The United Kingdom may soon find itself contributing soldiers to European Union military operations, as Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government negotiates a landmark defence and security partnership with Brussels.
According to a leaked classified memo, British troops could be deployed on EU military and civilian missions as a condition for accessing the bloc’s ambitious £127 billion Security Action for Europe (Safe) rearmament fund.
This potential development has ignited a wave of criticism, with opponents warning that it could mark a significant step toward re-integrating Britain into the EU’s defence framework—something they describe as a “backdoor” route into an EU Army.
The confidential document, seen by The Telegraph, reveals that under the terms of the draft agreement, the UK would be invited to participate in EU-led missions and operations.
While the partnership would not legally bind Britain to every EU military decision, it would open the door for British forces to be called upon in regions like Somalia or the Central African Republic, where the EU has historically deployed troops as part of its Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).
The agreement is expected to be a central agenda item at the upcoming UK-EU summit in London scheduled for May 19.
The proposed pact, reportedly spearheaded by the EU’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, outlines that non-EU countries must establish a formal security and defence partnership to be eligible for participation in the Safe fund.
This scheme aims to boost Europe’s military capabilities by pooling resources from EU member states and third-party partners, enabling the procurement of advanced weaponry and defence equipment.
For the UK, inclusion in this programme would be a boon to the domestic defence industry, allowing companies like BAE Systems to compete for lucrative contracts across the continent.
However, the deal comes at a cost.
One particularly controversial clause would see the UK surrender access to its sovereign fishing waters for at least three years, granting EU fishing fleets rights previously curtailed by Brexit.
This concession has reignited the long-simmering debate over control of British waters—an issue that played a pivotal role in the 2016 referendum campaign.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy, speaking from Poland while attending meetings with EU counterparts, confirmed that discussions on the UK-EU Defence Security Partnership are ongoing.
“We’re pleased that we are now negotiating with our friends in Europe,” he said.
“The UK will consider its participation in the EU CSDP civilian missions and military operations and missions, upon the invitation of the EU.”
Critics argue that Starmer’s Labour government is effectively reversing core tenets of Brexit by aligning too closely with Brussels on foreign and defence policy.
Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, was among those quick to condemn the move, branding it “a betrayal of British sovereignty” and accusing Starmer of attempting to stitch the UK back into EU structures without public consent.
“Two-tier Keir has sold Britain out again,” Farage said in a video statement.
“We voted to take back control, not to hand our troops over to Brussels.”
Proponents of the deal, however, maintain that in a rapidly changing global security environment, international cooperation is essential.
With conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, and potential escalations involving NATO, the UK cannot afford to operate in isolation.
Supporters believe the partnership would strengthen Europe’s collective security, provide economic benefits for British defence firms, and help restore post-Brexit diplomatic relations with the continent.
Still, concerns remain about the democratic oversight of such deployments.
The EU has historically struggled to mobilise its battlegroups due to the requirement of unanimous approval from member states.
Critics fear that, despite this safeguard, Britain could be drawn into foreign conflicts without sufficient parliamentary scrutiny or public debate.
The timing of the negotiations is also politically sensitive.
With a general election looming in the UK and pressure mounting over national defence spending, Starmer’s government is walking a tightrope.
On one hand, it must show a commitment to strengthening the UK’s global standing; on the other, it must reassure Brexit voters that it is not undoing the referendum’s outcome.
The leaked memo and the surrounding controversy have also reignited calls for greater transparency in post-Brexit negotiations.
Many analysts point out that deals of such magnitude should not be confined to closed-door discussions but brought before Parliament for open debate.
They argue that military commitments, especially those that may place British troops in harm’s way, require full democratic accountability.
Furthermore, the inclusion of the fishing rights concession has angered coastal communities and fishing associations that were promised full control over British waters post-Brexit.
“This is an insult to British fishermen,” said one industry representative.
“We were sold a vision of sovereignty, and now we’re handing our waters back in exchange for weapons contracts. It’s a slap in the face.”
As the May 19 summit approaches, the political stakes are high.
The government must balance strategic military alliances with domestic political realities.
While deeper ties with Europe may offer economic and security advantages, the optics of such a move—especially involving British troop deployments—could prove politically explosive.
The broader question raised by this unfolding situation is whether Brexit truly represented a permanent break from European integration, or merely a pause in a longer, more complex relationship.
For now, one thing is clear: Britain’s foreign and defence policy is once again being shaped not just in Westminster, but in Brussels.
