Best Of

Starmer is all in.

No way to back out of this now.

He'll have to resign if he ends up somehow having to dump Zelensky for Trump's Putinist USA.

These are the highest of stakes a PM gets to play.

UK Prime Minister
@10DowningStreet

The UK will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

https://x.com/10DowningStreet/status/1895950498576154630

I am going to stick my neck out and say that he will honour his pledge. I don't like Starmer or his politics but I think he has a brain and he also has a moral code. I am going to do something very rare and trust him to be doing the right thing for the right reasons.

Of course on all other matters my normal cynicism is maintained but in this instance I think he is genuine.

I disagree, I’m the other way. There is absolutely no way Putin will agree to allow what’s left of Ukraine to join NATO, will never sign anything allowing that, so Starmer and Europe are locked on course to selling out Ukraine. Wave after wave of talks will fall on the question of NATO membership until Starmer and Europe will insist Ukraine cuts a deal that will never be justified or fair, in order to make the war stop.

There is no “win win” or lasting peace option from where it is now, so all hugs in Downing Street and elsewhere in Europe have to be seen as ultimately leading to that betrayal and an unfair deal for Ukraine forced on them. that in itself will set the precedent sovereign borders can be redrawn, that will be music to the Kremlin’s ears.

What happens, if U.K. and France form a security alliance that includes a bunch of European states and Ukraine? Complete with a nuclear guarantee.

If in a deal from talks, Putin doesn’t sign such a deal, so the war goes on. The only deal Putin will sign is a deal leaving a weak and exposed Ukraine his country can interfere with.

The security guarantees you suggest outside of negotiated deal? To be honest, UK and France won’t sign that, or anything with security guarantees from them that could easily trigger a bigger crisis than this one, drag them into this or a larger conflict. If I’m right, then yes, all these hugs are very short termist and very hollow.

How would you answer the question of how independent is the UK nuclear deterrent, to be able to commit it as you suggest? All the Chagos investigation I have been doing, has left me with impression UK defence and security is so very much woven in with the US. UK has down the decades become locked and interlocked with US on defence and intelligence, I think it is in part what has led us to the Chagos Deal US and India want us to sign, and leaves a genuine question how quickly UK could untangle itself from US and become independent, if it really needed to. If I am right in that as well, we have to acknowledge the part it plays in all Whitehall decisions taken.

I don’t see any posts to PB taking into account how deeply UK is in bed with US on military technology and intelligence, and acknowledging the huge impact this has on political decision making.

I literally posted exactly this with regard to Five Eyes earlier this afternoon. A repeat of the same posting I made yesterday.

Correct. It's a very well known problem, that we already encountered a year or more ago with Storm Shadow, with Biden saying "not over Russia". There were reports in summer 2024 about how the US was refusing to allow its capabilities, which were needed, to be used.

Given that the USA has turned something between indifferent and hostile, Europe will need sovereign capabilities across the board over time - and to isolate an isolationist USA.

This is ITAR regs (internation Traffic in Arms Regulations), which have been in a thing since 1976, and I have been reading articles about in the trade press since the 1980s. The USA have used them to control supply of arms to third countries, sometimes to benefit their own industry, and in missiles, for example, there has been an emphasis in Europe of making arms ITAR-proof for a couple of decades. It was one of their perks for providing overarching security, reserve currency etc - Trump and Vance burnt that down, and the world is changing, including for them.

Here's an Economist piece from 2008 about how that had THEN driven a fall in US share of the satellite market from 83% to 50%:

The result is a system that is too successful in keeping American technology out of foreign hands. Before 1999, when the State Department took over the export regulation of satellites, America dominated commercial satellite-making with an average market share of 83%. Since then, this share has declined to 50%, according to Space Review. ITAR's critics blame the change in export controls. As bidding opened in July this year for the €3.4 billion ($5 billion) of contracts for Galileo, a constellation of 30 positioning satellites being built by the European Union and the European Space Agency, European officials cited export controls as a reason for avoiding anything to do with America wherever possible.
https://archive.is/DWCxN#selection-1211.1-1215.372

I've been pointing out for some time that one of President Chump's problems is that the USA is nothing like as dominant in reality as it is in his head, which is stuck somewhere between the 1950s and the 1970s. They had 40% of world GDP in 1960; now it is under 25%.

He just walked into a lamp post wrt 'I can pull a peace settlement out of thin air in one day', and felt he had to deflect blame onto Zelenskyy because of his overblown ego, which has resulted in him looking globally like the self-obsessed he has become. There are a lot more lamp posts down the road.

The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?

The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.

This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.

It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.

Governor Josh Shapiro: He went from being the leader of the Free World to now, in just one month, wanting to be a leader of a single hemisphere, leaving China and Russia in charge of the other hemispheres. That is deeply, deeply dangerous for America’s national security interests.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1895953699811275105

Maybe. It is true of Russia, but America is still arming Taiwan. Trump's beef against China goes back decades.

The paradox is, that if Taiwan falls, America loses access to its chips so it may be in America's selfish interest to onshore Taiwan's chip-making (and any other manufacturing) industry, and once it has done that, defending Taiwan is less important. We are already starting to see this technology transfer.

If you were Taiwanese, would you rely on Trump right now ?

Trump declines to answer question about China and Taiwan
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-declines-answer-question-about-china-taiwan-2025-02-26/

The 'technology transfer" will take a decade or more, if it ever happens. The new US plants are not the leading edge; Intel has a better shot of providing that this decade.

The US has a huge strategic interest in defending Taiwan's independence, but with Trump, who the hell knows ?

Starmer is all in.

No way to back out of this now.

He'll have to resign if he ends up somehow having to dump Zelensky for Trump's Putinist USA.

These are the highest of stakes a PM gets to play.



UK Prime Minister
@10DowningStreet

The UK will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

https://x.com/10DowningStreet/status/1895950498576154630

I am going to stick my neck out and say that he will honour his pledge. I don't like Starmer or his politics but I think he has a brain and he also has a moral code. I am going to do something very rare and trust him to be doing the right thing for the right reasons.

Of course on all other matters my normal cynicism is maintained but in this instance I think he is genuine.

I disagree, I’m the other way. There is absolutely no way Putin will agree to allow what’s left of Ukraine to join NATO, will never sign anything allowing that, so Starmer and Europe are locked on course to selling out Ukraine. Wave after wave of talks will fall on the question of NATO membership until Starmer and Europe will insist Ukraine cuts a deal that will never be justified or fair, in order to make the war stop.

There is no “win win” or lasting peace option from where it is now, so all hugs in Downing Street and elsewhere in Europe have to be seen as ultimately leading to that betrayal and an unfair deal for Ukraine forced on them. that in itself will set the precedent sovereign borders can be redrawn, that will be music to the Kremlin’s ears.

Not at all. Russia is already struggling - why do you think they are relying on North Korea to provide cannon fodder? What is important is to do what Ukraine wants and keep them in the game. Make sure they can continue to fight this war and force Russia into concessions. It doesn't ned Putin to agree to Ukraine joining NATO, not at the moment. That can come later. What it needs is for NATO minus the USA to give Ukraine they need to carry on the fight.

What weapons would those be, from our run-down stocks? We can give Ukraine money to buy American arms, but those sales would need American government approval – and to be in time for use, would need to come from US Army stocks. Arms manufacturing pipelines are long and slow. Taiwan is currently taking delivery of weapons it bought during the first Trump presidency.

Russia is slowly winning on the battlefield, despite its huge death tolls, or at least is not losing. The Russian economy has not collapsed, despite sanctions, and as soon as peace breaks out and sanctions are lifted, Russia can rebuild its treasury by resuming exports of its dig-and-sell commodities, including gas and oil.

So what Ukraine needs is America back in the game, at least as backstop. With American support, Russia cannot win. Without it (and even with it under Trump) the best Ukraine can hope for is not to give too much away in any ceasefire agreement or peace deal.

So in the short term, America needs Starmer and Lammy and Mandelson, and also Healey through Nato, to patch things up with the White House, at least to get things back to where they were before Vance and Zelensky started arguing.

That's true and not true.

Every critique of Ukraine is also true of Russia:

It can't win without foreign assistance.
It's economy is faltering.
There's a limited stock of weapons for them to draw down.

Ultimately, the "bear case" for Ukraine is that it cannot win because Russia has so many more resources. But is that true? Russia has 3x the population of Ukraine, but attacking is much harder than defending, and holding territory is hard.

It seems that neither side can actually land a knock out blow. The problem, ultimately, is that Putin can't sell the current situation as a win to his people, and therefore is obliged to push on, despite losses that aren't that different to British ones in the worst parts of WW1, and for what?

Starmer is all in.

No way to back out of this now.

He'll have to resign if he ends up somehow having to dump Zelensky for Trump's Putinist USA.

These are the highest of stakes a PM gets to play.



UK Prime Minister
@10DowningStreet

The UK will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

https://x.com/10DowningStreet/status/1895950498576154630

I am going to stick my neck out and say that he will honour his pledge. I don't like Starmer or his politics but I think he has a brain and he also has a moral code. I am going to do something very rare and trust him to be doing the right thing for the right reasons.

Of course on all other matters my normal cynicism is maintained but in this instance I think he is genuine.

I disagree, I’m the other way. There is absolutely no way Putin will agree to allow what’s left of Ukraine to join NATO, will never sign anything allowing that, so Starmer and Europe are locked on course to selling out Ukraine. Wave after wave of talks will fall on the question of NATO membership until Starmer and Europe will insist Ukraine cuts a deal that will never be justified or fair, in order to make the war stop.

There is no “win win” or lasting peace option from where it is now, so all hugs in Downing Street and elsewhere in Europe have to be seen as ultimately leading to that betrayal and an unfair deal for Ukraine forced on them. that in itself will set the precedent sovereign borders can be redrawn, that will be music to the Kremlin’s ears.

Not at all. Russia is already struggling - why do you think they are relying on North Korea to provide cannon fodder? What is important is to do what Ukraine wants and keep them in the game. Make sure they can continue to fight this war and force Russia into concessions. It doesn't ned Putin to agree to Ukraine joining NATO, not at the moment. That can come later. What it needs is for NATO minus the USA to give Ukraine they need to carry on the fight.

Reposted from the end of the previous thread.

My take on Spatgate is that I don’t think there was a deliberate plan by anyone to sabotage the meeting. What happened was the result of thin skinned egotists losing it.

After about 30 mins the meeting which has been largely cordial is wrapping up. Vance makes a point targeted against Biden. Says Biden’s chest thumping didn’t stop Putin invading Ukraine. Vance says Trump has the answers - diplomacy (= dialogue) and dealing with Putin.

Z addresses Vance somewhat confrontationally. Makes the point that dealing with Putin doesn’t work. A deal was struck with Putin in 2022 and Putin went back on the deal. Z concludes to V “JD what kind of diplomacy you are speaking about? What do you mean?”

Vance is riled. He feels challenged by Z who is effectively saying Vance is wrong. Diplomacy doesn’t work with Putin.

Vance loses his cool. He is angry that Z has publicly disagreed with his one significant contribution to the meeting, challenging him in front of the whole world. He finds it disrespectful and petulantly reacts saying Zelensky is ungrateful. He raises his voice, points his finger, accuses Z of criticising America, says Ukraine is struggling in its war effort and calls Z disrespectful.

Z does not accept Vance’s portrayal of Ukraine struggling. Warns America that Putin could come for them next and that they will feel the influence (threat) of Russia

Trump - triggered initially by Vance saying Z is disrespecting America is further triggered by Z telling America what it feels and it all kicks off.

Vance pours oil onto the fire challenging Z by asking him if he has even thanked America for its help. Takes him to task for “campaigning for the Democrats in Pennsylvania”

It then further escalates.

Conclusion. Z was perhaps unwise to publicly challenge Vance’s “diplomacy thesis”. Vance felt belittled by this and reacted calling Z disrespectful and ungrateful. Trump was triggered by Vance and further triggered by Z forecasting America would in the future also fell threatened by Russia. Trump and Vance both lose it.

Both spacehopper and teh hillbilly have fragile egos. Both absolute arses.