At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer delivering keynote speech at Munich Security Conference 2026 calling for European hard power and military preparedness

Europe Must Build “Hard Power” and Prepare to Fight, UK’s Starmer Declares at Munich Security Conference

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer delivered one of the most forceful calls for European military strength in recent memory on Saturday, telling leaders gathered at the Munich Security Conference that the continent must urgently build “hard power” and stand ready to fight if necessary. At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.” His stark message marked a decisive pivot in how Britain views its role in European security just over a decade after Brexit began fracturing UK-European relations.

A Blunt Wake-Up Call

Starmer didn’t sugarcoat his message. Standing before a packed room of global security leaders at the Munich conference, he made clear that Europe faces a moment of reckoning. At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”The Prime Minister directly challenged European nations to stop treating their security as someone else’s responsibility and start building real military muscle capable of deterring aggression. “We are not at a crossroads today, the road ahead is straight, and it is clear we must build our hard power, because that is the currency of the age,” At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”Starmer declared in his keynote address. His remarks followed opening comments by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who simnse  . Starmer pushed his argument even further with language rarely heard from British prime ministers in peacetime.He stated categorically, “We must be able to deter aggression, and yes, if necessary, we must be ready to fight, to do whatever it takes to protect our people, our values, and our way of life. As Europe, we must stand on our own two feet.” The “Sleeping Giant” That Needs to Wake Up One of Starmer’s most striking arguments centered on what he called Europe’s untapped potential. The British leader described Europe as a “sleeping giant” whose enormous economic and military capabilities somehow add up to less than they should.

---

“Our economies dwarf Russia’s more than 10 times over.Starmer elaborated, “We have enormous defense capabilities, but far too frequently, this amounts to less than the sum of its parts.” His point cut straight to a fundamental problem that has plagued European defense for years—individual countries maintain substantial military forces, but coordination remains weak and resources get duplicated unnecessarily. The numbers back up Starmer’s assessment. European NATO members collectively possess economies worth tens of trillions of dollars, millions of military personnel, At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”thousands of tanks and aircraft, and advanced defense industries. Yet Russia, with an economy smaller than Italy’s, has managed to prosecute a grinding war in Ukraine for years while European nations struggled to provide adequate military support.

From Overdependence to Interdependence

Starmer framed his call for European military strength not as a rejection of NATO or the transatlantic alliance, At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”but as an evolution toward what he termed “interdependence” rather than “overdependence” on the United States. This distinction matters tremendously in the current geopolitical climate. The British Prime Minister acknowledged that “the US remains an indispensable ally” while insisting that Britain’s future increasingly rests on closer ties with European powers. At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”His message aimed to reassure Americans that Europe would pull its weight while signaling to Europeans that they can no longer count on Washington to automatically solve every security challenge. This delicate balancing act reflects the complex reality facing European leaders. President Donald Trump has spent years demanding that NATO allies spend more on defense and rely less on American security guarantees.At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.” His recent threats to seize Greenland from Denmark and his sometimes hostile rhetoric toward European allies have accelerated European discussions about strategic autonomy.

The Brexit Chapter Is Closed

Starmer used his Munich platform to declare definitively that Britain has turned the page on the Brexit era.He stated categorically, “We are not the Britain of the Brexit years anymore.” At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”“Because we know that in a dangerous world, we would surrender control and not take control by turning inward, and I won’t let that happen,” This represents a remarkable evolution in British thinking. Just a few years ago, Brexit champions were celebrating Britain’s supposed liberation from European entanglements.At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.” Now the Labour Prime Minister stands before European leaders insisting that Britain must integrate more closely with the continent on defense and, surprisingly, on economic matters too. Starmer announced that Britain would explore moving closer to the European Union’s single market in certain sectors.He elaborated, “We want to collaborate to lead a generational shift in defense industrial cooperation.” At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”“Now this includes considering closer economic alignment once more. All of us want deeper economic integration, so we need to look at other areas where we could get closer to the single market, like that would work for both sides.” This economic dimension to Starmer’s argument recognizes a practical reality—effective defense industrial cooperation requires streamlined trade and regulatory alignment. At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”You can’t build a unified European defense industrial base while maintaining trade barriers and conflicting standards that complicate joint weapons development and procurement.

Putting Britain’s Money Where Its Mouth Is

Starmer didn’t just deliver stirring rhetoric; he announced concrete military commitments to back up his words.At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.” The Prime Minister revealed that Britain would deploy its carrier strike group to the North Atlantic and High North this year in what defense officials characterized as a “powerful demonstration of force” in response to Russian threats in the Arctic. The deployment, dubbed “Operation Firecrest,” will center on HMS Prince of Wales, the Royal Navy’s largest warship. At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”The carrier group will include accompanying Royal Navy warships, F-35 fighter jets, and helicopters, operating alongside American, Canadian, and other NATO forces. The UK Ministry of Defence indicated that US aircraft would also operate from the British carrier’s deck, demonstrating the integrated nature of allied operations. This deployment carries symbolic and strategic significance. The Arctic has become an increasingly contested region as melting ice opens new shipping routes and access to natural resources. Russia maintains a significant military presence in its Arctic territories and has invested heavily in capabilities there. By sending its premier naval asset to these waters, Britain signals its commitment to deterring Russian aggression and supporting allied security in a critical region.

The Russian Threat That Drives Everything

While Starmer focused his remarks on what Europe must do, the specter of Russian aggression provided the urgent context for his entire speech. The Prime Minister noted that Russia has demonstrated a “repeated appetite for aggression, bringing terrible suffering to the Ukrainian people.” But Starmer’s assessment of the Russian threat extended beyond the conventional military campaign in Ukraine. At a European security conference, UK Starmer says we need to build “hard power.”He warned that Moscow’s “hybrid threats extend across our continent, not just threatening our security, but tearing at our social contract, collaborating with populists who undermine our values, using disinformation to sow division.” This broader framing of the Russian challenge acknowledges that Moscow doesn’t just threaten Europe with tanks and missiles. Russian intelligence services have consistently worked to interfere in Western elections, amplify divisive political movements, spread conspiracy theories through social media, and undermine public faith in democratic institutions. Countering this multifaceted threat requires not just military hardware but societal resilience and information security.ilarly emphasized Europe’s need to shoulder greater responsibility for its own defe

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte reinforced the urgency of the Russian threat during his own Munich conference remarks. He revealed that Russia has suffered approximately 65,000 casualties over just the past two months in Ukraine—what he characterized as “crazy losses” that nonetheless haven’t deterred Moscow’s continued military operations.

Europe Takes Responsibility, Finally

Starmer’s message found strong echoes among other European leaders at the conference. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared that “Europe needs to step up and has to take on its responsibility” for its own security. She called for bringing the EU’s mutual defense clause “to life,” transforming what has been largely a theoretical commitment into practical cooperation. Von der Leyen highlighted how Europe’s support for Ukraine demonstrated growing strategic seriousness. “This is a true European awakening, and this is only the start of what we need to do,” she stated. Her comments reflected the dramatic shift in European defense thinking sparked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine—a conflict that shattered decades of assumptions about peace and security on the continent. French President Emmanuel Macron told the conference that “this is the right time for a strong Europe,” while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz indicated willingness to engage with Russia if Moscow demonstrates serious interest in peace negotiations. “The Europeans take more responsibility for their own defense,” the NATO secretary general observed, indicating “a huge shift in mindset within NATO.” Even US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, representing an administration often critical of European defense efforts, struck a positive tone about burden-sharing. He expressed that the Trump administration wants “Europe to be strong” and believes “Europe must survive,” adding that Europeans and Americans “belong together.” However, Rubio also acknowledged that if necessary, America was “prepared to do this alone”—a subtle reminder that European defense commitments need to translate into actual capabilities.

The Money Question Nobody Wants to Answer

Starmer’s stirring call for European “hard power” raises an uncomfortable question that his speech largely sidestepped: where will the money come from? Building the military capabilities he describes requires massive, sustained defense spending increases across Europe. Von der Leyen announced that European countries’ military spending jumped 80% in 2025 compared to pre-Ukraine conflict levels—a staggering increase that still leaves many nations short of their commitments. NATO members have now committed to spending 5% of GDP on defense, up from the previous 2% target that many countries consistently failed to meet. For context, increasing defense spending to 5% of GDP represents an enormous fiscal challenge. Britain, France, and Germany would each need to find tens of billions of additional euros or pounds annually in their budgets. This money would need to come from either tax increases, borrowing, or cuts to popular social programs—all politically difficult choices that governments have historically avoided. The economic dimension becomes even more complex when you consider that European economies have struggled with sluggish growth, aging populations, high public debt levels, and the ongoing costs of managing migration and climate change. Asking European taxpayers to fund a massive military buildup while their healthcare systems face funding crises and their pension programs teeter toward insolvency represents a tremendous political lift.

Defense Industrial Awakening

Beyond pure spending levels, Europe faces serious challenges in actually converting money into military capability. The continent’s defense industry, while sophisticated, suffers from fragmentation across national lines. Every major European country wants to maintain its own defense industrial base, leading to duplicative and expensive programs that fail to achieve economies of scale. Starmer’s call for a “generational shift in defense industrial cooperation” acknowledges this problem. European leaders increasingly recognize that they need to consolidate defense production, standardize equipment, and create genuinely European champions capable of competing with American defense giants and supplying the continent’s security needs. Recent efforts to boost European ammunition production for Ukraine have exposed how underdeveloped these capabilities became during decades of peace. When the war started, European factories simply couldn’t ramp up artillery shell production fast enough to meet Ukraine’s needs, forcing European countries to scour global markets for supplies while slowly rebuilding manufacturing capacity. Creating a unified European defense market would require countries to overcome fierce protection of national defense champions, accept job losses in less efficient sectors, and agree on common technical standards and acquisition procedures. The European Union has taken some steps in this direction, but progress remains frustratingly slow compared to the urgent timeline that strategic realities demand.

What About the Troops?

All the defense spending and industrial cooperation in the world means nothing without trained, motivated personnel willing to serve. Yet most European militaries face serious recruitment and retention challenges. Young Europeans increasingly view military service as an unattractive career option, preferring civilian opportunities in a tight labor market. Britain’s own military situation illustrates the problem. UK defense officials have warned that the British army would struggle in a potential war against a peer adversary due to years of underfunding. Most alarmingly, experts estimate that Britain would run out of ammunition within just days if engaged in a large-scale conventional conflict—hardly the “hard power” Starmer advocates building. Some European countries maintain conscription systems that ensure adequate numbers of trained personnel, but these systems have become politically unpopular as populations age and civilian labor markets compete for young workers. Other nations rely on all-volunteer professional forces that struggle to fill their ranks even during peacetime. Starmer’s vision of a Europe “ready to fight” would require not just equipment but a cultural shift in how Europeans think about military service and national defense. This represents perhaps an even harder challenge than finding the money or building the factories.

The American Wild Card

While Starmer carefully emphasized that European security autonomy doesn’t mean abandoning the transatlantic alliance, the elephant in the room remains American politics. President Trump’s unpredictable approach to NATO and his threats against allies like Denmark create uncertainty about America’s long-term security commitment to Europe. Trump has consistently argued that European nations free-ride on American security guarantees, using the money they save on defense to fund generous social programs while Americans foot the bill for protecting the West. His administration’s push for European allies to dramatically increase defense spending represents a continuation of long-standing American frustrations, though Trump expresses these grievances far more bluntly than previous presidents. The possibility of a future American administration deciding to radically reduce its European military presence or even withdraw from NATO altogether no longer seems unthinkable. European leaders recognize they need to develop genuine capabilities to defend the continent even if American support diminishes or disappears—hence Starmer’s emphasis on moving from “overdependence to interdependence.” However, building these capabilities while maintaining the transatlantic alliance requires careful diplomatic navigation. European leaders must convince Washington that they’re serious about burden-sharing without suggesting that they’re preparing for an American departure. They need to develop autonomous capabilities without creating the impression that they’re building an alternative to NATO. And they must increase defense spending dramatically while managing domestic political pressures to maintain social programs that their populations expect.

Ukraine’s Shadow Over Everything

The Munich Security Conference unfolded against the backdrop of the grinding war in Ukraine, which entered its third year with no clear end in sight. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky attended the conference, meeting with multiple allies to discuss continued support for his country’s defense. Trump has repeatedly called on Zelensky to “get moving” to end the war, suggesting that Ukraine should be more willing to negotiate with Russia. However, Secretary of State Rubio acknowledged at Munich that “we don’t know if the Russians are serious about ending the war.” The war’s outcome will profoundly shape European security for decades. If Ukraine successfully repels the Russian invasion with Western support, it would validate the value of sustained defense investment and military aid. If Ukraine faces defeat or forced acceptance of unfavorable peace terms, it would demonstrate that European security guarantees remain hollow and that aggression can succeed. Starmer’s call for European “hard power” implicitly recognizes that the West’s response to Ukraine will determine whether other potential aggressors view military action as viable. A Russia that achieves its objectives in Ukraine would likely face emboldened Chinese ambitions toward Taiwan, Iranian regional assertiveness, and instability in other contested areas around the world.

The Food Security Dimension

In an interesting aside at the Munich conference, EU Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen warned about threats to food supply chains, arguing that “you cannot build a continent on an empty stomach and you cannot win a war on an empty stomach.” His comments highlighted an often-overlooked dimension of modern security—the vulnerability of complex global supply chains. European dependence on external food production could leave the continent vulnerable to coercion or disruption during conflicts. Russia’s weaponization of grain exports from Ukraine during the war demonstrated how food security intertwines with military security. Building genuine European strategic autonomy requires attention to these economic dimensions alongside traditional military capabilities.

The Path Forward Remains Uncertain

Starmer’s Munich speech articulated a compelling vision for European security: a continent that possesses genuine military power, maintains strong transatlantic ties while reducing overdependence on America, cooperates closely on defense industrial matters, and stands ready to fight if necessary to defend its values and interests. Translating this vision into reality presents extraordinary challenges. European governments must convince skeptical populations to accept sustained large increases in defense spending. They need to reform and consolidate fragmented defense industries. They must recruit and train sufficient military personnel. And they have to accomplish all this while managing other pressing priorities from climate change to healthcare to pension sustainability. The urgency Starmer conveyed—his insistence that “the road ahead is straight” rather than a matter of choice—reflects a growing recognition among European leaders that their security environment has fundamentally changed. The assumption that history had ended and that Europe would enjoy permanent peace collapsed when Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine. The assumption that America would always guarantee European security has eroded as American politics become more unpredictable and American attention shifts toward China and the Indo-Pacific. Whether Europe actually builds the “hard power” Starmer demands remains to be seen. What’s clear is that European leaders finally recognize they need to—the question is whether they can overcome the political, economic, and practical obstacles standing in their way. Saturday’s speeches in Munich might mark the beginning of Europe’s genuine security awakening, or they might simply be more talk before comfortable inaction reasserts itself. The next few years will reveal which path Europe ultimately chooses. Q: What did Keir Starmer say at the Munich Security Conference? A: Starmer called for Europe to build “hard power” and be ready to fight if necessary, saying Europe must stand on its own two feet rather than overdepending on the US. Q: What is “hard power” according to Starmer? A: Hard power refers to military and economic strength—the actual capability to deter aggression through force rather than just diplomatic influence. Q: Why did Starmer say Europe is a “sleeping giant”? A: Because European economies are 10 times larger than Russia’s with huge defense capabilities, yet these resources don’t add up to effective collective strength. Q: Is Britain moving closer to the EU after Brexit? A: Yes, Starmer announced Britain would explore closer alignment with the EU’s single market in certain sectors and pursue deeper defense industrial cooperation. Q: What military commitments did the UK announce? A: Britain will deploy its carrier strike group led by HMS Prince of Wales to the North Atlantic this year in Operation Firecrest. Q: When did the Munich Security Conference take place? A: The 62nd Munich Security Conference took place from February 13-15, 2026, with Starmer speaking on Saturday, February 14. Q: Who else spoke at the Munich conference? A: Key speakers included EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, and Ukrainian President Zelensky. Q: How much are NATO members now expected to spend on defense? A: NATO members have committed to spending 5% of GDP on defense, up from the previous 2% target that many failed to meet. Q: What did Starmer say about US relations? A: He emphasized the US remains an indispensable ally but said Europe must move from “overdependence to interdependence” with America. Q: How has European defense spending changed recently? A: European military spending increased 80% in 2025 compared to pre-Ukraine conflict levels, though many countries still fall short of commitments. Q: What is the Russian casualty rate in Ukraine? A: NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte reported Russia suffered approximately 65,000 casualties in just the past two months—what he called “crazy losses.” Q: Did Starmer criticize Brexit? A: Starmer declared “we are not the Britain of the Brexit years anymore,” signaling a clear pivot toward closer European cooperation on security and economics. Q: What does “standing on our own two feet” mean for Europe? A: It means developing genuine military capabilities to defend the continent even if American support diminishes, rather than relying primarily on US security guarantees. Q: How did the US respond to Starmer’s speech? A: Secretary of State Marco Rubio struck a positive tone, saying the US wants Europe to be strong and that Europe and America “belong together.” Q: What are the main challenges to building European hard power? A: Major obstacles include finding funding for massive defense spending increases, consolidating fragmented defense industries, recruiting sufficient military personnel, and overcoming political resistance. Here are your Munich Security Conference questions answered in a **compact 2‑line FAQ** format (each question + answer fits in two lines). — **Q: What were the dates of the Munich Security Conference 2026?** A: The 62nd MSC took place from **February 13–15, 2026** at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof in Munich. **Q: Who were the key participants at MSC 2026?** A: Over 1,000 participants from 115+ countries, including Keir Starmer, Marco Rubio, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Emmanuel Macron, and a record US delegation. **Q: What was the main theme of Keir Starmer’s speech?** A: Starmer urged Europe to “stand on our own two feet,” calling Europe a “sleeping giant” that must increase defense spending. **Q: Where can I read Keir Starmer’s speech in full?** A: The full transcript is available on the UK government’s official website and the MSC’s media library. **Q: What did Marco Rubio say at the MSC?** A: Rubio called for a “recalibrated” transatlantic alliance, stating “America First doesn’t mean America Alone.” **Q: What major announcements were made for Ukraine?** A: Zelenskyy announced a €90 billion aid package from Denmark, and Starmer pledged over £500 million for Ukraine’s air defense. **Q: What was the motto of MSC 2026?** A: The motto was **“Under Destruction,”** reflecting the return of power politics and weakened global security guardrails. **Q: Where can I find all MSC 2026 speeches?** A: Videos and transcripts are posted on the official Munich Security Conference YouTube channel and website. **Q: What are the benefits of a strong European military presence?** A: A robust military presence can enhance regional stability, deter potential aggressors, and foster a sense of unity among European nations. By investing in hard power, Europe can address emerging threats more effectively and ensure that its interests are prioritized on the global stage. Furthermore, a self-reliant defense strategy can strengthen transatlantic ties, as both Europe and the US work collaboratively towards common security goals. A strong European military presence also supports joint operations and interoperability among member states, leading to more efficient responses to crises. It can stimulate technological advancements through defense innovation, benefiting both military and civilian sectors. Additionally, increased military capabilities can empower Europe to play a more significant role in international peacekeeping efforts. Ultimately, a cohesive defense strategy can reinforce Europe’s sovereignty and resilience in an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape.