Europe
UK intelligence oversight in crisis amid budget cuts and rising threats, report finds
The UK Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has published its comprehensive annual report, examining the country’s national security architecture and the activities of the intelligence community.
The document, the first report of its kind published since 2023, details the operational challenges and evolving threat perceptions faced by agencies such as MI5, MI6 (SIS), and GCHQ, while presenting striking data on serious shortcomings in oversight mechanisms.
The report stated that at a time when state-sponsored threats, the terror threat, and cyberattacks are simultaneously on the rise, the Committee responsible for overseeing these activities on behalf of Parliament has reached a point where it “cannot fulfill its statutory functions.”
Oversight mechanism in a resource crisis
One of the most notable sections of the report highlights that while the budget and staff numbers of the British Intelligence Community have rapidly increased, the Committee that oversees them has been forced to downsize.
According to the document, while the intelligence agencies’ budget has increased by £3 billion annually compared to 2014, the Committee’s budget has decreased by 23% in real terms over the same period.
Similarly, while MI5, GCHQ, and other security units have doubled their staff numbers, the Committee’s staff has been reduced by 40%.
Committee members emphasized that this is not merely an administrative issue but a direct blow to Parliament’s ability to scrutinize “activities conducted in secret and funded by the public purse.”
The report asserted that the Committee should have an independent office and that the Cabinet Office’s control over Committee staff is “unacceptable.”
The China threat and the “Whole-of-State” approach
The Committee described the threat posed by China to the UK’s national security as “comprehensive and complex.”
The report claimed that Chinese intelligence is “almost certainly the largest intelligence apparatus in the world” and that it targets UK interests in an “aggressive and prolific” manner.
Highlighting Beijing’s use of a “whole-of-state” approach, the report alleged that state-owned enterprises, academic institutions, and even ordinary citizens “can be co-opted into espionage and interference operations.”
The Committee found the British government’s strategy against this threat to be inadequate, stating that the pace of policy development is far too slow compared to the scale of the threat.
The report included the following statement regarding the government’s China policy:
“I welcome the Government’s attempt to respond to our Report. However, to imply, as the Government has, that our findings are out of date is misleading. We have monitored and noted all relevant developments throughout the Report, up to two months before publication. Given the glacial pace at which the Government’s China policy has evolved, this has not been difficult to do.”
The Committee criticized the government’s reluctance to include China in the “Enhanced Tier” of the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (FIRS) under the new National Security Act.
Details on Russia and Iran
The document also claimed that threats from Russia and Iran remain at a high level, asserting that Russia has “embarked on sabotage campaigns across Europe to destabilize Western support for Ukraine.”
It was noted that in May 2024, the UK expelled the Russian military attaché and removed the diplomatic protection from several Russian-owned properties.
Iran, meanwhile, was alleged to be “continuing its plots to assassinate and kidnap dissidents on UK soil.”
Terror threat at a “serious” level
The terror threat level in the UK was stated to remain at “SUBSTANTIAL.” It was disclosed that MI5 and the police have thwarted 43 late-stage terrorist plots between March 2017 and March 2025.
According to the report, the primary threat in the country continues to be Islamist terrorism, while the threat from Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism (ERWT) also persists.
It was stated that the conflict between Israel and Hamas has had a “galvanizing effect” on extremist groups in the UK, and organizations like Al-Qaeda and ISIS are using the situation for their own propaganda.
The terror threat related to Northern Ireland has been downgraded to “SUBSTANTIAL,” but it was noted that groups like the New IRA maintain their intent to attack and that pressure from security forces must be sustained.
Crisis in meetings with the Prime Minister
The report also documented the breakdown in relations between the Committee and the Prime Minister. It was noted that from its establishment in 1994, the Committee held regular annual meetings with the Prime Minister for 20 years, but the last meeting took place in December 2014. This disconnection, lasting over a decade, was said to have weakened the oversight mechanism.
However, the report mentioned that the new Prime Minister, who took office after the July 2024 general election, has taken steps to change this situation and has requested a meeting with the Committee. The Committee described this initiative as “positive engagement.”
Legislative and authority debates
The Committee stated that it actively participated in the processes for the 2023 National Security Act and the 2024 Investigatory Powers (Amendment) Act. It was emphasized that during the changes to the “Triple Lock” mechanism, the Committee objected to the broad powers proposed by the government regarding the delegation of the Prime Minister’s authority, ensuring that stricter safeguards were added to the law.
Furthermore, it was criticized that the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed under the 2013 Justice and Security Act is outdated.
It was noted that intelligence activities are increasingly being shifted to policy departments (such as the Investment Security Unit), but these units fall outside the Committee’s oversight jurisdiction.
The Committee called on the government to remain committed to its promise of “oversight of the full range of intelligence and security activities.”
“Artificial intelligence has increased the volume and impact of cyberattacks”
The report also touched upon the activities of GCHQ and the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), warning that artificial intelligence is being used to increase the volume and impact of cyberattacks.
It was predicted that state-sponsored actors and cybercriminals could use AI tools to launch more sophisticated attacks. Ransomware attacks, in particular, were identified as the most immediate threat to the UK’s critical national infrastructure.
The report also drew attention to the cyber-espionage activities of the China-based “APT31” group targeting British MPs and the Electoral Commission, as well as the “hack-and-leak” operations of the Russia-linked “Star Blizzard” group.
Financial data in the report indicated that the total budget for the British Intelligence Community (MI5, SIS, GCHQ) was approximately £4.9 billion in the 2023-24 fiscal year.
Europe
EU divisions deepen over who should negotiate with Vladimir Putin
As the US continues to mediate talks between Ukraine and Russia, the debate within the EU over who will sit at the table is intensifying.
Negotiations between Russia and Ukraine scheduled for next week in Abu Dhabi, mediated by the US, will take place without European participation.
There are currently no expectations of a breakthrough, but this has not prevented infighting within the EU over representation.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni added fresh friction to the debate yesterday, 5 November, stating that the EU gives “the impression of a Europe moving in different directions.”
In a letter to European Council President António Costa, she argued that the 27 EU leaders must unite behind a single representative before the end of the year.
According to Rapporteur, an “alphabet soup” of diplomatic formats, such as the E2, E3, E5, or the CoW (Coalition of the Willing), is competing to take centre stage in discussions concerning the future of Ukraine.
Facing elections next year, Meloni has long pushed back against the assertive stance adopted by the E3 format, which brings together the UK, France, and Germany, in their efforts to represent European interests in ending the war and shaping the continent’s future security architecture.
Last month, the Italian leader said:
“If France, Germany, and Great Britain believe that within that renowned E3 format they can achieve more alone than we can all achieve together, then they should at least do so in the name of everyone, with an official mandate from all parties.”
An EU diplomat remarked: “When we speak of the E3, we are talking about geopolitical influence, military strength, and financial power. This does not mean Italy is excluded, but Rome clearly believes it must have a seat at the table.”
Meloni has the backing of Poland, another major military power and the only other large EU country sharing a border with Ukraine.
However, her counterpart Donald Tusk has been less explicit about seeking a direct role in top-level talks.
“As you know, we have many different formats,” Tusk told reporters in Warsaw on Thursday. “We have a clear position as the EU and as the Coalition of the Willing. I am fully engaged in these processes.”
Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski, however, proved considerably more outspoken. “The last thing we want is Western Europe dealing with Russia while bypassing Eastern Europeans,” Sikorski said, drawing parallels to the 1930s and the 1945 Yalta Conference:
“You cannot exclude Eastern Europe and Scandinavia from these talks. We are roughly 120 million people. Finland borders Russia, Norway borders Russia, the Baltic states border Russia, and Poland borders both Russia and Ukraine.”
Berlin argues that the E3 remains the natural representative group, given that Germany, France, and the UK are the three strongest military powers capable of underwriting future security guarantees for Ukraine.
Like Italy, Poland favours the E5 configuration, which would allow Warsaw and Rome to take part.
Yet Sikorski also floated another leadership lineup to meet Putin: António Costa, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, and UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham.
Sikorski argued that under EU treaties, the Costa-Kallas pairing holds the legal authority to represent the bloc.
Speaking to journalists in Lisbon on Thursday, the EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, said: “I agree with Prime Minister Meloni; we must not speak with different voices. We must remain united in stating that these matters sought by Russia require Europe’s decision as well.”
Meloni is not alone in pointing out cracks in the EU’s posture. Last week, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, a close ally of Meloni on the European Council, questioned a phone call made to Putin by the leaders of Finland and Norway, asking what they truly hoped to achieve.
Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre defended the conversation as a useful step taken in full coordination with Kyiv.
According to an EU official, the pair would be “more than happy” to discuss appointing a special envoy for Ukraine.
The official stressed, however, that the call was not “a bid” to position Stubb and Støre for the role.
Regardless, the war is unlikely to end this winter, even as Europeans explore fresh mechanisms to finance Ukraine.
“We must be realistic about peace talks and extremely cautious regarding Russia’s true intentions,” Donald Tusk said. “During the winter months, Putin may have less motivation to reach an agreement.”
Europe
EU urges citizens to prepare 72-hour survival kits for crises
European Union citizens should be prepared to meet their basic needs independently for the first 72 hours of an emergency until public services can organize relief, according to new guidelines.
Hadja Lahbib, the European Commissioner for Equality, Crisis Management and Preparedness, presented the non-binding advisory guidance at the European Civil Protection Forum.
In her remarks on the initiative, Lahbib said: “When a disaster strikes, the first hours can be vital. Every European must know what to do, how to protect their family and how to help others. Preparedness begins in our homes, our schools and our communities.”
The Brussels leadership explained that the new measures are prompted by Europe facing increasingly frequent and complex crises.
Under the recommendations, the European Commission advised citizens to stockpile essential supplies and keep pre-packed emergency grab bags ready.
These steps aim to ensure that individuals can address their primary necessities independently during the first three days of a crisis, before state aid is mobilized.
The guidelines also encompass three additional priority areas: preparing children for emergency situations, making safety measures accessible to individuals with disabilities, and ensuring the public is better informed about potential threats.
Citing the 2001 founding anniversary of the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, the European Commission also proposed designating 23 October as “EU Preparedness Day” each year starting in 2027.
EU member states are preparing for an extensive hybrid attack scenario that could result in casualties, according to a Politico report citing European diplomats and officials.
The report noted that divisions have emerged within the EU over the bloc’s security role and whether its initiatives duplicate the functions of NATO.
According to the same report, ambassadors from the 27 EU member states held closed-door meetings focusing on deploying emergency response teams and allocating resources from EU funds to an affected country.
Following the outbreak of hostilities in Ukraine in 2022, both the EU and NATO intensified their preparations for a potential military confrontation with Russia.
In its “White Paper on European Defence – Preparedness 2030”, presented in March 2025, the European Commission identified Russia as one of the primary threats to European security.
The document outlines plans to boost defence production and improve air and missile defence, unmanned systems, and military mobility.
Meanwhile, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have begun drafting contingency action plans for a potential Russian attack, including measures for the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of civilians.
The three Baltic states decided in May 2025 to cooperate in the field of civil defence.
Lieutenant General Christian Freuding, head of the German Army, also stated that Berlin must be prepared for a Russian attack by 2029 or earlier.
On the other hand, Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed in a statement in September that Moscow is not preparing for war with Europe.
Putin stated that Moscow has no such plans and that there are no justifications or real reasons to escalate the situation with Europe.
Criticising the European stance, Putin described rhetoric from European nations regarding a Russian threat and the necessity of preparing for war as a “provocation” and a “deliberate incitement of the situation.”
The Kremlin also noted that the EU is turning into a “military-political-economic bloc” by spending vast budgets to weaponize its economies.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that statements by EU nations regarding the risk of war with Russia are driving European rearmament, which could ultimately become a “self-fulfilling prophecy.”
In earlier remarks, Lavrov assessed that “if Europe attacks the Russian Federation, it will be a completely different war, and it will be over very quickly.”
Europe
Paris meeting between Marine Le Pen and Nigel Farage unscheduled
Plans for a meeting in Paris between Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and French far-right National Rally (RN) figurehead Marine Le Pen remain uncertain.
Farage’s planned visit to France, which he announced for October as part of an effort to establish ties with figures on the European right before the end of the year, has yet to be officially scheduled by Le Pen’s camp.
Speaking to Politico on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive inter-party relations, four National Rally officials familiar with Le Pen’s schedule said no visit to the party leader had been planned.
Multiple party figures said they saw no urgency in drawing media attention to relations with Reform UK or to the migration pact signed in September.
One official noted that the “costs and benefits” of holding a meeting with Farage needed to be weighed.
Political circumstances for both parties have shifted markedly since the prospect of a meeting with Le Pen, widely viewed as the candidate most likely to win the first round of the 2027 French presidential election, was first mooted.
Jordan Bardella, the National Rally’s second-in-command, attended Reform UK’s conference in Birmingham in early September as guest of honour.
Bardella and Farage announced an agreement proposing the return to France of all migrants reaching the UK through unauthorised Channel crossings in small boats.
The proposal triggered a backlash across different political factions in France, where critics questioned why the country should accept the return of asylum seekers.
Internal problems also emerged within Reform UK during the Birmingham conference.
Reform UK, which had maintained its polling lead over the Labour Party led by Andy Burnham, who took over as prime minister from Keir Starmer, was shaken by an undercover investigation published on the eve of the conference.
The development, which raised fresh questions over the party’s financial structure, led to the resignation of Farage’s two most senior aides.
Labour subsequently recovered in the polls, while a rise in the Conservative Party’s share of the vote began to challenge Reform UK’s second-place standing.
The initial announcement that Farage would travel to France to meet Le Pen before the end of October was also made at the Birmingham conference in early September.
Referring to a trip to Paris after Bardella delivered a speech in English, Farage said: “The only downside is I think they’re going to invite me to Paris, and I will have to speak French, but never mind, we’ll get round it.”
However, no official invitation has been confirmed.
As October drew to a close and it became clear that Farage would not pay a return visit to the National Rally’s conference in Orleans, a senior Reform UK official maintained that the meeting was on the calendar for this year.
The leadership in Paris does not confirm that schedule.
The four officials familiar with Le Pen’s plans said they were unaware of any scheduled visit for Farage before Christmas. One of Le Pen’s advisers suggested that a meeting could instead be offered with Bardella, whose standing inside the party has weakened in recent months.
Questioning the merits of the party leader appearing alongside Farage, another adviser to Le Pen said: “We need a bit more time to think through the costs and benefits.”
Thibaut Francois, an official with the National Rally’s European Parliament delegation, said that “regular contacts” with Reform UK continued and that the two parties would meet “very soon”, though he did not clarify whether that would take place this year.
A senior Reform UK official said: “Reform’s primary objective is to become battle-ready for British elections; parading on the international stage right now would add nothing to the UK message.”
Charles-Henri Gallois, an economic adviser to Bardella, argued that there was no need for further contact between the two parties, asserting that the migration agreement was “ready and waiting to be implemented” should both parties come to power.
“There is no need to discuss this further,” Gallois told Politico. “Critics of the agreement do not understand migration flows. This agreement is entirely in France’s interest.”
With French voters wary of a UK-style exit, Le Pen has long distanced herself from efforts to pull France out of the European Union.
Jean-Yves Camus, a far-right specialist at the Jean-Jaures Foundation think-tank, said: “Farage still supports Brexit, whereas Le Pen abandoned the idea [of Frexit] because it was too frightening for French voters. Donald Trump’s defeat in the midterms will also reinforce Le Pen’s distrust of Trumpism and its European counterparts.”
The level of internal support within the National Rally for the migration deal signed by Bardella and Farage was a subject of debate even as it was being concluded.
Since the party conference in September, Bardella’s position has continued to weaken following antisemitism allegations, which he has firmly denied.
Before reaching the agreement with Bardella, Farage had proposed launching “the largest military operation in the Channel since the Second World War” to push small boats back to the French coast.
A figure close to Le Pen told Politico at the time: “Why would we take [them] back to France if they are not French?”
-
Diplomacy7 days agoSecular dress code dispute exposes deeper Türkiye-Azerbaijan strains
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russia weigh energy deals and corporate return in peace talks
-
Europe2 weeks agoMerz visits Asia to seek new markets for German defence firms
-
Europe2 weeks agoSerbia opposition wins snap vote as Vucic concedes defeat
-
America2 weeks agoPentagon prepares US bases for 90-day siege in global war plan
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD drops Dexit to back single market in new Europe strategy
-
America2 weeks agoLula defeats Flavio Bolsonaro to seal historic Brazilian comeback
-
Opinion2 weeks agoImperialism, economic power, and foreign policy
