Piling pressure on the Kremlin is expected to be the focus of discussions at the European Political Community (EPC) on Friday, as more than 40 leaders gather in Tirana, Albania, for the summit.

Leaders are set to reiterate calls for a full and unconditional ceasefire and demand Russia prove that it is serious about bringing its invasion to an end.

The summit convenes after Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy travelled to Turkey this week, a move Downing Street describes as a good-faith effort to engage in peace negotiations, which Putin ultimately did not attend.

In the event of continued Russian intransigence, further widespread sanctions are being prepared to degrade the Kremlin’s ability to prolong the war, with a particular focus on curtailing Russia’s energy revenues.

Discussions on these potential measures, which began in Kyiv over the weekend, are expected to be advanced by leaders in Tirana.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Keir Starmer, commenting ahead of the summit, stated: “People in Ukraine and across the world have paid the price for Putin’s aggression in Ukraine and across Europe, now he must pay the price for avoiding peace.

“Putin’s tactics to dither and delay, while continuing to kill and cause bloodshed across Ukraine, is intolerable.

“For the past three years, Ukraine has been fighting for peace and security, while Russia has sent thousands of young men and women to their deaths and compromised global stability.

“Alongside the US and more than 30 other partners, we have been clear that we will not stand for Russia kicking a ceasefire down the road.

“A full, unconditional ceasefire must be agreed and if Russia is unwilling to come to the negotiating table, Putin must pay the price.”

During the EPC summit, Starmer is scheduled to lead a security roundtable with Swedish prime minister Ulf Kristersson and will hold discussions with key allies including France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Ukraine regarding the latest US-led efforts to secure peace.

In a press notice overnight, Downing Street highlighted that Western sanctions have already led to forecasts for Russian energy revenue being cut by almost a quarter. Figures show oil and gas tax revenues were a third lower in dollar terms in 2024 compared to 2022, the first year of the war, with a further year-on-year decrease of almost 20 per cent recorded in February and March of this year.

The UK government asserts that supporting Ukraine and degrading Russia’s economic capacity to prolong the war is crucial for national and Euro-Atlantic security.

No 10 points to recent incidents of Russian aggression, including the revelation from Polish prime minister Donald Tusk this week that the Russian Secret Service was behind a major fire at a Polish shopping centre. Reference was also made to a landmark ruling by the International Civil Aviation Organisation attributing the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 in July 2014 to the Russian Federation.

Last week, the prime minister announced the UK’s largest-ever package of sanctions targeting Russia’s so-called “Shadow Fleet” as part of efforts to stall the Russian economy. 

The UK government also pointed to Russia’s increasing defence and security spending, now reportedly at 40 per cent of all federal expenditure and 8 per cent of its GDP — a post-1990 high and double the size of federal social services spending.

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Keir Starmer: Putin must ‘pay the price’ for avoiding peace appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

And as Nigel Farage’s teal troops descend on England’s town halls, Westminster is steadily adjusting to the new political reality precipitated by the local elections. The Labour and Conservative parties are still reeling — reckoning with respective backlashes on policy and political strategy.

Soaking in the media spotlight, Reform spokespeople have spent recent days doubling down on their party’s political positions, declaring unto Britain the change they plan to oversee.

Thus far, Reform representatives have emphasised the performative elements of their offering. In a social media post on Monday, chair Zia Yusuf — credited with his party’s auspicious professionalisation drive — unveiled Reform’s flag-flying policy.

Reform, the scourge of “woke” from Doncaster to Kent, will ensure that “the only flags permitted to be flown on or in [council] buildings will be the Union Jack and the St George’s flag.”

Yusuf added: “No other flags will be permitted to be flown on its flag-poles, balconies, reception desks or council-chamber walls.”

***This article first appeared in a special edition of Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, centring on the local elections fallout. Sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

Reform controls 10 councils in England, including Kent, Lincolnshire, Derbyshire, Lancashire and Doncaster after its sweeping gains last week. But already its flag policy has come under concerted fire from across the political spectrum.

Mike Tapp, the outspoken Labour MP for Dover and Deal, responded: “As VE Day reminds us, Britain has a proud history of working with allies to defeat dictators and tyrants.

“It tells you all you need to know about Nigel Farage’s Reform that their very first act after winning elections is to ban the Ukrainian flag from our town halls, in this of all weeks.”

He added: “Farage and Reform councillors should stop sucking up to Moscow and drop their ban on flying the Ukrainian flag immediately.”

Tom Tugendhat, the former security minister and Conservative leadership candidate, said: “The White Horse has been the symbol of Kent for almost 2,000 years.

“The first king of Kent, Hengest, is said to have used the flag as he and his brother, Horsa, conquered their new kingdom. Denying our flag is denying our history.”

Mark Francois, the shadow Armed Forces minister, said: “Flags are important symbols and should be respected as such. So, does this new policy mean no flying of Ukrainian flags, in solidarity with them?

“Does it mean councils couldn’t fly the Armed Forces day flag, either? And what about county flags, too? This sounds like something which just hasn’t been thought through.”

The backlash prompted a clarification: “Reform UK will proudly fly the union jack, St George’s flag and county flags. Unlike the Tories and Labour, we are proud of our country and history”, a party spokesperson commented on Monday afternoon.

Reform’s policy is pitched against “woke” flags — pulling on the same (US-influenced) political strain as its opposition to “DEI” (diversity, equity and inclusion) practices. In a similar vein, Farage took aim at “climate change training” this morning.

But Reform’s above clarification still excludes the Ukraine flag, which councils have flown in solidarity with the country after Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022.

Reform’s position on the Ukraine war is an evidenced, long-term political vulnerability. During the 2024 general election campaign, Reform’s momentum was knocked by comments Farage made suggesting the West “provoked” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine by expanding the European Union and NATO military alliance eastwards.

This discourse, at best, distracted from Reform’s central election pitch and, at worst, repelled potential voters.

Labour, via a variety of spokespeople and glossy social media graphics in recent months, has repeatedly criticised Reform for “fawning” over Putin. So expect the party to lampoon Reform’s “Ukraine flag ban” in the coming weeks — as it looks to drive a wedge between the party and its target voters.

The future of British politics will not turn on the axis of Reform’s flag policy. That much is plain. Policy progress will dictate this government’s fate. But this row exposes chinks in Farage’s armour, even as he enjoys this moment of ascendancy.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

Conservative MPs looking to oust Badenoch are ‘deluded’, says Iain Duncan Smith

Lunchtime soundbite

‘If you end up just being the managers of the status quo and the status quo isn’t working for people, they’re going to put you out.’

—  Former prime minister Sir Tony Blair speaks at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles.

Now try this…

‘Come back, Boris? Routed Tories pine for a winning formula’
Dire local election results leave some Conservatives wondering if their former leader’s magic could turn things around, Politico’s Noah Keate writes.

‘Labour must be relevant to people’s everyday lives and offer realistic hope’
Former Labour leader Lord Kinnock writes for the Mirror.

‘Tory MPs to meet to discuss ousting Kemi Badenoch “before it is too late”’
The Independent reports.

On this day in 2022:

Conservatives criticise Johnson after key London losses

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

The post Reform UK ‘flag ban’ presents target for Labour appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

When I visited Kyiv, last month, to mark the third bloody anniversary of Putin’s illegal invasion, I didn’t have to imagine this. Speaking to Ukraine’s Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights, I heard firsthand how this nightmare is very much a reality for Ukrainian mothers and fathers today.

Since Putin’s illegal invasion began on 24^th February 2022, at least 19,546 Ukrainian children have been forcibly taken from their families and their homeland, although the true figure is likely to be much higher because Russia frequently targets vulnerable children without anyone to speak for them. Yale’s Humanitarian Research Lab, which recently had its funding cut by the United States’ so-called Department of Government Efficiency, have placed the number of stolen children closer to 35,000.

The commissioner told me how children as young as eight months old have been ripped from their homes by Russian forces, with Russia denying the very existence of this child and many thousands more. Many have been placed with citizens of Russia or placed in institutions. Some have been listed on child placement databases, naturalised into Russia, as if they were children born in Russia. Some are conscripted to the so-called All-Russian Young Army Military Patriotic Social Movement — the Kremlin’s attempt to mobilise young Russian children and provide them with basic military skills before later joining Putin’s meatgrinder in the occupied territories in Ukraine.

The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for president Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights for allegedly establishing and sanctioning Russia’s program of coerced adoption and fostering these stolen children — a war crime as defined in international law. There is strong evidence to support their direct involvement in the allegations. A report in December 2024 by Yale Humanitarian Research Lab, which has been undertaking vital work to track these children and document the war crimes exposed between May and October 2022, Russian Aerospace Forces — under the direct control of President Putin’s office — transported multiple groups of Ukrainian children to Russia on Russian Federation- flagged military transport plane.

The United Kingdom rightly recognises these crimes and the importance of the International Criminal Court in prosecuting those responsible. Indeed, we are also playing our part in funding the Bring Back Kids Initiative through the Partnership Fund for a Resilient Ukraine. The initiative launched by president Zelenskyy is uniting international agencies and organisations with the Ukrainian government to bring Russia’s crimes against humanity to an end by reuniting the stolen children of Ukraine with their families.

We must ensure that Russia provides a full register of all Ukrainian children currently in its custody, as mandated by the Geneva Conventions, and that Ukraine, with support from its allies and partners, secures a proper framework for their return, with housing, psychosocial, financial and other forms of support for their reintegration.

To achieve this, it is vital to ensure that there remains a focus on this critical issue, which has too often been forgotten in the national and international discourse of this conflict. That is why I have written to the foreign secretary, David Lammy, and defence secretary, John Healey, calling on them to recognise 17^th July as a National Day of Action for the Stolen Children of Ukraine. The National Day of Action will be a day of significance that will seek to raise awareness of the issue and set out what more the United Kingdom can do to ensure that justice is served, and the stolen children of Ukraine are not forgotten. Befittingly, the 17^th July is also ‘International Criminal Justice Day’ which aligns the national day of action with the need for accountability mechanisms within the international community.

There can be no true peace in Ukraine without the return of the children that Putin has stolen. Until those children are back with their families, no victory, no peace settlement, and no resolution can truly be considered complete. It is only when they are safely reunited that Ukraine can begin to heal.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Johanna Baxter: ‘There can be no true peace in Ukraine without the return of the children Putin has stolen’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The comment comes in a week in which the US appeared to signal an intention to ease sanctions on Russia amid ongoing attempts to secure a ceasefire.

Vladimir Putin has so far refused to follow Ukraine’s lead by signing up to an unconditional 30-day truce while the terms of a full ceasefire are thrashed out. Instead, Putin has continually set out a list of demands that he insists must be met before he agrees to call off attacks.

Reports have also suggested that the US is pushing for a new deal with Kyiv that would give the United States control over Ukrainian minerals and energy assets.

The Reform UK leader told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “It’s quite right to aim for peace, but we can’t have a peace that turns Putin into a winner, so I would not be 100 per cent with where his team is right now, absolutely not.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Challenged over previous comments in which he had appeared to say Nato and Ukraine had provoked Russia’s invasion, he said: “There’s no point looking back then, we are where we are now.

“We want a peace deal, surely everybody wants a peace deal, but it needs to be equitable. Right at the moment, it appears Russia is getting far too much.

“At the moment, that’s the way it looks. Now there may be things going on behind the scenes on the Russian side that we don’t know, but at the moment that’s the worry.”

He added: “There may be things going on behind the scenes on the Russian side that we don’t know, but at the moment that’s the worry.”

The Ukraine war continues to prove a difficult issue for Farage, who previously accused the West of provoking the Russian invasion.

Earlier this month, in the wake of Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Trump’s now-infamous White House meeting, Farage suggested the Ukrainian president had been “rude” and “very unwise”.

Said meeting culminated in intense public shouting match as Trump rowed in behind the comments issued by his vice president, JD Vance, who claimed that Ukraine should be more “thankful” for US support.

In a post to X at the time, the Reform UK leader said that the row was “regrettable” and warned that the fallout will leave Putin “feeling like the winner”.

In a subsequent interview, Farage was asked if he would treat a guest as Trump did. He responded: “I wouldn’t expect a guest to be rude to me in my own house, absolutely not. I would expect a guest to treat me with respect.”

He also criticised Zelenskyy for not wearing a suit for his White House visit, and said he showed “no respect” to Trump through his choice of clothing.

Farage’s stance has drawn fire from across the political spectrum, with prime minister Keir Starmer having repeatedly urged the Reform leader to cease his “fawning” over Vladimir Putin. 

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Nigel Farage claims ‘Russia getting far too much’ from Trump in Ukraine ceasefire talks appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The Liberal Democrats have written to the attorney general, Lord Hermer, as pressure mounts on the government to seize frozen Russian assets and repurpose them to fund support for Ukraine. 

The calls for the government to move from freezing Russian assets to seizing them have grown in recent days in light of US president Donald Trump’s decision to suspend military aid to the war-torn Eastern European country.

The Lib Dem request also comes amid suggestions that Lord Hermer is holding up a plan to seize frozen Russian assets. According to The Times newspaper, the attorney general has been criticised by some in government for warning ministers against the move.

There is a “live discussion” across Whitehall about options for using Russian assets to plug the gap left by the pause in US military assistance to Ukraine, the newspaper reports. 

Rishi Sunak, the former prime minister, is among those advocating a seizure of Russian assets to fund the Ukrainian war effort and/or future re-development projects.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Week-in-Review: Lord Hermer, Blue Labour and the defining choice Keir Starmer faces

Sunak told the House of Commons on Tuesday: “Events overnight [Trump’s decision to suspend military aid] make it even clearer that Europe must find considerably more resources for Ukraine.”

He added: “The chancellor has rightly continued our policy of using the interest on frozen Russian state assets to benefit Ukraine, but I believe now is the moment to go further and to actually seize those assets.

“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates the principle of sovereign equality providing a basis in international law for this and by acting in concert with our allies we can ensure there are no risks to financial stability.”

Responding to Sunak at commons Treasury questions, chancellor Rachel Reeves insisted that it is “incredibly complicated” to take further action in line with international law. However, she added Russia should “pay for the damage that Russia has caused”.

Reeves said: “As the prime minister said yesterday, we would look at going further but as [he] knows it is incredibly complicated to do that in line with international law, but we keep all options on the table because [he] is absolutely right, Russia should pay for the damage that Russia has caused.”

Ben Maguire, the Lib Dem shadow attorney general, has now written to his government counterpart demanding he publish the legal advice underpinning ministers’ decision-making around the potential seizure of the assets.

Commenting, Maguire has urged the government to “make his reasoning public” — calling for “proper scrutiny” of the decision as Ukraine’s military capacity to resist Putin is undermined by the White House.

Trump’s decisions to cut aid to Ukraine and ban the UK from sharing military intelligence with the besieged nation have “crippled” Zelensky’s defence effort, he added.

The Lib Dem MP said: “Zelensky’s besieged nation has been crippled by Trump’s callous approach to Ukraine’s defence. From cutting aid to banning intelligence sharing at the drop of a hat, it’s clear we need a plan B to halt Putin’s brutal invasion.

“We know that the UK holds billions in frozen Russian assets – capital that could transform Kyiv’s defence effort and counteract the reckless decisions coming from the White House. We’ve rightly seized the interest on these assets, but it’s time for Britain to go further and faster.

“That’s why I’m calling on the UK Attorney General to make his reasoning public, and publish his legal advice to the government on seizing the frozen assets in full. We need the chance to properly scrutinise the decision-making on this crucial issue, so the UK can then make the right choice for Ukraine.”

His letter to Lord Hermer adds: “Currently, the profits accruing from frozen Russian assets across the UK are being used to fund Ukraine’s resistance. This is the right thing to do.

“It is essential, however, that the UK goes further and faster. US president Trump’s decision to suspend military aid supplies and intelligence sharing with the Armed Forces of Ukraine makes it imperative that we do more, now, to contribute to Kyiv’s defence…

“As Attorney General, will you — as a matter of urgency — publish the legal advice that you have provided to the UK government in relation to the proposed seizure of frozen Russian assets?”

Foreign secretary David Lammy has agreed in principle that Europe should “move” from freezing Russian assets to seizing them.

Late last month at commons Foreign Office questions, the foreign secretary was urged to introduce legislation to “repurpose” Russian assets for the Ukrainian war effort by Lib Dem MP Alison Bennett.

Lammy insisted that this is not an issue on which any government can act alone. “We must act with European allies”, he said.

He added: “It was a topic of conversation at the G7. It was a topic of conversation at the Weimar group. And of course, Europe has to act quickly. And I believe we should move from freezing assets to seizing assets.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Rishi Sunak: Now is the moment to seize Russian assets to help Ukraine

The post UK government urged to publish legal advice on seizing frozen Russian assets appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

In the most troubling development since Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s White House meeting on *checks notes* Friday, it was announced overnight that the US will forsake Ukraine as it escalates attempts to impose an unconditional ceasefire.

“President [Trump] has been clear that he is focused on peace”, the relevant White House statement reads. “We need our partners to be committed to that goal as well. We are pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.”

The missive came alongside a fresh attack on Zelenskyy by Trump. The Ukrainian president “won’t be around very long” if he does not commit to a ceasefire soon, his US counterpart declared.

The development is so extraordinary that Graham Stuart, a serving Tory MP and former Foreign Office minister, has said it is time to consider the “possibility” that the US president is a Kremlin asset. The comment serves as a marked sign of the times.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

The Westminster frame of partisan competition, it is often remarked, can distort just as much as it reveals. The reality of our new diplomatic disorder, in several crucial senses, is a case in point. But the prevalent pattern that sees the latest Trump pronouncement interpreted and responded to by interested political actors — one by one — is proving immensely instructive. Statement by statement, press release by press release, a stark picture is being formed of the fault lines that will define this parliament.

The UK government’s delicate balancing act, as the mediator between Trump’s America and Europe, is facing daily stress tests. The figurative “bridge”, only weeks after it was unveiled by Downing Street briefers, is quaking as the tectonic plates of geopolitics shift. Keir Starmer has little trouble sauntering to the US side, as last week’s visit proved — but he has so far proved unable to coax the Trump administration in the European direction. Starmer’s strategic construction looks less sturdy every news cycle.

The Liberal Democrats, as I have commented before, are confidently exploring the political space it has spent the Trump 2.0 era cleaving: Sir Ed Davey is the UK’s anti-Trumper-in-chief. The Conservative Party is coming to terms with its role somewhat less self-assuredly. Still, the Tories have in recent days issued statements generally condemning Trump’s Ukraine initiative.

But by far the most interesting case is that of Reform UK.

The party has shown such strategic confusion in recent weeks that commentators are busily rethinking the myths that drive it: namely, that Nigel Farage — politically invulnerable and electorally insurgent — is on an inexorable march to Downing Street.

In the House of Commons yesterday, Farage could hardly have looked more uncomfortable as he responded to the prime minister’s statement on his diplomatic efforts. His ostensible question concerned US security guarantees, and specifically whether a Trump-Ukraine raw materials deal can provide requisite protection.

Had Farage been paying attention to the prime minister’s commentary in recent days, he might have predicted his answer. “The minerals deal is not enough on its own”, Starmer replied.

But media attention focused on his follow-up: “But can I just remind him? Russia is the aggressor and Zelenskyy is a war leader whose country has been invaded. We should all be supporting him and not fawning over [Vladimir] Putin.”

Farage nodded in agreement as the prime minister launched into his answer. But his populist facade of self-importance had been shattered. Starmer, the Labour roar suggested, had struck the right tone.

That morning, Farage suggested Volodymyr Zelenskyy was “rude” and “very unwise” in his now-infamous White House meeting with Trump. In an X post over the weekend, published several hours after other political leaders had opined, the Reform chief labelled the spat “regrettable” and warned that the fallout will leave Putin “feeling like the winner”.

But Farage’s remarks in an LBC phone-in Monday were considerably more colourful. Asked if he would treat a guest as Trump did, Farage responded: “I wouldn’t expect a guest to be rude to me in my own house, absolutely not. I would expect a guest to treat me with respect.”

He also echoed MAGA talking points about Zelenskyy’s military-style attire. “Do you know what?”, he began. “If I turned up in the White House, I’d make sure I was wearing a suit and my shoes were cleaned.”

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

Those comments were the backdrop to a remarkable intervention from the Conservative Party yesterday morning — remarkable because the Tories under Kemi Badenoch have, thus far, proven conspicuously quiet with regard to Farage’s antics. In a statement issued via a CCHQ press release, shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel compared Farage’s stance on Russia to that of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

“For Nigel Farage to sit there pointing the finger at Zelenskyy is both morally wrong and diplomatically counterproductive”, Patel declared. “But sadly, it is not surprising. Like Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of Reform UK seems to have history equivocating over Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine.”

There was, of course, the usual Lib Dem rebuke. Ed Davey praised Zelenskyy’s “courage” — comparing it to “Farage’s cowardly approach of licking Trump’s boots.”

But the Patel statement was undoubtedly more significant. The intervention reflects an emergent new flank on the right, as the Conservatives seek to stigmatise Farage’s stance on the Ukraine conflict. It is a canny strategy, if a belated one.

After all, it’s reasonably well-acknowledged that Farage’s stance on the Ukraine conflict is one of the reasons Reform UK remains politically vulnerable. Farage’s insurgency was stalled during the 2024 general election campaign after he suggested the West “provoked” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine by expanding the European Union and NATO military alliance eastwards. The discourse, at best, distracted from Reform’s central election pitch and, at worst, repelled potential voters.

The Conservative Party therefore, is right to exploit Faragism’s foremost weakness. The question is why it took them so long.

More broadly, there is an interesting conversation to be had around why Farage has not pivoted his party to a clearer pro-Ukraine stance — given the political damage his ambiguity inflicted on Reform last election. Assuming Farage is thinking rationally, there are a few theories.

First, it is possible that Farage privileges his friendship with Trump above the immediate electoral interests of his party. His connection to the MAGA movement affords him significant cultural clout in the US, particularly as a speaker at various pro-Trump conventions. (A cynic would highlight the lucrative nature of this relationship).

In a related political sense, Farage may well fear a backlash (from those who are ardently pro-Trump) if he creates too much distance between Reform and the US president. Perhaps it is the power of Elon Musk, as the ringleader of the ruthless Online Right, that Farage dreads. Musk has previously suggested that Rupert Lowe, the Reform MP for Great Yarmouth, is the future of the party — and Lowe’s energetic engagement with the Online Right since would suggest the praise went straight to his head.

If Farage does have a rival in Reform, it is Lowe. Having recently “democratised” his party by allowing Reform members the power to remove their leader, Farage does have to consider intra-party rivalries. Once again, he is not invincible.

There is also, interestingly, something of a split in Reform over Ukraine. The pressure provided by Lowe is one factor; another is Farage’s friendship with Trump. But it should also be stated that Richard Tice, Reform UK deputy leader, has been a longtime advocate of Ukraine’s cause. Before Farage seized Reform’s reins during the general election, then-leader Tice drove to Ukraine to deliver supplies to the frontline. At the time (January 2024), Tice received some serious stick from Online Right types for the scheme.

And in the House of Commons last week, Tice broke Reform’s parliamentary silence on Ukraine with a speech condemning the “monstrous tyranny of that most evil, evil villain, Putin.”

Right-of-Conservative parties, however small, have tended to schism into factional conflict sooner or later. Perhaps we are witnessing the beginnings of this process in Reform’s five-MP caucus.

But whatever the explanation for Farage’s stance, Reform is exposed in a way we have not seen since the creation of the Brexit Party, its predecessor outfit, in 2018. Starmer — and potentially Badenoch — stand to make progress at its expense.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

JD Vance accused of ‘erasing’ British history after ‘random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 years’ jibe

Lunchtime soundbite

‘Well, I know JD Vance quite well. I’ve looked at the comments. I don’t think he actually said that.

A lot of people are getting carried away. They’re saying loads of things and getting quite animated. Let’s keep cool heads.

America is our closest ally, and I believe the President Trump and JD Vance want peace. They’re looking after their national interest. We need to do so.’

—  Kemi Badenoch defends JD Vance over his comment about “some random country that has not fought a war in 30 or 40 years” not being able to guarantee Ukraine’s security. Via GB News

Now try this…

‘Keir Starmer, unlikely leader of the free world’
The British prime minister has had a shaky start at home — but is winning grudging praise for his response to Trump’s Ukraine pivot, writes Politico’s Esther Webber.

‘Minister said NHS could use Dyson ventilators to help firm’s marketing, Covid inquiry told’
Via the Guardian.

‘Want to rebuild the party’s fortunes? Get sane MPs, with stable personal lives’
Former No 10 adviser to Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak Andrew Gilligan writes for ConservativeHome.

On this day in 2024:

Progressives come together in Devon to oust local Conservative MP

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

The post Ukraine developments leave Nigel Farage and Reform exposed appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The comment came as the US vice president rejected British and French plans to send peacekeeping forces to Ukraine as a “security guarantee”.

In an interview with Fox News overnight, the US vice president said the only way to secure lasting peace in the region is to grant the US an “economic upside in the future of Ukraine”.

He said: “If you want real security guarantees, if you want to actually ensure that Vladimir Putin does not invade Ukraine again, the very best security guarantee is to give America [an] economic upside in the future of Ukraine. 

“That is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years.”

UK prime minister Keir Starmer and French president Emmanuel Macron have raised the prospect of stationing military personnel in Ukraine in order to police the peace that the US administration is seeking. 

Starmer has also insisted that a “US backstop” is needed to deter Russian president Vladimir Putin from sending his forces against Ukraine again.

But Vance added: “The only guy in town with a strategy is the president of the United States, and everybody needs to follow his lead.”

The UK has been involved in several military interventions since 1980, including as an ally of the United States. Hundreds of British service personnel were killed when the UK fought alongside the US in Iraq and Afghanistan during the early 2000s.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Senior Conservative MP says UK must consider possibility ‘Trump is a Russian asset’

Liberal Democrat defence spokesperson Helen Maguire, a former Captain in the Royal Military Police who served in Iraq, reacted scathingly to Vance’s interview. 

She said: “JD Vance is erasing from history the hundreds of British troops who gave their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“I saw firsthand how American and British soldiers fought bravely together shoulder to shoulder. Six of my own regiment, the Royal Military Police, didn’t return home from Iraq. This is a sinister attempt to deny that reality.

“As the UK’s representative to the US, Peter Mandelson should call on Vance to apologise for these comments.”

Vance’s comments come as the White House seeks to pressure Volodymyr Zelenskyy to agree to an unconditional ceasefire with Russia. To that end, US president Donald Trump has ordered that all military aid be suspended to the war-torn Eastern European country.

A White House official said late on Monday night: “President [Trump] has been clear that he is focused on peace. We need our partners to be committed to that goal as well.

“We are pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

UK must work with US whoever is in office, Rayner says after Trump suspends Ukraine aid

The post JD Vance accused of ‘erasing’ British history after ‘random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 years’ jibe appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Angela Rayner said the prime minister remains “laser-focused” on Ukraine and would not be “derailed” by announcements from the White House, following news that Donald Trump has ordered that all military aid be suspended to the war-torn Eastern European country. 

The extraordinary move comes as the US administration seeks to pressure the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, to agree to an unconditional ceasefire with Russia.

A White House official said late on Monday night: “President [Trump] has been clear that he is focused on peace. We need our partners to be committed to that goal as well.

“We are pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.”

The deputy PM suggested the announcement reflects the “very serious moment” the world is in, adding: “I think the prime minister [Keir Starmer] has been very serious about the way he has conducted himself.”

Rayner told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “He’s laser-focused on getting peace.

“He won’t be derailed by announcements. He will continue that dialogue with our oldest and strongest ally, the US, and with European partners and with Ukraine.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

JD Vance, the US vice president who clashed with Zelenskyy in the White House last week, piled further pressure on Ukraine in an interview overnight.

Speaking to Fox News, he said the Ukrainian president “showed a clear unwillingness to engage in the peace process” sought by Trump.

“But I think he’ll get there eventually”, the vice president said. “He has to.”

The military aid cuts follow a meeting between Trump and senior members of his administration including secretary of state Marco Rubio and defence secretary Pete Hegseth.

Asked if she was shocked by the Trump administration’s announcement on pausing military aid to Ukraine, Rayner said: “That is a matter for the US.”

She added: “We are focused on support for Ukraine, bringing the US around the table alongside our European partners in Ukraine.

“We’ve put our money where our mouth is and stepped up our support for Ukraine through air defence, through military capabilities and through the military aid we give year upon year.

“The prime minister will not conduct dialogue on open airwaves.”

Pressed on whether the government will regret “cosying up” to the US administration with the king’s offer of a unprecedented second state visit for Trump, Rayner reiterated that America is the UK’s “oldest ally”.

She said: “The US is our oldest ally, our military capabilities, our support, our trading partners — we are the closest [that] allies can be. 

“So our relationship with the US is incredibly important and will continue, and it will endure, despite who may be in office at the time, and I think president Trump is absolutely of the same view. 

“And the prime minister, I think, has done an excellent job of bringing people around the table. He won’t choose between the US and Europe that is not in British interest. 

“He will continue to work to get that peace and those security guarantees for Ukraine, because that’s not just what Ukraine deserve a need, but it’s also about our long term security of our country as well.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post UK must work with US whoever is in office, Rayner says after Trump suspends Ukraine aid appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Graham Stuart, a former Foreign Office minister, issued the comment in response to Donald Trump’s decision to pause all military aid to Ukraine. The extraordinary move comes as the US administration seeks to pressure Volodymyr Zelenskyy to agree to an unconditional ceasefire with Russia.

A White House official said late on Monday night: “President [Trump] has been clear that he is focused on peace. We need our partners to be committed to that goal as well.

“We are pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.”

Trump also launched a fresh attack on Zelenskyy in a statement on social media. The Ukrainian president “won’t be around very long” if he does not commit to a ceasefire soon, he insisted.

Commenting on developments, Stuart posted to X: “We have to consider the possibility that president Trump is a Russian asset. 

“If so, Trump’s acquisition is the crowning achievement of [Vladimir] Putin’s FSB career — and Europe is on its own.”

The stance echoes the position advocated by Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, who told the House of Commons on Monday that the UK needs to “reduce our dependency on the United States” as he fears “that president Trump is not a reliable ally with respect to Russia”.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Keir Starmer has attempted to act as a bridge between the United States and Europe, having hosting a summit of nineteen leaders, including EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and Nato chief Mark Rutte, on Sunday.

Addressing MPs yesterday, the prime minister insisted the UK government will not “choose between” the US and Europe, as it attempts to secure a lasting, sustainable peace in Ukraine. 

Starmer said: “I do want to be crystal clear. We must strengthen our relationship with America for our security, for our technology, for our trade and investment.”

The prime minister suggested that those who wish to pick sides between Europe and the United States are “unserious”.

He said: “We will never choose between either side of the Atlantic. In fact, if anything, the past week has shown that that idea is totally unserious.

“Because while some people may enjoy the simplicity of taking a side, this week has shown with total clarity that the US is vital in securing the peace we all want to see in Ukraine.”

The Scottish National Party and Conservative shadow minister Alicia Kearns have called for the invitation to Trump from the king for a second state visit to be rescinded, in light of the US president and Zelenskyy’s calamitous White House meeting on Friday. 

Starmer rejected those demands on Monday and warned MPs that any solution to Ukraine and European security would need to be achieved by working “more closely” with the US president.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has described the US president’s decision to pause aid to Ukraine as “profoundly worrying”.

She said in a post on X: “It is clear that Britain and Europe must re-arm much faster if we want to provide Ukraine with more than just warm words of support.

“We must work to keep America in, and Russia out.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Senior Conservative MP says UK must consider possibility ‘Trump is a Russian asset’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The prime minister gestured to the cheering masses huddled beyond Downing Street’s gates. Starmer’s words were not audible — but his body language, the symbolism, spoke volumes. Zelenskyy cut an emotional figure as he marched beyond his Range Rover convoy. Starmer’s broad smile reflected the levity of this singular moment: Zelenskyy once again stood among allies.

The prime minister noted the significance of the episode in his subsequent sit-down with Zelenskyy. The choreography echoed the ambush of the Ukrainian president, at the hands of Donald Trump and JD Vance, in Washington. Even Zelenskyy’s pose, hunched forwards and hands clasped, invoked his DC calamity.

The surface-level resemblance rendered the substantive contrast even more potent.

“You’re very, very welcome here in Downing Street”, the prime minister informed his Ukrainian counterpart. “And as you’ve heard from the cheers street outside, you have full backing across the United Kingdom, and we stand with you with Ukraine for as long as it may take.”

The prime minister’s observation was a correct one: the spontaneously cheering masses on White Hall Saturday are emblematic of a deeper political reality.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

According to YouGov polling published last month, 78 per cent of Britons believe it is unacceptable for Ukraine not to be included in peace negotiations — including 65 per cent who describe it as “completely unacceptable”. A total of 67 per cent of Britons say that they both want Ukraine to win and care a “great deal or fair amount” that it does so.

A different poll last month, also courtesy of YouGov, found that only one in five Britons (20 per cent) think maintaining good relations with the United States is more important than supporting Ukraine.

Zelenskyy, meanwhile, is viewed favourably by 64 per cent of Britons and unfavourably by only 16 per cent. Compare and contrast Donald Trump’s standing: 22 per cent view the US president favourably; 73 per cent view him unfavourably. The fieldwork for this polling was conducted from 16-17 February — long before Zelenskyy and Trump’s White House bust-up.

Starmer’s diplomacy in recent weeks has been unique, consummate and urgent. He has sought to reassure the Ukrainian president and his people of the UK’s absolute, unwavering commitment to their country’s cause. And he has endeavoured to do so without risking the sudden censure of Trump, whose whims — however unpredictable or unreasonable — matter for Ukraine’s fate. (Starmer recognises that the US president’s sincere anglophilia makes their relationship a powerful one. He has, to deploy Trump’s own vernacular, “cards”).

It was noteworthy that Starmer did not take to social media on Friday night to condemn the president and vice-president’s hostility towards Zelenskyy. A statement was issued hours later via a spokesperson; but by 10.00 pm GMT, the whole of the European continent (sans Britain) had already pronounced.

Nonetheless, Starmer rang both Zelenskyy and Trump in the immediate aftermath of the row. It was resolved that the planned visit by Zelenskyy to London would be brought forward, giving him the opportunity for a symbolic meeting at Downing Street followed by an audience with regal diplomat King Charles III.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

“I picked up the phone to president Trump, and I picked up the phone to president Zelensky”, Starmer told the BBC on Sunday. “That was my response.”

Trump has styled himself as a “mediator” between Russia and Ukraine as he seeks an unconditional ceasefire in the conflict. But Starmer’s role as an interlocutor between Zelenskyy and Trump is, increasingly, a defining diplomatic dynamic as peace is considered.

The prime minister has placed himself at the centre of European attempts to shape any deal between Moscow and Kyiv. Speaking on Sunday, he declared that European leaders — convened for talks at Lancaster House in London — had agreed to draft a peace plan to present to the US.

Starmer said: “The UK is prepared to back this with boots on the ground and planes in the air, together with others. Europe must do the heavy lifting.”

For his diplomatic efforts, Starmer has won commendation from across the political aisle in the UK. Former foreign secretary James Cleverly, for instance, wrote on X over the weekend that the PM has “done the right thing”.

He added: “We will need to go further, and bring other countries with us, but he has put the UK into a genuine position of leadership in support of Ukraine”.

Reflecting on the prime minister’s Sunday press conference, former defence secretary Ben Wallace commented: “An excellent statement on Ukraine by Sir Kier Starmer [sic]. He is to be congratulated on hosting this event and getting the tone and action points just right.”

Sir Roger Gale, the Conservative “grandfather of the House”, is another opposition politician to have praised the PM. He posted to X: “Whatever my criticism of Sir Kier Starmer’s [sic] domestic policy — [and] they are many — I believe that in the Leadership that he has shown and the progress that with European leaders he has made over the crisis in matters relating to Ukraine he deserves the united support of the [House of Commons].”

Significantly, these supportive remarks come after Starmer announced that defence spending will rise to 2.5 per cent in 2027, and to 3.0 per cent in the next parliament, last week. The PM made plain that the hike would come at the expense of the international aid budget — a “painful” but necessary decision. In an era of geopolitical instability, he explained, “the defence and security of the British people must always come first”. The resignation of Anneliese Dodds, the former development minister, followed.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

But the PM’s announcement, notwithstanding Dodds’ cutting “soft left” rebuke, has placed the government in the mainstream of British public opinion. New polling by YouGov suggests that two-thirds of Britons (65 per cent) are in favour of increasing defence spending at the expense of overseas aid. This compares with just 20 per cent who oppose the policy.

In this regard, the prime minister has proved an apparent geopolitical trailblazer. Emerging from over two hours of talks on Sunday, EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen hailed the bloc’s new plan to increase defence spending. It will be presented on Thursday, she said.

At home, there are already suggestions that Starmer could receive a political reward for his steadfast diplomacy. New polling by More in Common, shared this morning with Politico, shows the prime minister has gained 6 points on the question of who would make the better prime minister compared to last week. Then, the same pollster had Nigel Farage polling above Starmer. No longer.

Fifty-six per cent of Brits say the handling of negotiations on Ukraine reflects positively on the government. Meanwhile, Starmer’s net approval is up from -39 to -28. That is far from good, of course — but it is his best score since November. (The fieldwork for this polling was done from 28 February-2 March — so just after Zelenskyy’s Oval Office appearance.)

The prime minister was branded “never here Keir” by his political opponents for his sustained diplomatic engagement during the early months of his premiership. But the time Starmer spent abroad in the July-November period, manifestly, was an intelligent investment. Today, he is receiving an almighty windfall for it — primarily in geopolitical terms, but potentially in domestic political terms too.

It points to an ironic but I think clear conclusion: Starmer seems less lost in the world Trump is carving. His diplomatic responsibilities have imbued his government with purpose — and political definition.

At times such as this — uncertain and volatile — political fortune favours the brave. Starmer’s advocacy of Ukraine’s cause, at once absolute and diplomatically delicate, could well remake his premiership.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

Mandelson rebuked after saying Zelenskyy must give ‘unequivocal backing’ to Trump peace plan

Lunchtime soundbite

‘Like Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of Reform UK seems to have history equivocating over Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine.’

—  In response to Nigel Farage’s LBC phone-in, shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel has compared his stance to that of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

She also said: “Nigel Farage is completely wrong. President Zelenskyy is a hero, who has stood up to Putin’s aggression, and led his country’s defence against their barbaric and illegal invasion over the last 3 years — and it is troubling to not hear the Leader of Reform say that.

“For Nigel Farage to sit there pointing the finger at Zelenskyy is both morally wrong and diplomatically counterproductive. At this uncertain and dangerous time, one would hope that MPs of all stripes would be putting our national interest first, rather than playing politics.”

Now try this…

‘“President Zelensky is a hero”, says Kemi Badenoch’
BBC News reports.

‘Defense promises but scant detail as Europe enters decisive week’
Via Politico.

‘Can Starmer make Labour the security party?’
The prime minister has found the definition he lacked but tensions over spending cuts remain, writes the NS’ George Eaton. (Paywall)

On this day in 2022:

Under the Borders bill, Britain will not treat refugees with the humanity they deserve

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

The post Will Britain rally against Donald Trump — and around Keir Starmer? appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The meeting between Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart was convened so the two leaders could discuss the raw materials deal and the US administration’s attempts to end the war in Ukraine.  

But it culminated in intense public shouting match as Trump rowed in behind the comments issued by his vice president, JD Vance, who claimed that Ukraine should be more “thankful” for US support.

In a post to X on Saturday, the Reform UK leader said that the row was “regrettable” and warned that the fallout will leave Putin “feeling like the winner”.

He posted: “The spat in the White House last night is regrettable and will make Putin feel like the winner.

“But this is not the end of the story, far from it. A peace deal is essential and Ukraine needs the right security guarantees.”

Taking part in an LBC phone-in show on Monday morning, Farage was asked for further clarity on his view of Trump and Vance’s treatment of Zelenskyy. 

He responded: “Whatever the spat that occurred… let’s look at the very big picture to begin with.

“We after three years of war… are at a million battle casualties. We have a situation now where we either go for a peace deal or this continues for year after year after year.

“The truth is that the longer the war goes on, the more it suits Russia.

“What is interesting is that before Zelenskyy had left the White House, he’d realised that he had overplayed his hand and… he was willing to go back in and sign the minerals deal.

“I actually think good is going to come of Friday. Zelenskyy is going to sign the deal. The real worry I’ve got is… how do we put together a security package that ensures that Putin can’t do it again.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Farage added: “I think president Zelenskyy was very unwise to tell the Americans what would happen to them if they didn’t back him. I think it was unwise. Yes sure, Vance and Trump bit back. But I think in diplomatic terms, I think Zelenskyy played it very badly.”

Pressed on whether he saw anything “intemperate” in Trump’s language, the Clacton MP said: “Whether there was or whether there wasn’t, we’re heading towards peace. We’re heading towards peace. It’s a good thing.”

Asked if he would treat a guest as Trump did, Farage added: “I wouldn’t expect a guest to be rude to me in my own house, absolutely not. I would expect a guest to treat me with respect.”

He said he was not “defending” Trump and Vance’s behaviour, claiming he would “try not to” behave like that himself. 

However, he dismissed the pair’s approach as “irrelevant”.

The Reform leader added: “This is where we all go wrong. We’re all focusing on the row that happened. Maybe the row was bound to happen anyway. Zelenskyy wasn’t ready, maybe for this, and perhaps the Americans weren’t ready for it either. I don’t know.”

He also criticised Zelenskyy for not wearing a suit for his White House visit, and said he showed “no respect” to Trump through his choice of clothing.

He said: “Do you know what? If I turned up in the White House, I’d make sure I was wearing a suit and my shoes were cleaned.” 

Commenting on Zelenskyy’s military-style attire, he added: “I think there are times to wear it and there are times not to, perhaps.”

However, he went on to conceded that this is a “minor” point.

Responding to Farage’s comments, shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel said: “Nigel Farage is completely wrong. President Zelenskyy is a hero, who has stood up to Putin’s aggression, and led his country’s defence against their barbaric and illegal invasion over the last 3 years – and it is troubling to not hear the leader of Reform say that.

“For Nigel Farage to sit there pointing the finger at Zelenskyy is both morally wrong and diplomatically counterproductive. At this uncertain and dangerous time, one would hope that MPs of all stripes would be putting our national interest first, rather than playing politics

“But sadly, it is not surprising. Like Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of Reform UK seems to have history equivocating over Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine.”

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey said: “Nigel Farage is once again showing his true colours as Trump’s own spokesman here in Britain.

“Zelensky showed courage and integrity in that room – in stark contrast to Farage’s cowardly approach of licking Trump’s boots.

“Farage is more focused on promoting Trump and Musk’s interests in the UK than British interests in the States. He was once again parroting White House talking points this morning, to the dismay of British people here at home. It’s clearer than ever that Nigel Farage is simply out for himself and his Mar-a-Lago cronies.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post ‘Very unwise’: Nigel Farage suggests Zelenskyy was ‘rude’ in White House meeting appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The UK ambassador to the US said Zelenskyy needs to “get back on the same page” with Trump after he left the White House on Friday following an extraordinary shouting match.

Commenting on the Oval Office press conference, Lord Mandelson told ABC News a “very radical reset” was needed.

The New Labour grandee said: “We need a very radical reset. The reset has to consist of the US and Ukraine getting back on the same page.

“And president Zelensky giving his unequivocal backing to the initiative that president Trump is taking to end the war and to bring a just and lasting peace to Ukraine.

“And the Europeans too need to back the calls for a ceasefire. And by the way, I think that Ukraine should be the first to commit to a ceasefire and defy the Russians to follow.”

The X account Rapid Response 47, which communicates US administration policy and insists it holds “Fake News accountable”, shared the comments over the weekend. 

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey accused Lord Mandelson of muddying the government’s position.

He wrote on X: “What is Mandelson up to? You cannot square what the prime minister said this morning with this. What is the government’s actual position?

“Our man in DC should be securing US protection for our brave Ukrainian allies, not telling president Zelensky what to do.”

Speaking to ABC News, Mandelson added: “After what happened on Friday it’s clear that we need to bring the US and Ukraine back together again.

“I think the first thing that president Zelenskyy can do is make clear his commitment to the initiative that president Trump is taking and yes, I do think it would be a good idea if he signed the economic and commercial deal put forward by the US.

“Quite apart from the economic gain that Ukraine will derive from that it will also give the US a stake in Ukraine’s future.

“It will mean that US commercial interests, US individual citizens will be on the ground there. That will be an even greater, added incentive for the US to protect Ukraine in future and make sure war does not ensue again. That’s what I want to see. That’s what we all want to see.”

Asked whether Lord Mandelson’s position was now government policy, defence minister Luke Pollard said: “No. It’s certainly right that of all the people on our continent who want peace, the Ukrainians want it the most.

“But we’re still in discussions, diplomatic engagement, with our European, US and Ukrainian friends as to the shape of our deal.”

He told Sky News: “It’s certainly right that the war could stop tomorrow if president Putin stopped his illegal and unprovoked aggression. He could stop this war so what we need to find is a formula that allows a peace that is lasting and durable to be created, and then to be defended.”

Asked if Lord Mandelson misspoke, Pollard added: “That’s not government policy, and you wouldn’t ask me to commentate on every up and down in the negotiations. But we are seeking to find that lasting peace.”

Former foreign secretary James Cleverly posted to X: “The UK ambassador to Washington isn’t meant to communicate his own opinion, he is meant to communicate the UK government opinion.

“[Foreign secretary David] Lammy and [prime minister Keir] Starmer need to grip this.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Mandelson rebuked after saying Zelenskyy must give ‘unequivocal backing’ to Trump peace plan appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Volodymyr Zelenksyy arrived, like Keir Starmer and French president Emmanuel Macron before him, with Trump hovering in the West Wing entrance. The US president immediately drew attention to his Ukrainian counterpart’s simple, military-style attire. It was a premeditated troll. “Oh look, you’re all dressed up”, he remarked in a mocking tone. Trump waved to the cameras and then pointed back at Zelenskyy: “He’s all dressed up!”

Trump raised a fist. His famous thumbs-up stance, a gesture that could be interpreted by nervous world leaders as a sign of docility, did not emerge as it had for Macron and Starmer. A pat on the back suggested it was time for Zelenskyy to enter. 

The Ukrainian president obliged. The spectacle had begun. The trap was set. 

Zelenksyy took his place in the Oval Office, sitting in the same chair as Macron and Starmer before him. Trump began by touting the minerals deal that the meeting had been convened to formalise; he praised the bravery of Ukrainian soldiers but reiterated his call for an unconditional ceasefire. 

“We have had some very good discussions with Russia”, the US president declared in his opening statement. “I spoke with president Putin, and we’re going to try and bring this to a close. 

“It’s something that you want and that he wants. We’re going to have to negotiate a deal… I think something can happen.”

Zelenskyy shared images of Ukrainian prisoners of war held by Russia. Trump displayed minimal interest. 

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Week-in-Review newsletter, sign up for free and never miss this article.***

At around the eight-minute mark, reporters began firing questions. First they focused on the details of the raw materials deal, before pivoting to the nature of US support for Ukraine. Therein came the first instance of disagreement. Trump stressed the level of US financial backing delivered under the last administration. Zelenskyy countered by pointing to the significance of European support. 

“Europe really helped”, he said. “President Trump said that they made less support, but they are our friends and they are our supportive partners. They really gave a lot, Mr President.” 

Trump replied: “They did. But they gave much less — much less”. Both leaders laughed off the apparent dispute. “We’re not arguing!”, Trump clarified jokingly as he tapped Zelenskyy’s knee. 

A few minutes later, a reporter asked what “compromises” Trump could exact from the Ukrainian government to secure a peace deal. “You can’t do any deals without compromises. So certainly he’s going to have to make some compromises”, the US president responded. 

Trump described his role in the process as that of an “arbitrator” or “mediator”. 

He added: “So all I can do is see if I can get everybody at the table and get an agreement. And I think we’re going to end up with an agreement, otherwise I wouldn’t probably be even here today.”

Zelenskyy paused for a beat before attempting to respond himself. But Trump had already pointed to a new reporter huddled to his left. Zelenskyy lifted his hands above his knees in apparent exasperation — there was a subtle head shake and an existential glance towards the ceiling. 

The question, directed at Trump, came from a sycophant: “Do you think ultimately your legacy will be the peacemaker and not the president that led this country into another war, and ended foreign wars?”

The US president responded: “I hope it will. I mean, I hope I’m going to be remembered as a peacemaker. This would be a great thing if we could do this. I’m doing this to save lives, more than anything else. Second, is to save a lot of money — but I consider that to be far less important.”

He added: “Thank you Brian for that question. It was a nice question… You know, this could lead to a third world war, this was headed in the wrong direction. If we didn’t win this election, and by the way we won by a lot — it was a mandate — the popular vote by millions and millions of votes — we won everything, the districts, look at the areas of [Republican] red, take a look at a map. This was a big mandate. 

“And this was one of the things — I said we’re going to get this thing settled. If we didn’t win, this could very well have ended up in a third world war. And that would not have been a good situation.”

Trump gestures back to the reporter — it is Brian Glenn of the MAGA media outlet Real America’s Voice, whom the president has made a member of the White House press corps. Glenn is currently dating Trump loyalist congresswoman Marjorie Taylor-Greene, and was notably granted the first question at the US president’s press conference with Macron on Monday. 

Glenn’s second inquiry was destined for Zelenskyy. “Do you ever — why don’t you wear a suit? Why don’t you wear a suit? You are at the highest level in this country’s office, and you refuse to wear a suit — do you own a suit?”

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Week-in-Review newsletter, sign up for free and never miss this article.***

Trump smirks as an ill-tempered exchange ensues between Zelenskyy and Glenn. “I will wear a costume after this war is finished”, the Ukrainian president responded. “Maybe something like yours, yes, maybe something better I don’t know, we’ll see — maybe something cheaper.”

Glenn: “Thank you.”

Zelenskyy: “Thank you.”

In the next notable development, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins presses Trump on whether he will agree to security guarantees in the event of a peace deal. 

He says: “I don’t want to talk about security yet, because I want to get the deal done — you fall into the same trap as everyone else… I want to get the deal done… the security is the easy part…we’ll have workers there digging, digging, digging, taking the raw earth, so that we can create a lot of great product in this country. 

“So in that sense, you have something.”

Trump adds: “I don’t think you are going to need much security, I think once this deal gets done, it’s over. Russia’s not gonna want to go back and nobody’s going to want to go back. When this deal ends. I really believe this deal is — is going to be over.”

Zelenskyy shakes his head throughout Trump’s answer. He attempts to comment, but Trump cuts him off — clearly conscious of the Ukraine president’s intention to speak. He points to another reporter. Zelenskyy throws his right hand in the air; a gesture of despair. His body language begins to reflect the more belligerent footing the conversation has adopted. 

The next question comes from another Trump sycophant.  

“You had [Emmanuel] Macron and Keir Starmer at the White House this past week both of whom praised your courage and conviction to lead the pathway towards peace.

“Part of that involved though, reengaging with Russia in diplomatic relations — something that previous leaders lacked the conviction to do so. What gave you the moral courage and conviction to step forward and lead that?”

Zelenskyy tilts his head and directs his eyes to the reporter when Putin is mentioned. He remains steel-faced as Trump responds: “Boy, I love this guy… One America News does a great job. I like the question.”

He adds: “It’s a pathway to peace… You know, we’re very much involved. We got involved. It’s too bad we got involved. Because there should have been no involvement, because there should have been no war — and there shouldn’t have been 7 October. That would have never happened.”

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Week-in-Review newsletter, sign up for free and never miss this article.***

Zelenskyy asserts himself — “I can answer, please”. Before he does, Trump refers back to the exchange about the Ukrainian president’s attire. “I do like your clothing by the way”, he says, “I think he’s a great guy by the way [talking about the Real America’s Voice reporter]. 

“I don’t know if you do like each other, but, you know.”

There follows a long answer from Zelenskyy, expressing the need for a US security guarantee and Putin’s history of ignoring negotiated settlements. “We can’t just speak about ceasefire and speak and speak. It will not work”, he insists.

“He broke his own signature, 25 times, he broke a ceasefire.”

Trump contends: “Never with me. He never broke it with me”

The Ukrainian president responds: “No, no, you were the president. In 2016, you were the president… That’s why we will never accept just [a] ceasefire. It will not work without security guarantees.”

Zelenskyy and Trump field further questions — including one about free speech in the UK. Throughout, the US president disparages his predecessor, Joe Biden, and claims that he has “stopped wars that nobody ever heard about.”

Zelenskyy undertakes to prosecute his case more forcefully: “Europe is very important for us, because we really defend Europe for today, all Europeans really recognise that we are defending the line… and our people are dying. That’s why they helped us. 

“And also it’s about the need  — yes like the president said, you have big, nice ocean. But… Russia will go further, to Baltics and to Poland, by the way… It’s understandable for them, because they’ve been the USSR… Putin wants to bring them back to his empire. 

“It’s a fact. And when he will go there, if we will not stay, you will fight — your American soldiers. It doesn’t matter [if] you have ocean or not, your soldiers will fight.”

Upon further questioning, Trump says he is unwilling to visit Ukraine because a lot of its cities “are not recognisable — there’s not a building standing.”

Zelenskyy again contradicts his US counterpart. “No, no, no, we have very good cities. Yes, a lot of things [have] been destroyed, but mostly cities are alive, and people work, and children go to school.”

He suggests that Trump has been influenced by Kremlin propaganda: “This is very important, and maybe it’s Putin who is sharing this information that he destroyed us. He lost 700,000 people — 700,000 soldiers.”

The US president is prompted more and more by reporters about his relationship with Putin. He reveals he has “spoken to him on numerous occasions” and that the latest call “went well”.

Trump adds: “Well, if I didn’t align myself with both of them, you’d never have a deal. You want me to say really terrible things about Putin and then say, ‘Hi, Vladimir. How are we doing on the deal?’. 

“It doesn’t work that way. I’m not aligned with Putin. I’m not aligned with anybody. I’m aligned with the United States.”

He goes on, referring to Zelenskyy: “You see, the hatred he’s got for Putin. It’s very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate. He’s got tremendous hatred, and I understand that — but I can tell you the other side isn’t exactly in love with, you know, him either.”

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Week-in-Review newsletter, sign up for free and never miss this article.***

At this point, US vice-president JD Vance interjects: “So look, for four years [in] the United States of America, we had a president who stood up at press conferences and talked tough about Vladimir Putin, and then Putin invaded Ukraine and destroyed a significant chunk of the country. 

“The path to peace and the path to prosperity is maybe engaging in diplomacy.”

Zelenskyy asks to respond to Vance directly, and the VP yields. A long question follows, in which the Ukrainian president reiterates Putin’s record of exceeding the limits imposed on him by pacts. “What kind of diplomacy, JD, are you speaking about? What do you mean?”

Vance escalates: “I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country. Mr. President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come to the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media. 

“Right now you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the president.”

Zelensky hits back: “During the war, everybody has problems, even you. But you have a nice ocean and don’t feel [it] now, but you will feel it in the future.”

That comment rankled Trump, prompting the US president to intervene. “Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel. You’re in no position to dictate that”, the US president asserted, his voice growing more irritated.

“You don’t have the cards right now. You’re gambling with millions of lives.”

Zelensky returns once more: “I’m not playing cards.”

The conversation has, at this point, devolved into a full-scale row. Vance demands that Zelenskyy thank the US for its support; Zelenskyy insists he has done so many times; Trump slams Zelenskyy’s “attitude”.

Then, in a bizarre twist, the US president says he sympathises with the criticism Putin faced over accusations of Russian interference in the 2016 US election: “He had to go through that.”

He adds: “It came out of Hunter Biden’s bathroom. It came out of Hunter Biden’s bedroom. It was disgusting.”

Gesturing to Zelenskyy, the US president concludes: “The problem is, I’ve empowered you to be a tough guy. And I don’t think you’d be a tough guy without the United States… You are either going to make a deal, or we’re out. And if we’re out, you’ll fight it out. I don’t think it’s going to be pretty…

“But you’re not acting at all thankful and that’s not a nice thing. And I’ll be honest, that’s not a nice thing. Alright, I think we’ve seen enough, what do you think? 

“This is going to be great television. I will say that.”

Zelenskyy issues an ironic thumbs-up. Trump winks at an individual behind the camera. Vance slaps Trump’s arm.

The VP and president are pleased with their work. 

The ambush is quickly celebrated by administration officials and the president’s online outriders. Elon Musk posts to X shortly after: “Time to find out what really happened to the hundreds of billions of dollars sent to Ukraine.”

The reaction of stunned European leaders took slightly longer to roll in — but their support, when it did arrive, was overwhelming. Zelensky responded to the myriad statements with a simple message: “Thank you for your support”.

Those five words today appear over thirty times on his X feed.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Week-in-Review newsletter, sign up for free and never miss this article.***

Here in the UK, the saga prompted cross-party condemnation. Alicia Kearns, a Conservative MP and shadow minister, was one of the first to respond. She posted to X: “Zelenskyy is fighting for the survival of his people.

“We just witnessed what can only be described as bullying. Performative bullying for a domestic US audience. Just watching the video shamed me to my core. Utterly shaming.”

Simon Hoare, a Conservative MP and former minister, referred to a question he asked of the prime minister on Wednesday. “As I said in the commons… at PMQs: the FORMER leader of the free world.”

Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick said he was “sickened” by the “degrading spectacle”. Kemi Badenoch was less straightforward with her choice of language. “We need to remember that the villain is the war criminal president Putin”, she said. 

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey responded to the Conservative leader’s statement: “For someone who prides themself on being so ‘direct’, it’s striking you still can’t bring yourself to criticise president Trump directly”.

Davey had issued his own remarks calling out Trump and Vance’s “thuggery”.

Trade minister Douglas Alexander told BBC Radio 4 that not only were the scenes in the Oval Office “deeply troubling and sobering”, he argued they demonstrated “in the starkest possible terms” the extent to which “the world we’ve all experienced for the last 80 years” had changed. 

He also labelled Zelensky the “bravest political leader in Europe since Winston Churchill”.

Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, finally responded on Saturday morning. He referred to the debacle as “regrettable”.

For some time, the prime minister’s quiet was also conspicuous. As Zelenskyy responded to messages of support from world leaders on X, the prime minister’s views were expressed via a spokesperson. 

“The prime minister has tonight spoken to both president Trump and president Zelensky”, the statement, issued at around 10.00 pm, read.

“He retains unwavering support for Ukraine, and is doing all he can to find a path forward to a lasting peace based on sovereignty and security for Ukraine. 

“The prime minister looks forward to hosting international leaders on Sunday including president Zelensky.”

The comment, its timing and the channel through which it was issued reflect the precariousness of Starmer’s position as it relates to Ukraine and Trump. The prime minister’s visit to Washington DC on Thursday was hailed as a personal and diplomatic triumph. Sceptics had doubted Starmer’s ability to act as a “bridge” between the European continent and a White House as capricious as this. But Trump’s seemingly sincere praise, his endorsement of the Chagos Islands deal and his suggestion that the UK could avoid being hit by tariffs — were all recorded as meaningful victories. An impetuous Vance had tried to ambush the prime minister on free speech, a sinister portent of his attack on Zelenskyy; but Starmer parried those attacks effectively. Meanwhile, the PM’s offer of a second, unprecedented state visit appeared to genuinely move Trump. 

But Friday’s White House debacle has upended — in a singularly spectacular fashion — any diplomatic advances Starmer made this week. The US president has proved, once again, that he is untameable. He intends to end the Ukraine war by whatever means necessary — seemingly, on whatever terms are available. Right now, those are Putin’s terms. 

The prime minister’s statement yesterday evening suggests his ostensible strategy to operate as a transatlantic “bridge” persists. The summit of European leaders he is set to host on Sunday, attended by Zelenskyy, will test the opinion of one half of this formulation. Already, a view on the continent is hardening that Europe must achieve strategic “independence” from the White House — in both its current and future forms.

It begs the question: where will Starmer stand if Trump decides he does not need a bridge to “Europe” — and Europe, simultaneously, seeks strategic “independence” from the US?

The situation is at once delicate, urgent and fast evolving. 

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post How the Trump-Zelenskyy debacle unravelled — and where it leaves Starmer appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

In what is a significant hint the Conservatives could advocate leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) under her leadership, Badenoch will argue activists cannot be allowed to use international institutions or law to further a “political agenda”.

The Conservative leader will set out a “realist” stance on international affairs, as she calls for a foreign policy that supports the UK’s “national interest” first and foremost. 

She will say that the alliances and approaches that have defined the UK’s position on the international stage for generations need to be “reviewed”, and urge the government to ensure “sovereignty” is placed at the core of the UK’s foreign policy. 

Badenoch will say: “Twenty years ago, Irving Kristol talked of a conservative being a liberal mugged by reality.

“And, on foreign policy, that is exactly what I am: a conservative. Not a cosmopolitan internationalist. Not a supra-nationalist. Not a neo-con. But a conservative realist.

“Our foreign policy should seek to support our national interest. We should review those alliances, methods and approaches which have served our world well for three generations; working together to the greatest possible extent with those nations which share our values.

“But our sovereignty must be at the core of our foreign policy.

“The United Kingdom must accept reality. No-one owes us a living. No process is an end in itself. We can no longer hide behind vapid statements that were, at best, ambitious twenty years ago and are now outright irrelevant.

“It is time to speak the truth: the world has changed. And we are not ready.

“So, we must change too.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Badenoch will deliver these remarks in a major week for international diplomacy as the prime minister, Keir Starmer, prepares to travel to Washington DC for discussions over the future of Ukraine with Donald Trump. 

The US president has stated his intention to end the war in Ukraine, the third anniversary of which was marked on Monday, and has even directed administration officials to begin negotiations with their Russian counterparts. Ukrainian officials have not been invited to the talks, with Trump having dismissed president Voloydmyr Zelenskyy as a “dictator”. 

Starmer will use his trip to the United States to persuade the Trump administration that Ukraine must be involved in negotiations over the end of the war. Addressing a summit in Kyiv via video link on Monday, Starmer told world leaders in attendance that “Ukraine must have a seat at the table”.

He added: “And any settlement must be based on a sovereign Ukraine, backed up with strong security guarantees. The UK is ready and willing to support this with troops on the ground — with other Europeans, and with the right conditions in place.

“And ultimately a US backstop will be vital to deter Russia from launching another invasion in just a few years’ time.”

Badenoch, in a foreign policy speech trailed as “major” by the Conservative Party, will describe the primary purpose of a nation state as the defence of its “borders, its values and its people”. 

She will add: “Secondly, we must stop being naïve about international affairs. We’ve let ourselves be fooled into believing that international law alone can keep the peace.

“But when faced with a regime with no respect for the law, we need to be realistic. 

“We can no longer simply put our trust in international partnerships or supranational institutions as ends in themselves. Where these work for us and deliver in our national interest we will embrace them. NATO remains vital for European defence. 

“We should always prioritise closer trading relationships with open economies, and as a trading nation we need to protect the rules that underpin global commerce.”

The Conservative Party leader will also warn that international law could become a tool for those who seek to “advance an activist political agenda”.

“Where international discussions achieve results, like with the AUKUS Partnership or the CPTPP trade deal, we must support them.

“But ‘international law’ should not become a tool for NGOs and other critics to seek to advance an activist political agenda through international bodies and our domestic courts”, Badenoch will say.

“And if international bodies are taken over by activists, or by autocratic regimes like China or Russia, we must use our influence to stop them. And if that fails, we will need to disengage.”

She will add: “The message should be simple: we must do what it takes to protect Britain. That means not just our independent nuclear deterrent.

“But also the ability to protect our critical national infrastructure — at home and under the sea. It means having the capability required to contribute meaningfully to NATO-led deterrence in Europe, and the new technologies for the battles of tomorrow.

“Alongside this, we need to make sure that we have the infrastructure to keep Britain strong. We cannot put virtue signalling ahead of a realistic assessment of our national interest.

“That means prioritising our Energy Security, building our domestic R&D capabilities in the key technologies of the future, and defending critical industries, and our arms manufacturing, which are core to our nation’s strength.

“If we approach this challenge as a zero-sum game — as a simple choice between defence spending and public services — we will struggle to persuade the public to back it.  And there will be painful decisions on government spending.

“Any country that spends more interest on its debt than on defence, as the UK does today, is destined for weakness.”

Commenting ahead of the Conservative leader’s speech, a Labour Party spokesperson said: “Kemi Badenoch was part of a Conservative government which hollowed out our armed forces, made us more reliant on Putin for our energy needs and diminished Britain’s standing on the world stage. 

“We will always work constructively with opposition parties in the national interest but the Conservatives must take responsibility for their record over 14 years of government.

“If Kemi Badenoch was really the ‘realist’ she says she is, she’d be apologising to the British people for the damage she and her party did to our country.

“This Labour government is fixing the Tories’ mess and delivering on our Plan for Change, the core foundations of which are economic stability, national security, and border security.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Kemi Badenoch: UK must be willing to ‘disengage’ from international bodies appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

In recent days, the White House has been pressuring Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukraine’s president, to sign a $500 billion deal in which he would give the US half of his country’s mineral resources. 

The Trump administration has labelled this claim as “payback” for earlier US military assistance. But Zelenskyy has so far refused to sign, citing a lack of security guarantees. 

In an X post on Monday morning to mark the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Boris Johnson saluted the “continuing heroism of the Ukrainian people.”

The former prime minister, who left office in 2022, also condemned “the bizarre untruths currently being peddled” about the origins of the conflict. 

He added: “I urge people to keep cool and look at the facts of the continuing US support for Ukraine, under Donald Trump, and I remain convinced that Ukraine will have a great future as a free sovereign and independent nation. 

“Slava Ukraini!”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

In an interview with ITV’s Good Morning Britain, he further criticised the rhetoric surrounding the origins of the war, including that being peddled by the White House. 

Johnson, speaking from Kyiv, said: “What you’re hearing from the White House and a lot of people in America about the responsibility for the war and blaming Ukraine, this is Orwellian.

“You might as well blame the girl for attacking the shark in the opening reel of Jaws. It’s just total rubbish. Ukraine is the victim.”

He went on to say that a US-Ukraine minerals deal would “commit the [United States] not only to further financing of Ukraine, but also to a free, sovereign and secure Ukraine.

“And that is not to be sneezed at. That’s a very, very important commitment. It also, as it happens, spells out in the agreement that Russia is the aggressor in this war. 

“Now, people will say, ‘Oh, this deal is extortionate for Ukraine, and America is being too rapacious’, but not a penny can flow from this investment fund that is going to be set up unless you have a free, sovereign and secure Ukraine.

“And don’t forget, a sovereign country is a great thing. A sovereign country can decide which clubs it wants to join, like Nato. A sovereign country can decide which troops it wants to invite onto its soil to help protect it.”

Press on whether it is his understanding that the US and Ukraine will sign a minerals deal over the coming days, Johnson said: “It’s my hope that they will. I can’t absolutely be sure that that is going to happen. 

“Various drafts have been floating around over the last few days. 

“The only point I’m trying to make is that when you look at this deal, when you look at what it says in black and white about the American commitment to Ukraine, to the freedom, sovereignty and security of Ukraine, when you look at what it envisages for the long term, for Ukraine, that’s integration with the West, economic integration with the West, a big partnership with most powerful economy in the world — that’s positive for a country that wants to be free from Russian control. 

“That’s positive, in my view, for Ukraine. Yes, it is a good deal for United States as well.”

He added: “America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price for Ukraine is reasonable.”

Security minister Dan Jarvis was later questioned over Johnson’s claim that a minerals deal between the US and Ukraine could be agreed soon.

He told Good Morning Britain: “The prime minister [Keir Starmer]… is travelling to Washington later this week. He spent the weekend talking to international partners.

“It does feel like this is a very important moment, an opportunity to bring together a process that will lead to the conclusion of this conflict, which has gone on for far too long.

“The human cost for the people of Ukraine is unbearable, and the UK will do everything it possibly can to both support Ukraine… and work with our international allies — of which, of course, the Americans are absolutely key — to bring this illegal invasion by Putin to a conclusion.”

Pressed on Johnson’s comments, Jarvis said: “Let’s see where we get to over the next few days.

“As a former prime minister, he will understand that there is a diplomatic process that is underway. That’s why the prime minister spent the weekend talking to international allies.

“That’s why the prime minister is flying to Washington later this week. It does feel like it is a pivotal moment.

“What the UK will do is work closely with our international allies, both in Europe… and of course, not least, with the special relationship we have with the US.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

It comes on the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine which has led to tens of thousands of deaths. 

Home Office minister Dan Jarvis has said that widening travel sanctions for Russian elites would “bolster our own UK national security”.

Speaking to Times Radio on Monday morning about the plan, the security minister said: “It will work by expanding the criteria for exclusion that sits with the Home Secretary.

“So this will mean that those Russian elites, those people who are close to Putin, those people who have been able to take resource from Russia, those people who are able to wield influence there, will now not be able to travel to the UK in the way that they have done previously.

“This will not only put further pressure on Russia, on the Russian elites and on Putin’s regime, but it will also bolster our own UK national security, because these are not people coming here to do good things.

“These measures will ensure that they’re not able to come here any longer in the way that they have for some time.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

The plan “compliments” the Foreign Office’s existing sanctions on Russian individuals, Jarvis claimed. He also suggested that some 1,700 people affected by those sanctions would be in the remit of the ban.

Local and federal politicians as well as managers or directors of large Russian companies will face exclusion from the UK under the rules, which come on top of existing travel bans on high-profile business figures.

Reflecting on the new rules, foreign secretary David Lammy said it was time to “turn the screws” on Vladimir Putin’s Russia on Sunday.

Defence secretary John Healey added: “Keeping the Ukrainians in their fight and as strong as possible at any negotiating table is critical not only for them, but for the security of the UK.

“These new measures send a powerful message that we will do what it takes to turn the tables on Putin’s aggression.”

The new sanctions also comes as prime minister Keir Starmer is expected to join world leaders in a call hosted by Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday.

The PM restated Britain’s “ironclad” backing for Kyiv in a series of conversations with allies over the weekend as he prepares to make the case for safeguards to protect the country’s sovereignty on his visit to the US later this week.

He is expected to address leaders from the G7 and across Europe as part of a group call in a show of solidarity amid fragile transatlantic relations.

Security minister Dan Jarvis has reiterated the government stance that Ukraine’s “rightful place” is in Nato, despite Donald Trump’s apparent opposition to the move, the security minister said on Monday morning.

The US president has said Ukraine joining the alliance is unlikely.

Asked if Nato membership for Ukraine was a realistic goal while Mr Trump was in the White House, Jarvis told Sky News: “The UK government is very clear that Ukraine is on an irreversible path to Nato membership.

“We think that Ukraine’s rightful place is in Nato.”

He added: “It is not about overruling the US, it is about working closely with our partners in Nato to have these kind of conversations.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Fresh sanctions on Russian elites will ‘bolster UK national security’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Every social media tirade, standard diplomatic procedure dictates, should justify some new summit so agreed action can be considered and implemented. Earlier this week, Emmanuel Macron hastily convened European premiers in Paris for discussions over the future of Ukraine. But Trump’s chaotic briefing since has further complicated matters. The escalating war of words between the US president and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy exposes the futility of old world instincts in the new world the former is forging.

In two bursts across Tuesday and Wednesday, Trump claimed Zelenskyy has an approval rating of “4 per cent”; is doing a “terrible job” as Ukraine president; and is acting as a “dictator without elections”. Alongside these comments, came the suggestion that Ukraine started the war — not Russia or Vladimir Putin.

The profound implications of Trump’s stance will not have been lost on Downing Street and Keir Starmer, whose strategy of hugging the US president close (or as close as possible) is facing renewed challenge. Since the US presidential election in November, Starmer has sought to stress the thin overlap between his government’s aims and those of the now-incumbent Trump administration. The sweeping diplomatic differences, on issues like the Ukraine war, have been minimised and downplayed. The approach, suffice it to say, has demanded significant rhetorical contortion.

But Trump’s fickle politics cares little for the UK-US “special relationship”. His vision for Ukraine has evolved in recent weeks — no doubt shaped by early conversations between the US administration and the Kremlin. It was Zelenskyy’s suggestion Trump is swimming in a thick soup of Russian propaganda that prompted his above comments.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

Trump’s remarks effected Starmer’s most overt criticism of US foreign policy since taking office. In a call with Zelenskyy, the UK prime minister reiterated his support for “Ukraine’s democratically elected leader”. A No 10 readout of the conversation revealed Starmer told his Ukraine counterpart it is “perfectly reasonable to suspend elections during wartime as the UK did during World War Two”.

Starmer, it is reported, wants to be a bridge between the United States and Europe. But how just tenable is this approach when Trump is tracking more and more toward the worldview promulgated by Putin?

The ramifications of this new reality stretch far beyond British politics — that much is plain. And the lobby lens of Westminster oneupmanship can distort just as much as it reveals. But the new diplomatic disorder, and its construction by an ascendant Trump-Putin axis, begs questions of all of the UK’s political parties. Their answers — or lack thereof — deserve some scrutiny.

Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservative Party, is a case in point. Addressing the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) conference on Monday, Badenoch praised Trump for “fixing” problems as US president — problems he had initially spotted in his first term in the White House. “People ask me what difference new leadership will make?”, Badenoch stated. “Well, take a look at president Trump.”

On Wednesday morning, Bloomberg political editor Alex Wickham noted “some disquiet” in Conservative circles over Badenoch and her frontbench’s lack of comment on the situation in Ukraine. The Tory leader’s ARC speech had contained no reference to the negotiations being conducted between the US and Russian governments — or the war generally.

But Badenoch ended her relative silence on Wednesday afternoon in response to Trump’s “dictator” diatribe. Zelenskyy “is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion”, the Conservative leader insisted in a post to X.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

She added: “President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight — and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending — there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5 per cent sitting on his desk.

“That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.”

There was no overt criticism of the US president by name, despite the apparent denunciation of his “dictator” remark. The two phrases — “Zelensky is not a dictator” and “President Trump is right” — spoke to the fine balance Badenoch sought to strike with her statement.

And contrast Badenoch’s response to the comments issued by former Conservative defence secretary Ben Wallace, who accused Trump of echoing Russian “propaganda lines” on Wednesday morning (pre “dictator” remark). See also the comments of former Conservative MP and cabinet minister Simon Clarke — who recently introduced Badenoch as the warm-up act for her New Year speech. He labelled Trump’s Ukraine stance “utterly appalling”.

The former levelling up secretary said: “Whatever the admiration some on the (centre) right may have for other aspects of the president’s agenda, his position … will embolden a murderous tyrant and sows the seeds for further, even more serious conflict in Europe.”

One takeaway from Badenoch’s statement is that she is not about to stop praising the US president’s general initiative in government.

The Liberal Democrats, as I argued last week, are the foremost critics of Donald Trump in Westminster. Unsurprisingly then, Lib Dem leader Ed Davey has called out the US president’s remarks in the strongest possible terms. He has labelled Trump “the Spokesperson for Vladimir Putin”, and accused him of “parroting” Kremlin propaganda.

After Trump’s Zelenskyy comments, Davey added: “[This] must be where the line is drawn.

“It is my sincere hope that the whole political spectrum in the United Kingdom will speak with one voice in opposition to Trump’s lies.”

Davey has spent the best part of today pointing to Reform UK leader and Trump chum Nigel Farage’s conspicuous silence. “You seem unusually quiet there… @Nigel_Farage any thoughts?”, he posted this morning.

Then came the follow-up: “There’s a rumour that Nigel Farage is keeping his head down because he’s off to a Trump cheerleading conference over the weekend.

“I’m afraid I’m being proved right — Farage is far more interested in Trump’s success than British security. He is a bootlicker and a plastic patriot.”

This afternoon however, Farage became the last UK political leader to reject Trump’s characterisation of Zelenskyy — over 20 hours after Badenoch’s intervention on X. Speaking to GB News, the Reform leader insisted that Zelenskyy “is not a dictator”.

But he added: “It’s only right and proper that Ukrainians have a timeline for elections.”

The Reform leader did go on to defend Trump’s conduct so far, saying he promised to “bring Putin to the negotiating table”, and “that is exactly what he’s done”.

“Is it right to try to seek peace in a war that has now seen one million battle casualties? Yes”, Farage said. He added that European allies are upset because “they have shown themselves to be pretty irrelevant.”

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

Still, Farage’s long silence — broken by his GB News interview — was telling.

The Reform leader is set to appear at CPAC, the pro-Trump Conservative Political Action Conference, in Washington DC this weekend. Perhaps the Reform leader feared the backlash from MAGA acolytes if he rejected the president’s Ukraine stance. Perhaps it is the power of Elon Musk, as the ringleader of the ruthless Online Right, that Farage dreads. By straying from the MAGA line, Farage risks inciting Musk’s fury. (The Tesla owner has unsurprisingly backed Trump’s “dictator” comment).

Farage’s stance on the Ukraine conflict is one of the reasons Reform UK is politically vulnerable. During the 2024 general election campaign, Reform’s insurgency was stalled after Farage suggested the West “provoked” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine by expanding the European Union and NATO military alliance eastwards. The discourse, at best, distracted from Reform’s central election pitch and, at worst, repelled potential voters.

Trump’s recent comments have re-exposed this soft underbelly.

And so this saga serves as a test for Farage: is he willing to act as a serious UK political actor and track toward the mainstream of British public opinion? Or is he more concerned with courting MAGA sentiment, and the support of a disproportionately noisy online fringe?

Farage must choose: the US speaker circuit or the House of Commons? MAGA opinion or British public opinion? Fringe or mainstream?

His eleventh-hour intervention would suggest Reform is reckoning with these questions. In the end though, the political rationale is just too compelling. According to a recent YouGov poll, just 3 per cent of Britons agree with Trump that Ukraine is to blame for Russia’s invasion of its sovereign territory. 8 per cent believe both sides are equally responsible, while an overwhelming 77 per cent blame Russia.

The findings are consistent across supporters of all political parties, including more than 60 per cent of Reform voters.

The status of MP was always going to confer upon Farage additional responsibilities — ones that he might have sidestepped in his erstwhile extra-parliamentary life. Trump’s Ukraine comments serve as a notable example of an issue from which the Reform leader could not escape.

After all, the time Farage took to pronounce on the issue speaks to his enduring political weaknesses and vulnerabilities.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

Starmer backs Zelenskyy as Ukraine’s ‘democratically elected leader’ after Trump attack

Lunchtime soundbite

‘Let’s be clear — Zelenskyy is not a dictator. But it’s only right and proper that Ukrainians have a timeline for elections.’

—  Nigel Farage breaks his silence and gives his view on his friend Donald Trump’s attacks on the Ukrainian president.

Now try this…

‘Raise taxes to pay for defence spending increase, ministers urge Reeves’
Labour insiders believe it would be difficult for the Conservatives to oppose such a rise, the i reports. (Paywall)

‘VP Vance *WILL* Raise Free Speech Issues with UK Govt During Official Visit Next Week.’
Via National Pulse.

‘Britain and France working on plans for ‘reassurance force’ to protect Ukraine’
The Guardian reports.

On this day in 2024:

Sunak faces fresh by-election headache after Scott Benton loses suspension appeal

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

The post From Starmer to Farage: what responses to Trump’s attack on Zelenskyy reveal appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The UK prime minister dismissed the claim by the US president in a call with his Ukrainian counterpart on Wednesday evening. 

According to a Downing Street readout of that conversation, Starmer told Zelenskyy it was “perfectly reasonable to suspend elections during wartime as the UK did during World War Two”. 

Earlier this week, Trump issued the baseless claim that Ukraine started the current conflict with Russia, before stating Zelenskyy has an approval rating of 4 per cent.

In response, Zelenskyy accused the US president of living in a “disinformation space” created by Russian propaganda. 

A Downing Street spokesperson said: “The prime minister spoke to president Zelensky this evening and stressed the need for everyone to work together.

“The prime minister expressed his support for president Zelensky as Ukraine’s democratically elected leader and said that it was perfectly reasonable to suspend elections during wartime as the UK did during World War Two.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservative Party, also rejected Trump’s comments on Wednesday. In a statement posted to X, she insisted “president Zelenskyy is not a dictator.”

She added: “He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. 

“Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative prime ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.”

The row comes as the prime minister prepares to head to Washington next week for his first meeting with Trump since his inauguration in January.

Downing Street noted that in his phone call with Zelenskyy, Starmer had “reiterated his support for the US-led efforts to get a lasting peace in Ukraine that deterred Russia from any future aggression.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Starmer backs Zelenskyy as Ukraine’s ‘democratically elected leader’ after Trump attack appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The former defence secretary’s comments came after Trump appeared to blame Ukraine for starting war against Russia. In a press conference on Tuesday, the US president criticised Kyiv’s negotiation skills and suggested the war in Ukraine could have been “settled very easily”.

After an extraordinary meeting between senior American and Russian officials in Saudi Arabia, Trump said of Ukraine: “They’ve had a seat [at the table] for three years and a long time before that.

“You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.”

Touting his own negotiation skills, Trump also said he was “more confident” about a peace deal after Tuesday’s talks, attended by US secretary of state Marco Rubio.

Asked about Ukraine’s absence from the talks, Trump said: “I’m very disappointed. I hear that, you know, they’re upset about not having a seat.

“Well, they’ve had a seat for three years and a long time before that. This could have been settled very easily.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

He also called for elections to take place in Ukraine as he took aim at president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s “approval ratings”.

The US president said: “We have a situation where we haven’t had elections in Ukraine, where we have martial law, essentially martial law in Ukraine, where the leader in Ukraine, I mean, I hate to say it, but he’s down to 4 per cent approval rating.”

He added: “If Ukraine wants a seat at the table, wouldn’t the people have to say it has been a long time since they had an election?

“That’s not a Russian thing, that’s something coming from me and coming from many other countries also.”

Wallace was asked about Trump’s comments in an interview with LBC on Wednesday morning. 

Responding, the former defence secretary said: “Well, I know Mar-a-Largo is quite close to Disney World, but that was pure Disney in both sort of facts and reality. 

“And I think what you were actually hearing is Donald Trump‘s realisation that if you don’t have skin in the game, you don’t get a say, as much as you think you do. 

“I mean, I saw them all sitting around that table in Riyadh in Saudi Arabia.”

He added: “I’m sure they did a lot of interesting things in four hours. But fundamentally, if you want to get a peace deal in Ukraine, you’re going to need the people who are going to have to put skin in the game to make it happen.”

Asked how Trump’s comments will go down within Russia, Wallace added: “I think the Kremlin have been pretty happy since day one. 

“If the White House is repeating those sort of propaganda lines that, you know, Ukraine started the war, etc, then of course they’ll be really happy that people are rewriting history.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Ex-defence secretary Ben Wallace says Trump parroting Russian ‘propaganda lines’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.