IN THE summer of 2013, Jeremy Corbyn spoke at a People’s Assembly conference on the theme of welfare not warfare. During his contribution to the conference, Corbyn made the point that due to imperial attitudes, Britain insisted on being a nuclear state and intervening across the world.

Corbyn went on to say that a huge arms conversion programme to convert the arms industry into something that did socially useful work was vital. Corbyn, with his usual insight, was arguing for a policy approach based on welfare, not warfare. Twelve years on, Corbyn’s words at the 2013 conference seem remarkably up to date and frankly spot on.

At the present time, working-class people face cuts to local services, NHS staff shortages, and a substantial cost-of-living crisis. In the last few weeks, the government has announced it intends to make life more difficult for households relying on disability related benefits. This attack on disabled people follows on from the abolition of the winter fuel allowance for pensioners, the maintenance of the two-child benefit cap and the refusal to pay the Waspi women.

While working-class people face attacks on so many fronts, there still appears to be plenty of money for increased military spending.

In response to the possibility of a negotiated outcome to the dreadful Ukraine-Russia war, it seems that the approach of Keir Starmer and some other European governments is to ramp up military spending rather than think about future European-wide security arrangements which are inclusive and based on peaceful co-existence between all the countries of Europe, including Russia.

As Isobel Lindsay, vice-chair of Scottish CND, said at a recent seminar: “Russia makes up around 40 per cent of the land mass of Europe and is the biggest country in Europe. Perhaps it is time to work out ways of co-existing again with Russia on the same continent.”

Supporting a welfare not warfare approach within communities and trade union structures is not easy at this moment in time. The pro-big-business press and a range of politicians are constantly putting out messages in support of more military spending and reducing expenditure in areas such as benefits and international aid.

However, the good news is that the peace movement is pushing back on the current attempts to build support for ever-increasing military expenditure.

Recently, the Peace Pledge Union (PPU) produced an excellent leaflet giving 10 solid and sensible reasons for not increasing military expenditure. The PPU reminds us in the leaflet that Prime Minister Starmer has pledged to increase Britain’s military budget to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027.

Research by the PPU also shows that, remarkably, in 2024 Britain was the fifth highest military spending country in the world. This is not to mention that the ongoing replacement of Britain’s nuclear weapons system is projected to cost an eye-watering £205 billion.

The PPU and other organisations have also pointed out that this colossal level of military expenditure diverts money away from where it is most needed. In fact, it diverts money into the pockets of arms companies.

So we have a situation where disabled people face having their benefits cut, public services continue to lack proper funding, and we have a shortage of decent housing, while arms companies enjoy soaring share prices and massive profits.

Back in the 1950s, Ralph Nader, the US lawyer and political activist, is credited with coining the term “corporate welfare.” It seems to me that modern-day arms companies are in receipt of corporate welfare via lucrative government contracts and other support mechanisms.

It is often overlooked that claims about the economic benefits of military spending are overblown. Research by the Scottish Trade Union Peace Network and CND has shown that military spending has one of the lowest employment multipliers of all economic categories. This research has shown that investing in areas such as health is around two and a half times more jobs-rich than investment in military spending.

The research also shows that investment in areas such as construction and a number of other manufacturing sectors is also far more jobs-rich than military spending.

It is interesting that Diane Abbott MP has tabled an early day motion calling for the reversal of international aid cuts and other public spending cuts to fund increased defence spending. This is a really positive development, and Abbott deserves credit for taking this initiative.

It is important in the current warmongering climate for the peace movement to strengthen the current work it is doing. Therefore, posing an alternative to current government policies around a welfare not warfare approach is vital at this time.

I am pleased to report that Stop the War Scotland organised a welfare not warfare national demonstration on Saturday May 10 in Glasgow. This demonstration heard a range of speakers make a compelling case for diverting money from military spending into sectors such as the NHS, education and decent affordable housing.

However, it is important that work around the welfare not warfare heading is also developed via local activities, such as street stalls in town centres and motions to trade union branches. As well as organising public activities, we need to be mindful of the reasons behind the Starmer government’s warmongering policy direction.

As the organisation Rethinking Security has said: “The term ‘security’ has become synonymous with armed force — however, real security includes freedom from poverty, the guarantee of housing, healthcare and education.”

Unfortunately, the current Starmer-led government seems more than happy to have a narrow military-based view of security issues. This narrow view of security is now driving the government’s push for increased military spending.

The current Defence Secretary John Healey never seems to miss the opportunity to bang the drum for increased military spending. I have yet to hear him say anything about how Britain could play a role in promoting a peaceful world through encouraging diplomacy and dialogue.

One of the tactics that Healey and other hawkish commentators use to justify their calls for increased military spending is to talk up the so-called Russian threat. Indeed it has been depressing in recent weeks to listen to the BBC’s Today in Parliament programme and hear MPs of all parties talk up the case for more spending on weapons of war.

While ignoring the warmongering policies of successive British and US governments, they are happy to lambast Putin and Russia and the Chinese leadership to buttress their arguments for more military spending. It is time for most Westminster MPs, in particular, to stop framing Russia’s military action in Ukraine as the first step in a Russian plan of broader European conquest.

As the US-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft said in its July 2024 report, Right Sizing the Russian Threat to Europe: “A close examination of Russian intent and military capabilities shows that Russia likely has neither the capability or intent to launch a war of aggression against Nato members.”

The same report also highlights that Nato currently has a greater than three-to-one advantage over Russia in active duty ground forces. The report also makes the point that this numerical advantage will be even greater in the air and at sea. The report highlights that Nato has a remarkable 10-to-one lead in military aircraft over Russia.

This report, along with the work of CND and Stop the War, would be a useful read for MPs who seem wedded to the notion of an overwhelming military threat from Russia to justify their reckless public pronouncements in support of ever-increasing military spending.

It seems now is the time for the Scottish and British peace movements to redouble their efforts in the struggle for a peaceful world and make welfare not warfare one of the main rallying calls. At this difficult and violent time for our world, it is worth remembering the words of philosopher Bertrand Russell: “War does not determine who is right — only who is left.”

Arthur West is the former chair of Scottish CND and a member of the Scottish Trade Union Peace Network.