logo
Britain has the worst government at the most dangerous possible time

Britain has the worst government at the most dangerous possible time

Telegraph19-02-2025

This is a critical moment that calls for heroic leadership, and yet we are saddled with a Cabinet of hypocrites, phoneys and cowards. Donald Trump is pulling the plug on Ukraine, and seemingly attempting to oust Volodymyr Zelensky (who he has wrongly dubbed a 'dictator'), but Britain has nothing useful to contribute other than fake outrage, sentimental chest-beating and pledges it cannot afford. Trump appears to be conceding far too much to Russia, and yet we can't do anything about it. Labour's sanctimoniousness cannot hide its complicity in Ukraine's betrayal: our political class is no better than the rest of Europe's freeloading political elites.
If Keir Starmer really cared about the security of the West, and the fate of Kyiv, he would tear up his entire agenda. He would announce a rearmament programme à la 1934, and the reconstruction of a homegrown military industrial supply chain. He would go for growth, ditch Rachel Reeves and Ed Miliband's Leftist idiocy, suspend net zero to cut energy costs, slash taxes and deregulate. He would drastically increase the size of the Armed Forces, transform procurement, and embrace AI and modern warfare technology. He would reverse his splurge on the welfare state to pay for vastly more military personnel. He would fix our nuclear deterrent. With US foreign policy now centred around the promotion of free speech, he would cancel Britain's most illiberal laws and reposition himself as America's comrade-in-arms. He would stop sucking up to China, and prepare for trade dislocation.
All of this would allow him to travel to Washington holding his head high, reminding the president that of course Ukraine didn't start the war, conceding that Trump is right to demand a greater military contribution from European countries and offering grown-up, realistic solutions.
Alas, the Prime Minister is the wrong man at the wrong time. Starmer is temperamentally and ideologically unfit to stand up for the free world and to lead a historic rearmament of Britain, his judgment impaired by his background as a radical Left-wing human rights lawyer, his instincts invariably wrong or stuck in the 1990s, his understanding of history, economics, geopolitics and the American psyche lamentable.
No true war-time prime minister would humiliate our long-suffering Armed Forces by doubling down on the persecution of soldiers in Northern Ireland, or focus obsessively on handing the Chagos, host to key military bases, to an ally of China, citing ludicrous 'international law' considerations and picking the wrong side in the new struggle of the Great Powers.
No real war-time leader would choose to prioritise spending more on welfare and his public sector client groups while refusing to allocate more to defence, as if the non-existent peace dividend still existed. No statesman would glibly propose sending peacekeeping troops or typhoons to Ukraine at a time when the British Army is smaller, per capita, than it has been for 300 years, when our military is catastrophically bereft of ships, of planes, of munitions, of drones, tech and money, when generals fear that we could barely cope with the shortest of conflicts.
The 'liberal international order' died for good under Barack Obama, when Bashar al-Assad unleashed his chemical weapons in 2013, Putin invaded the Donbas in 2014 and America signed the Iran deal. The US was no longer in charge and no longer cared. Why did Britain, when all of this was happening even under the Democrats, continue to run down its Armed Forces? The old order had certainly long since expired by 2022, when Putin launched his despicable full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and when Hamas attacked Israel in 2023, under Biden. Trump is merely confirming what anybody with half a brain should have understood.
America was briefly the world's hegemon after winning the Cold War, but 9/11 and the Iraq and Afghanistan fiascos, combined with the vertiginous rise of China, put paid to it. We are back to spheres of influences, to Great Powers carving up the world: Trump appears to be a fan of the latter incarnation of the Monroe Doctrine. Tragically, the Atlantic Charter, which committed the UK and US to the principle of self-determination, is forgotten. Just as regrettably, imperialism appears to have returned, as practised by Trump with Denmark and Greenland, Canada and Panama, as well as by China with its belt and road initiative. Trump seems keen on a reprise of Yalta or Potsdam: Ukraine's fate, like that of Eastern Europe after 1945, will be decided by others.
America is back to old habits in other ways: it didn't intervene in the First World War until 1917, and it took Pearl Harbor for it to enter the Second World War in 1941. With or without Trump, we shouldn't expect it to step into every war in Europe or every conflict in the world any longer. It's our own fault: Britain and Europe should have volunteered to spend a lot more on defence years ago. Nato, which worryingly now feels on its last legs, was never meant to be a way for Europe to sponge off America.
Even Trump's attempt at extracting hundreds of billions of dollars worth of raw materials from Ukraine in compensation for US help isn't entirely novel, though it is certainly astonishingly blatant. The US has frequently asked for something in return for its assistance, in a transactional way: decolonisation, money, the dollar's hegemony, access to raw materials. The First and Second Gulf Wars were triggered by America's perceived self-interest: Kuwait produces oil, and 9/11 had to be avenged.
America is pivoting to the Pacific: it wants to avoid at all cost Chinese hegemony in the region. It sees Russia as a lesser issue – despite its close alliance with China – that Europe should deal with itself.
Labour's foot-dragging about increasing military spending from 2.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent is thus morally idiotic. Poland, a country that is on the front line, intends to spend 4.7 per cent of GDP on defence this year, at the cost of a large deficit. It boasts 200,000 plus soldiers, more than any Nato country other than the US and Turkey. That's a real commitment. If Poland can do it, why can't we? Or are ministers not telling the truth when they claim to care about Ukraine? We are truly stuck with the worst possible Labour Government at the most dangerous of times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Russian drone attacks kill six in Ukraine, including an infant
Russian drone attacks kill six in Ukraine, including an infant

Daily Mail​

time30 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Russian drone attacks kill six in Ukraine, including an infant

Russia killed three generations of a family - including a one-year-old baby - as Vladimir Putin unleashed his vengeance for Ukrainian strikes that destroyed his strategic bomber aircraft. The attack came just hours after Donald Trump spoke with Putin. The US President said the Russian leader 'very strongly' told him that Russia will retaliate for Ukraine's weekend drone attacks on four air bases. The US assesses the attack hit as many as 20 Russian warplanes, destroying around 10 of them, according to two officials - a figure that is about half the number estimated by Zelensky but was still humiliating to Moscow. Putin kept to his word that Russia would hit back, launching devastating strikes on civilians in Chernihiv and Kharkiv, as Ukraine's President Zelensky warned that the despot 'feels impunity' and 'is showing the middle finger to the entire world'. At least six people were killed and six more wounded in hospital after last night's onslaught by Russia in Pryluky, regional governor Viacheslav Chaus said. According to him, six Shahed-type drones struck residential areas of the eastern city early Thursday morning, causing severe damage to residential buildings. Among the dead were a woman, 46, her daughter, 26, and grandson, 16 months, who police said were found under rubble. Hours later, seventeen people were wounded in a Russian drone strike on the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv early Thursday, including children, a pregnant woman, and a 93-year-old woman, according to regional authorities. At around 1.05 am, Shahed-type drones struck two apartment buildings in the city's Slobidskyi district, causing fires and destroying several private vehicles. 'By launching attacks while people sleep in their homes, the enemy once again confirms its tactic of insidious terror,' regional head Oleh Syniehubov wrote on Telegram. One Russian drone hit the 16th floor of a residential building, while another struck the wall of a five-story building. Among the wounded were children whose ages were given as 13, nine and seven. Mayor Ihor Terekhov called it 'targeted terror' against civilians by the Putin regime. One woman resident of Kharkiv region said: 'I am recording this at 2am, I can't sleep. The night started with a strike of Iskander around 11pm, and then the drones came. I went to the bathroom first, it's my temporary shelter number one, but then there were six explosions one after another, so I am saying this on the way to the basement. Praying to God I'll be out alive in the morning.' Russia also launched a missile strike on a Ukrainian military training camp in Poltava region, leaving a number injured. The US embassy in Kyiv has warned about the threat of major new Russian airstrikes after Putin told Trump he 'will have to respond' to Ukraine's June 1 drone attacks on Russia - dubbed Operation Spiderweb. Russian aircraft were damaged but not destroyed in the attack, and will be restored, the country's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov insisted in an interview with the state news agency TASS. 'The equipment in question, as was also stated by representatives of the Ministry of Defence, was not destroyed but damaged. It will be restored,' Ryabkov said. But US officials described the attack as highly significant, with one of them cautioning that it could drive Moscow to a far more severe negotiating position in the US-brokered talks to end more than three years of war. Zelensky said he would consider creating private armies which are used by Putin, for example the notorious Wagner military company. 'I will now start thinking about it after such ultimatums,' he said. 'Facts are stubborn things. Since the beginning of this year, the Russian army has carried out strikes on Ukraine using almost 27,700 aerial bombs, almost 11,200 Shaheds and almost 9,000 strike drones of other types, as well as more than 700 missiles, including ballistic ones. This is in less than half a year. This is the pace of Russian strikes, and they have taken this pace in Russia quite deliberately from the first days of a full-scale war. Russia has rebuilt its state, social and economic system in order to be able to kill people in other countries with impunity and on a massive scale.' After Trump's phone conversation with Putin, Zelensky said: 'Many have spoken to Russia at various levels. No talks have led not only to a reliable peace, but even to an end to the war. Unfortunately, Putin feels impunity and, even after all the terrible Russian strikes, he is allegedly preparing some more 'responses'.'

Polling opens in Holyrood by-election that Swinney says is ‘two horse race'
Polling opens in Holyrood by-election that Swinney says is ‘two horse race'

Rhyl Journal

time31 minutes ago

  • Rhyl Journal

Polling opens in Holyrood by-election that Swinney says is ‘two horse race'

Polling stations are now open in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse seat following a high profile campaign dominated by the rise in support for Reform. The by-election is taking place following the death of the SNP MSP Christina McKelvie, who had been receiving treatment for breast cancer. Today is polling day in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. @KatyLoudonSNP has shown she would be an outstanding MSP. This is now a two-horse race between @theSNP and Farage.#VoteSNP to stop Farage and for a better Scotland. Vote Katy Loudon. — John Swinney (@JohnSwinney) June 5, 2025 She had held the seat since 2011, winning it comfortably in the 2021 Scottish election with a majority of 4,582 over Labour. But SNP leader and Scottish First Minister John Swinney has said it is now Reform UK that are the main threat to his party there – claiming the contest is a 'two horse race' between the two parties. Mr Swinney, who has made several campaign visits to the area, has spent much of his time attacking Nigel Farage and his party. Reform have also come under attack from Labour, with a furious row prompted by an online ad which alleged Scottish leader Anas Sarwar would 'prioritise' the Pakistani community. Labour have branded that 'racist', but as the war of words between the parties escalated, Mr Farage used a rare visit to Scotland earlier this week to accuse Mr Sarwar of 'sectarian politics'. It's polling day! Great opportunity to show the momentum we have, vote @CllrRossLambie and @reformparty_uk Vote Reform. Get Reform — Reform UK Scotland (@ReformUKScot) June 5, 2025 Mr Sarwar still insists his party's candidate Davy Russell can win the seat, despite him coming in for criticism over his failure to take part in a TV debate. Speaking on Wednesday, the Scottish Labour leader branded Mr Farage a 'pathetic, poisonous little man'. Hitting out at his rivals Mr Sarwar said: 'Reform have chosen a campaign of dirt and smear, the SNP have lacked all ambition, the best they can offer is 'vote SNP to stop Farage'.' Stop SNP waste. Stop SNP incompetence. Stop SNP failures. Elect the local champion that can beat them. Vote Scottish Labour. — Anas Sarwar (@AnasSarwar) June 4, 2025 Mr Swinney however was adamant that people needed to vote for SNP candidate Katy Loudon if they wanted to 'stop Farage'. The First Minister insisted: 'People face a simple choice in this by-election. 'They can either vote for the SNP – elect an SNP MSP – or they will end up with a Reform MSP. That's the simple choice.' The election comes as polls show a surge in support for Mr Farage's party in Scotland. While Reform have not yet won an election north of the border, one poll last month suggested they could come in second to the SNP in the May 2026 Holyrood elections. Polls are open in the constituency till 10pm, with the result expected to be known in the early hours of Friday morning.

Trump is right to protect American citizens. We should protect ours
Trump is right to protect American citizens. We should protect ours

Telegraph

time36 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Trump is right to protect American citizens. We should protect ours

Sometimes the best policies are the ones that produce the shrillest wails from the Left. Such may be the case with Trump's latest travel ban, which by rights should spark serious soul-searching in Britain. Overnight, the President announced restrictions on the citizens of 12 countries. This was a response to the recent terror attack on Boulder, Colorado, in which an Egyptian national, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, is alleged to have thrown firebombs and sprayed burning petrol at a Jewish vigil on Sunday in support of Israeli hostages held by Hamas. Although Egypt is not on the list, Homeland Security officials said Mr Soliman was in the country illegally, having overstayed a tourist visa, but that he had applied for asylum in September 2022. So far, so Trumpian. (He took similar measures during his first term, after all, and they were repealed by Joe Biden who called them 'a stain on our national conscience'.) But then came the kicker. 'We will not let what happened in Europe happen in America,' Trump said. Ouch. If the months of Trump 2.0 have so far shifted the Overton window across the West, allowing even the likes of Sir Keir Starmer to contemplate – at least rhetorically – tackling immigration, then such a travel ban should be welcomed on these shores as well. Already, the usual suspects are accusing Trump of being 'racist'. But a glance at the range of countries on the list shows that this is not a question of race, or even religion. Rather, it is a question of homeland security, and that holds a stark lesson for Britain. A few months back, official data revealed that though foreigners comprise just 15 per cent of the population of our country, they commit 41 per cent of all crime and up to a quarter of sex crimes. In the first nine months of 2024, almost 14 per cent of grooming suspects were Pakistani, five times their share of the population. Two nationalities – Afghans and Eritreans – were more than 20 times more likely to account for sexual offence convictions than British citizens, according to the data. Overall, foreign nationals were 71 per cent more likely than Britons to be responsible for sex crime convictions. Based on convictions per 10,000 of the population, Afghans with 77 convictions topped the table with a rate of 59 per 10,000, 22.3 times that of Britons. They were followed by Eritreans, who accounted for 59 convictions at a rate of 53.6 per 10,000 of their population. In March 2025, data from the Ministry of Justice revealed that foreigners, who claim £1 billion a month in benefits, were also responsible for large proportions of violence, robbery, fraud and drug offences, between 2021 and 2023. There was no data for terrorism offences or acts of anti-Semitism. But does anybody want to hazard a guess? Which brings us to a fundamental question. Why? Why does Britain need to allow the criminals of the world to come to our shores to abuse women and girls, run criminal enterprises, foster terrorism and anti-Semitism, and claim benefits in the process? Obviously not all foreigners from these countries behave in this way. But facts aren't racist. Large numbers are pulling down our pants, spanking our buttocks and pulling them up again. In fact, the problem is not one of race but one of politics and culture. In my new book, Never Again? How the West Betrayed the Jews and Itself, which is coming out at the end of September, I look at groundbreaking research published in April by cognitive scientists Scott Barry Kaufman and Craig Neumann. They found that 'citizens in democratic countries have more benevolent traits, fewer malevolent traits, and greater well-being' than those living under autocratic regimes. Based on a study of 200,000 people from 75 countries, people living under autocracies were found to be much more likely to exhibit the 'Dark Triad' of negative personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. In democracies, by contrast, more people displayed the 'Light Triad' of humanism, faith in humanity and 'Kantianism', or treating people with dignity in their own right rather than viewing them as a means to an end. Obviously, this is not related to race. Russians are hardly black, but they hardly live in a democracy either. It is a case of cognitive development. The problem occurs when, in an age of global travel, 'Dark Triad' migrants who grew up in despotic regimes encounter gullible 'Light Triad' officials in the democracies, whose empathies are easily played upon. That is why we find British judges ruling that an Albanian convict should avoid deportation because his son had an aversion to foreign chicken nuggets, a Pakistani drug dealer could stay so he could teach his son about Islam, and a paedophile of the same nationality should not be sent home since it would be 'unduly harsh' on his own children. These real-life cases, reported by the Telegraph, provide a clear collision of the 'Dark Triad' traits in the criminals and the 'Light Triad' tendencies in the judges. It is a chemical reaction waiting to happen, and the vast majority of the population, wherever they are born, are suffering the consequences. In other words, we are being taken for fools. No foreign criminal has a God-given right to set up home in Britain just because he fancies it. This is our home, and although we are delighted to welcome strangers, that generosity should be withdrawn from those who nick our television and threaten our children – even if their own happen to like the chicken nuggets in our fridge. Trump has now thrown down the gauntlet. What is the British Government going to do to set our own house in order? Will it take an anti-Semitic outrage like the firebombing in Colorado before the Prime Minister takes action? Will he take action even then?

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store