The Guardian view on the defence investment plan: the UK needs security, not dependency on a wayward US | Editorial

Sir Keir Starmer cuts civilian investment while deepening reliance on American power. That doesn't feel like national renewal

Since Brexit, Daphne du Maurier's final novel, Rule Britannia, has been seen as a prescient warning about the UK cutting itself adrift from Europe. After joining and then leaving the EU's predecessor, the Common Market, in a referendum, Du Maurier imagined the UK facing such economic instability that its prime minister submits to a US takeover. Britain is occupied by US forces, sparking an uprising that eventually forces them to leave. Sir Keir Starmer's defence investment plan (Dip) would not belong in Du Maurier's novel, but has the same nightmare logic: a Britain adrift from Europe told that fiscal necessity and national security require deeper incorporation into American power.

It shows the strain inside Sir Keir's government that the plan took a year to move from strategic defence review to partial funding plan. John Healey, the former defence secretary, resigned after deciding that the Treasury's offer could not fund the strategy. His successor, Dan Jarvis, told MPs that the plan was worth 298bn over four years, which is 15bn above last year's spending review settlement. Mr Jarvis said that he had secured 1.5bn more than was on offer when he arrived. Against the defence ministry's demands, that looks less like a breakthrough than proof of why Mr Healey walked.