on Iran, what do you and the government think of the president's proposal, if you want to call it that, for a kind of joint US-Iran tollbooth in the Strait of Hormuz?
John Healey (21:41):
Well, we want to see the ceasefire reinforced and strengthened. We want to see it extended to Israel and Lebanon, and we want to see a Strait of Hormuz that remains open and free, consistent with the long-established laws of international navigation, without any sort of tolls for passage.
(22:05)
On your first set of questions, I like to let our actions rather than our words speak for themselves. And I would just say about our carrier, I reject the descriptions that have been leveled against them. Our carrier completed an eight-month tour last year of the Indo-Pacific, in which it led ships of 14 other nations during the period of its operation, including the US. It meant that it is now, because of that operation, fully certified as NATO's flagship, and that is the role that it will now play as we deploy it to the High North.
(22:54)
And I think our operation that I'm setting out today reinforces the seriousness with which we take the Russian threat, it reinforces the importance of the High North, and says by what we're doing rather than by what we're saying, that we recognize while we've got responsibilities that we're discharging in the Middle East, we won't take our eye off NATO, we won't take our eye off defending and deterring on the northern flank, and we won't take our eye off the Putin threat. Molly Blackall.
Deborah Haynes (23:36):
Hi. Molly Blackall from The i Paper. Thanks for doing this. On this operation, you said that if there was damage, Putin would have been held responsible. How can the UK hold Russia responsible if they do take action to actually cut cables or damage them in the future? What capabilities do we actually have to respond to this if it was happening, rather than just track it? And if I may, on the Middle East, you said that the UK is willing to do its bit to try and make the ceasefire hold. What's your plan to contribute? Thanks.
John Healey (24:14):
Molly, I gave an answer to your first question earlier on, which is that you see a glimpse of what I've set out today of the British Armed Forces' ability to detect, to deter Russian malign activity that may threaten our undersea infrastructure. We have a range of capabilities in which, if necessary, we could take that steps further, including to respond if there is a question of Russian damage to our cables or to our pipelines. And I'm simply not going to set those out in public. It'll only make Putin wiser. But I believe the demonstration of what our armed forces have been able to do over more than a month says to Russia, "You can't get away with the covert operations that you want to mount in the Northern Atlantic, in the UK wider waters, and that threaten allies as well."
(25:26)
And on the question of our sort of contribution to the wider Middle East, you've seen in recent days, you saw last week our foreign secretary convene over 40 nations to try and develop a common understanding and consensus about how we can reinforce a ceasefire, how in the context of a ceasefire, we can work together to ensure that the Strait of Hormuz is reopened to commercial shipping with the confidence that that commercial shipping must have, that it will be allowed free and safe passage.
(26:08)
You've seen this week, our military planning HQ convene 30 nations, looking at the potential military options that could reinforce the conditions of a ceasefire and a free and open Strait of Hormuz. And you've got the Prime Minister this week out in the Middle East, talking to Gulf allies about exactly how Britain can work with them and with other allies to reinforce that drive to see stability restored to the Middle East, peace restored, and the long-term protection and security that we have to have restored also for our British interests out there in the region. Peter Walker.
Lizzy Buchan (27:02):
Hi, John. Thanks very much. You were very clear that you think the Russians took this action because of the distraction of the Middle East. The distraction came from a conflict which the UK government accepts was launched by the US without a plan, without an outcome.
(27:22)
Everybody knows that basically Russia seems to be emboldened by the fact that Donald Trump is unpredictable, at least in what he says and sometimes than what he does. Is that a fair assessment to say that your job is made more difficult because Putin can take advantage of the chaos caused by Trump?
(27:38)
And on a kind of parallel point, is the prime minister's role in the Middle East now, similar almost to his Ukraine role in being an ally and someone to negotiate things where allies can actually believe what he says and know he won't change his mind the next morning?
John Healey (27:57):
So, Putin would have wanted us, I expect, to be distracted. And my purpose today is to demonstrate to him publicly that we have not been, that we have our eye on him, that we recognize he and Russia pose the primary threat to UK security and NATO security. And we also know that Putin and Russia were linked with Iran before this current round of conflict erupted, that Russia was likely sharing intelligence, that was training Iranian forces in drone technology and drone tactics. And we've seen the way that what Russia is doing to attack Ukraine is reflected in many of the ways that Iran is threatening and attacking wider Middle Eastern countries.
(29:07)
And then finally, on the question of what now, where the UK can play a role diplomatically or in defense diplomacy in bringing countries together, in fostering a shared understanding of the threats, a definition of the sort of circumstances that may be necessary for a long-term ceasefire and opening of the Strait of Hormuz, we're ready to play that role as you've seen in recent weeks.
(29:47)
Those options are still being developed, those discussions are still continuing, and the circumstances within which any sort of options or actions could be taken are still
John Healey (30:00):
... still rapidly developing and depend critically on this central security and stability of the ceasefire, which is why we've been so strong in welcoming it and you've heard our foreign secretary today saying that we want it strengthened and we want all nations with an interest in peace in the Middle East to play their part. Finally, we've got Dan Bloom, POLITICO.
Shehab Khan (30:31):
Defense Secretary, are you planning to convene more meetings of the Hormuz Coalition in the next few days, given reports that the US wants to see concrete plans out of that coalition in the next few days? And can I just come back to the question on tolls? Britain has been leaving this military planning exactly to ensure that tolls can't be imposed on ships going through the Strait of Hormuz, but Donald Trump has mused about some kind of joint venture where the US will take money from tolls. So do you think he's being serious, and if he is, would you be prepared to deploy British military assets to stop tolls being imposed in the Strait of Hormuz by the US?
John Healey (31:13):
So look, Dan, I'm really not going to get into sort of what-ifs of that nature. Just simply isn't sensible. It isn't actually doable. What I will state is very clearly what I discussed and stated when I was in the Middle East last week, in discussions with Saudi Arabia, with Bahrain, and in Qatar, and all the Gulf countries are strongly of the same principled view as we are, that a compromise of that freedom of navigation of the seas, the introduction of any sort of pay-for-passage tolls, would create a potential principle that could be used and abused by others elsewhere. So we will continue to argue for that. We'll continue to try and build a strength of international opinion behind that principled position. And in terms of any next steps or convening of meetings, we'll announce anything if that is the case in due course, and I haven't got an update on that specific question for you today.
Lizzy Buchan (32:30):
[inaudible 00:32:32]
John Healey (32:32):
Thank you very much.
Lizzy Buchan (32:33):
Secretary [inaudible 00:32:34]
John Healey (32:34):
Johnny, you've had plenty already.
Lizzy Buchan (32:36):
... waters. Did you mean that the Russian submarines were operating inside UK territorial waters or in the waters close to the UK?
John Healey (32:48):
Well, I'm glad you asked, but I think you may not have heard me when I gave a very clear answer-
Lizzy Buchan (32:52):
Sorry.
John Healey (32:52):
... to one of your colleagues earlier on. These submarines have been operating in and around wider UK waters, and by that, I mean our exclusive economic zone waters and not our territorial waters. And they've been operating in and around the waters of other allies, which is why this has been an important operation that in part, we have led, but we have conducted in particular with the Norwegians, but with other allies, and I think you've had from the information I've been able to set out an indication of how substantial, how long-running, and how complex this operation is, and how well our military have been able to respond. So thank you all very much.