Many analysts say the strategic military review due on Tuesday, the first since 1998, has been rushed and is aimed more at saving money than preparing the military for future threats.

The government is trying to reduce a record budget deficit of more than 10 percent of national output, and at the same time retain its place as strong military power in Europe and a capable ally to the United States, which it has backed in conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Negotiations between the Ministry of Defense and the Treasury over the Strategic Defense and Security Review evolved into a bitter public spat, which ended only late on Friday with the intervention of Prime Minister David Cameron.

A decision on whether to keep a £5.2 billion ($8 billion) order for two aircraft carriers built by Britain’s BAE Systems, Babcock and France’s Thales, was one of the main stumbling blocks to finalizing the review.

“It would literally cost us more to cancel the things than to go ahead and build them,” finance minister George Osborne told the BBC.

Foreign Secretary William Hague sought to counter such criticism, echoed this week by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who voiced concerns that defense cuts by NATO members may go too far.

“We will continue to have a wide range of strategic capabilities and be adapting to the threats of the future, I really do want to stress this,” he told Sky television.

He pointed to the threat of cyberattacks — attacks on sensitive computer networks — and terrorism, and said Britain must prepare for the “information age” and not just focus on large “prestige projects.”

His comments confirm analyst reports that a National Security Strategy, expected on Monday, would highlight terrorism and cyberthreats, perhaps to justify the modification or scaling back of major military hardware orders.

It is likely that at least one of the aircraft carriers will be modified to save money and also make them compatible with allies’ aircraft, allowing Britain to share the burden of operating and equipping the vessels.

Analysts say that if both carriers are built, little money will be left for aircraft for them or vessels to accompany them.

“They will be aircraft carriers, let us say. They will live up to their name. We will explain in due course,” Osborne said, when asked whether the vessels would carry aircraft.

Hague said one of the initial problems with the carrier order was that the vessels were not “interoperable” with French or US aircraft, which may mean this has been resolved.

Osborne also said that the settlement with the Ministry of Defense over the review “first of all” secures funding for Britain’s 9,500 troops in Afghanistan, making significant cuts to the army unlikely