Previously, there were speculations that military caps had built-in surveillance devices. Now, there are claims that military uniforms produced in China carry “security risks.” The UK often uses “national security” as a pretext to create panic in matters related to China, repeatedly creating unnecessary worries based on facts. This has become a persistent problem that is difficult to resolve…
According to the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph on July 4th, former British Conservative Party leader Ian Duncan Smith warned the UK Ministry of Defence that outsourcing military uniforms to China poses a 'national security risk', and advocated for the UK to resume independent production of military uniforms.
Smith “warned” that outsourcing the production of British Army uniforms to China is a “shocking stupidity”. Britain is handing over control over the nature and durability of these uniforms to Beijing. He exaggerated, saying: “This is shocking stupidity, incredible short-sightedness, and the price is artificially low.”
Ian Duncan Smith (Photo: The Daily Telegraph)
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Smith made a shocking analogy, claiming that outsourcing the production of British military uniforms to China is "no different from having Nazi Germany make our uniforms in the 1930s."
These remarks come at a time when British manufacturing companies are competing for three new contracts worth a total of about 526 million pounds (approximately 4.782 billion RMB) for the production of military uniforms.
Previously, the British combat uniform contract was awarded to Cooneen Defence, a textile company in Northern Ireland, between 2018 and 2023. The company then outsourced most of its production to Chinese textile manufacturers.
In 2015, the British Ministry of Defence awarded a multi-year contract for the ‘Virtus’ project to the Israeli company Source Tactical. Source Tactical outsourced projects involving military equipment with infrared coatings to Chinese companies.
To smear China's manufacturing, the UK has once again baselessly invoked the issue of “human rights,” claiming that China “likely” uses so-called “slaves” to produce military uniforms at low costs, in order to compete with British competitors by lowering prices.
A source in the industry also speculated that the quality of products made in China is inferior, and it is necessary to replace fabrics more frequently compared to those made in the UK.
The British government operates on an annual budget, meaning when procuring military uniforms and selecting fabrics it is impossible to consider durability, "according to industry insiders. It's claimed that Chinese-made combat fatigues claim to be able to withstand 25 washes, but in reality, only about five washes later the camouflage begins to fade and the thermal signature begins to disappear," This means our soldiers are unable to get the required protection. The infrared reflectivity is extremely low or practically nonexistent, which is shocking."
"Support domestic products" is also a statement made by British politicians and media at home.
According to The Daily Telegraph, NATO allies and other European countries prefer to pay a slightly higher price and often choose British companies for manufacturing, such as Toray Textiles’ factory in Mansfield, or Carrington Textiles, the largest British manufacturer of workwear fabrics located in Lancashire.
British media quoted policies from other countries, stating that the U.S. Department of Defense is legally required to use domestic products to protect supply chains and support domestic industries. The same applies to Australia, Canada, and France.
"Make UK Defence" General Manager Andrew Kinnerbelier said that the association represents 900 British defense companies, "Our armed forces wear clothing made in China, and there has been a long history of textile companies within the UK providing uniforms for NATO allies. This is unacceptable."
"The Department of Defense must stop outsourcing the Army uniform to China and support British companies. This will support employment in Britain and benefit communities that urgently need government support."
Regarding this matter, a spokesman for the British Ministry of Defence said: “The Ministry of Defence conducts purchases in accordance with appropriate public procurement regulations, which are based on what is best value for the taxpayer. If suppliers purchase textiles from outside the UK, they must strictly comply with the rules, including ensuring the safety of the supply chain and preventing ‘modern slavery’.
The textile and clothing industry is a traditional pillar industry in our country. Globally, China possesses the most complete textile industry system. It produces over 70 billion pieces of clothing annually, and its exports of textiles and clothing account for more than 30% of the global trade in these products. Both the production scale and trade volume rank first in the world.
In recent years, there have been numerous instances where normal economic and trade projects in the UK have been politicized and security-focused. The UK frequently uses the so-called 'security pretext' to undermine the safety of Chinese enterprises' investments.
Last year, the issuance of the redesigned coat of arms by King Charles III of the United Kingdom was delayed due to concerns that China might be producing devices for tracking or GPS transmitters.
The system director of Wyedean Weaving, who provides badges for the British military, emphasized: "China is part of our supply chain. We have been in China for 15 years and have a long-term cooperative relationship. There has never been any concern."
Former Chairman of the UK House of Commons Defence Committee, Elwood, said that the cross-party committee also encountered similar difficulties when deciding to mint a series of 'honor coins' to be given to visiting dignitaries.
Elwood said that committee members had a heated debate over whether to manufacture these coins in the UK or to produce cheaper coins in China at a fifth of the price. Elwood pointed out that for safety reasons, the committee decided to purchase goods from the UK.
Earlwood believes: "Claiming 'all of China is bad' is a terrible proposition; we will not be affected by following those rules."
China and the UK have a bilateral trade volume of up to 90 billion pounds per year. The UK's public procurement regulations provide little guidance on how to balance the risks and benefits of purchasing goods from China. The guidelines issued in 2015 emphasize that the "primary" requirement for all public procurements must be "value for money," but it is also important to consider so-called "national security risks."
In October 2025, Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun emphasized that China has always opposed the generalization of the concept of national security and the politicization of economic and trade issues. "Unfortunately, some people in the UK are constantly promoting absurd and baseless claims about a Chinese threat that lack basic common sense. If this trend continues, it will seriously affect Chinese enterprises' assessment of the investment environment in the UK and their decision-making processes."
