Reform UK has appointed its first dedicated defence spokesperson after more than two years without a senior figure overseeing the party’s military policy, as growing concerns over Russia and Britain’s national security increase pressure on the right-wing party to present a comprehensive defence strategy.
The party announced on Thursday that Angus MacIntyre, a former Royal Air Force wing commander who retired last week after 40 years of military service, would take responsibility for developing its defence policy ahead of the next general election.
The appointment marks an attempt by Reform UK leader Nigel Farage to address mounting criticism that the party has failed to establish a credible position on Britain’s military capabilities, defence spending and the threat posed by Russia.
Despite its significant rise in opinion polls over the past two years, Reform has struggled to articulate a detailed alternative to the Labour government’s military spending plans and has faced difficulties establishing meaningful relationships with Britain’s defence industry.
A senior Reform official said the party wanted to develop a comprehensive programme that could be implemented if it entered government, rather than publish a collection of headline commitments without explaining how they would be delivered.
“We want to come into government with a comprehensive program that we can deliver to the machine, rather than have a flimsy manifesto with a few headline commitments and ask them to work out how to deliver it,” the official said.
The official, like others discussing internal policy matters, was granted anonymity.
MacIntyre’s appointment comes at a politically sensitive time for Farage. Russia’s war against Ukraine, increasing tensions between Moscow and Western governments, and concerns about Britain’s military readiness have pushed defence and national security higher on the political agenda.
Introducing MacIntyre, Farage said his military experience demonstrated how seriously Reform UK viewed Britain’s defence responsibilities.
“Having someone of Angus’ stature and calibre speak for us on defence shows how seriously Reform UK takes protecting the interests of Britain’s military,” Farage said.
MacIntyre, meanwhile, accused successive Conservative and Labour governments of weakening the country’s armed forces through years of insufficient investment.
“Neither can be trusted. Only Reform UK can fix and rebuild our armed forces,” he said in a statement.
Although Reform has increasingly positioned itself as a potential governing alternative, Farage’s past comments about Russian President Vladimir Putin have complicated the party’s efforts to establish a convincing national security position.
In 2014, Farage said he admired Putin as an “operator”, remarks that have continued to follow him as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine reshaped European security.
Farage has subsequently attempted to distance himself from those comments, describing Putin as “a very bad dude” and arguing that Britain should be prepared to shoot down Russian military aircraft if they enter British airspace.
However, his position on Ukraine has remained politically contentious.
Farage has described Kyiv as “corrupt” and promised to review Britain’s military assistance to Ukraine, raising questions about whether a Reform government would maintain the current level of support for the country.
His comments have also created concerns within Britain’s defence industry, where companies have become increasingly involved in supplying equipment, weapons and other military capabilities to Ukraine.
One defence industry representative said Farage’s statements had been unhelpful, both commercially and politically.
“A lot of money for the defence industry does come from contracts with Ukraine, and it’s also that moral thing with the defence industry — they want to support Ukraine,” the representative said.
The issue presents a challenge for Reform because its leader’s comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the party’s wider electoral base.
A YouGov poll published last month found that Russia was overwhelmingly regarded as the biggest threat facing Britain, ranking significantly above concerns about uncontrolled artificial intelligence.
Sophia Gaston, a British foreign policy researcher who authored a report on public attitudes towards defence scheduled for publication on Thursday, said support for increased military spending was particularly strong among Reform voters.
According to Gaston, 83 per cent of Reform supporters favoured higher defence spending, a larger proportion than supporters of any other political party.
She also highlighted the gap between Farage’s sometimes ambiguous position on Ukraine and the more hawkish attitudes of his supporters towards authoritarian states.
“While there has been a lot of attention on Nigel Farage’s somewhat mixed feelings towards Ukraine and NATO more generally, he must tread a careful line as that does not necessarily reflect the views of his voters, of whom 92% regard Russia as a threat to global peace,” Gaston said.
“All in all, Reform voters remain Eurosceptic, Atlanticist, hawkish towards authoritarian nations, and in favour of a more defensive state,” she added.
The findings suggest that Reform cannot rely solely on its traditional Eurosceptic positioning if it wants to convince voters that it can manage Britain’s defence and international security responsibilities.
Reform’s existing defence commitments largely reflect the party’s broader political priorities, particularly immigration control, opposition to diversity initiatives and improving benefits for military personnel and veterans.
The party has called for the Royal Navy to be deployed to help prevent small-boat crossings in the English Channel. It also wants to end diversity initiatives within the armed forces and cadet organisations, grant military personnel immunity from prosecution for actions undertaken during combat operations, and give veterans priority access to social housing.
On defence spending, Reform has pledged to increase the military budget to 3 per cent of gross domestic product by 2030 and support NATO’s longer-term target of 3.5 per cent by 2035.
These commitments broadly align with the Labour government’s spending ambitions.
Reform says it would finance the proposed increases through £45 billion in cuts to other areas of public expenditure, including welfare.
However, the absence of a detailed explanation of how additional funding would be allocated has raised questions about the party’s ability to translate its spending promises into a practical military programme.
Britain faces several interconnected defence challenges, including replenishing weapons stockpiles, strengthening naval capabilities, improving air defence, expanding ammunition production and modernising military equipment.
It must also address recruitment and retention problems, as well as concerns about the readiness of its armed forces to respond to a major conflict.
Earlier this summer, Reform MP Danny Kruger offered some indication of the party’s broader ambitions, calling for Britain to “become a great power once again”.
Kruger argued that the country should move beyond its position as a regional military heavyweight and become Europe’s leading economic, technological, diplomatic and security power.
He also emphasised the importance of NATO, national defence and a stronger response to Russian hybrid interference.
His proposals included a fundamental overhaul of Britain’s defence procurement system, potentially removing responsibility for procurement from the Ministry of Defence.
The suggestion reflects growing frustration across Britain’s defence sector over delays, cost overruns and difficulties delivering major military programmes.
Reform’s lack of a dedicated defence spokesperson has also created practical difficulties for companies seeking to understand the party’s priorities and engage with its policymakers.
Defence industry representatives have questioned how businesses can develop relationships with a political party that has not established a clear point of contact or published a comprehensive military strategy.
“They don’t have any defence policy, and they’re therefore not asking any questions, and have no person to engage with,” one industry representative said.
The representative criticised the party’s limited public commitments, arguing that its approach had largely focused on increasing military spending and removing what it considers excessive political and diversity initiatives from the armed forces.
“Their only policy really on defence is: ‘Well, we want to spend more money, and we’re not going to tell you what and when, and also we want to get the woke out of the military,'” the representative said.
Another defence sector representative described the absence of a dedicated spokesperson as particularly surprising given the deterioration of the international security environment.
“There has been nothing significant on defence which, in addition to a lack of defence spokesperson, is baffling given the geopolitical environment we are facing,” the representative said.
The appointment of MacIntyre is expected to provide the party with a more structured approach to engaging with defence companies, military experts and other stakeholders.
Following MacIntyre’s appointment, Reform UK plans to develop and publish detailed policy documents on defence, following the approach it has taken in recent months on issues including immigration and the economy.
The party also intends to expand its foreign policy team over the next year, according to a senior Reform adviser.
The challenge will be to turn its broad spending commitments into a coherent military strategy that addresses Britain’s operational requirements, industrial capacity and international obligations.
For Reform, the issue is increasingly important. Its growing electoral support has brought greater scrutiny of whether the party is prepared to govern, particularly on issues involving national security and Britain’s role in NATO.
MacIntyre’s military experience could help address concerns about the party’s lack of defence expertise. However, his appointment alone will not resolve questions about how Reform would deter Russia, support Ukraine, strengthen NATO commitments or rebuild Britain’s defence industrial base.
With Russia remaining a major concern among British voters, the party will need to demonstrate that its ambitions extend beyond increasing military expenditure and changing personnel policies.
The development of a detailed defence programme will therefore be an important test of whether Reform can transform its electoral momentum into a credible governing alternative on national security.
