Trump blaming Ukraine for Putin war like saying US attacked Japan at Pearl Harbor, says Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson has said that Donald Trump blaming Ukraine for starting Vladimir Putin's war was like claiming 'America attacked Japan at Pearl Harbor'.
The former Prime Minister, a fierce supporter of Ukraine, also rebuffed the US president's 'dictator claim' against Volodymyr Zelensky.
Trump's extraordinary outbursts against Zelensky have stunned European capitals as the new president tears up America's policy on Ukraine in what appeared to be a move to cosy up to Putin and strike a deal which benefits both the US and Russia.
Both Ukraine and Europe were excluded from peace talks in Saudi Arabia between delegations led by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, discussing the war and US-Russia ties.
But it is Trump's language which has sparked the biggest backlash, even from some supporters of the new US president.
Mr Johnson, who was at Trump's inauguration in January, said: 'Of course Ukraine didn't start the war. You might as well say that America attacked Japan at Pearl Harbor.'
Japan launched a surprise strike on the American naval base, Pearl Harbor, in Hawaii, on December 7, 1941.
Thousands of American servicemen were killed or injured in the attack, which dealt a major blow to the US Pacific Fleet. Four US battleships were sunk and nearly 200 aircraft destroyed.
President Franklin Roosevelt declared war on Japan the following day and America entered World War II.
Mr Johnson also rebuffed Trump's 'dictator' jibe against Mr Zelensky, saying: 'Of course a country undergoing a violent invasion should not be staging elections. There was no general election in the UK from 1935 to 1945.
'Of course Zelensky's ratings are not 4 per cent. They are actually about the same as Trump's.'
But Mr Johnson, who played a key role in leading support from the West for Ukraine, argued that Trump's comments were 'not intended to be historically accurate, but to shock Europeans into action'.
The former PM continued: 'The US believes Belgium, France and other countries are blocking. It's absurd. We need to get serious and fast.'
He also asked when Europeans are going to 'stop being scandalised about Donald Trump and start helping him to end this war?'
Sir Keir Starmer has hit back at Trump's 'dictator' barb, stressing that Mr Zelensky is the democratically-elected leader of Ukraine.
Mr Zelensky, who accused Trump of living in a 'disinformation space', being fed propaganda by the Kremlin, warned that he would not sell his nation after Russia and the US started talks to broker a peace deal without Ukraine.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said it was "false and dangerous" for Trump to call Mr Zelensky a dictator.
Australia's Defence Minister Richard Marles said "the war in Ukraine must be resolved on Ukraine's terms, because the aggressor here is Russia".
Britain and France could lead a peace-keeping force of around 30,000 troops, with air power including from the US acting as a 'backstop' to stop future Putin aggression if the war is brought to an end.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
31 minutes ago
- UPI
Senators propose $15-per-hour federal minimum wage
A proposed federal act would raise the federal minimum wage law to $15 an hour on January 1, two U.S. senators announced on Tuesday. The Service Employee International Union was fighting for that wage in 2021 (pictured). File Photo by Tasos Katopodis/UPI | License Photo June 10 (UPI) -- The federal minimum wage would rise to $15 per hour, with annual cost-of-living increases based on inflation, in a proposed bipartisan measure. Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Peter Welch, D-Vt., co-sponsored the bill that they have named the "Higher Wages for American Workers Act" and would increase the federal minimum wage from its current $7.25 per hour for non-exempt workers. "For decades, working Americans have seen their wages flatline," Hawley said on Tuesday in a joint press release with Welch. "One major culprit of this is the failure of the federal minimum wage to keep up with the economic reality facing hardworking Americans every day," Hawley added. Welch said inflation and rising costs are making it too hard for families to afford basic necessities. "We're in the midst of a severe affordability crisis, with families in red and blue states alike struggling to afford necessities like housing and groceries," Welch said. "A stagnant federal minimum wage only adds fuel to the fire," he continued. "Every hardworking American deserves a living wage that helps put a roof over their head and food on the table -- $7.25 an hour doesn't even come close." "Times have changed, and working families deserve a wage that reflects today's financial reality," Welch added. Hawley said the current federal minimum wage is less than what a worker earned in 1940 when adjusted for inflation. If the proposed federal minimum wage increase is passed into law, it would take effect on Jan. 1 and allow cost-of-living increases that match inflation in subsequent years. Many states have respective minimum wage laws that exceed the current and proposed federal minimum wage, but a dozen still were at the federal minimum wage in 2024. Many large employers also have higher minimum wages, including Walmart, which has paid its workers at least $14 an hour and often more since 2023. President Joe Biden in 2021 ordered the federal government to pay contract workers at least $15 an hour. California lawmakers in 2022 raised the state's minimum wage for many fast-food workers to up to $22 an hour.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
U.S. Conference of Mayors Statement on the Situation in Los Angeles
WASHINGTON, June 10, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, U.S. Conference of Mayors President Columbus (OH) Mayor Andrew Ginther released the following statement on the situation in Los Angeles, California. "The streets of American cities are no place for the U.S. military. Law enforcement is a local responsibility, and America's mayors support Mayor Bass as she works with state authorities to promote order in her city. Protest, carried out peacefully, is a bedrock of our democracy. However, violence, theft, and destruction of property can never be tolerated. We have every confidence that Mayor Bass and state officials can manage the situation. The authorities there have the experience, training and resources to maintain peace and protect the rights of legitimate protestors. "With crime plummeting across the country, mayors have demonstrated their ability to promote public safety. Troops should never be deployed to cities without the request of state and local authorities. The U.S. Conference of Mayors stands firmly behind the rights of mayors to determine the best public safety strategies for their individual cities. We urge the president to work constructively with local and state authorities as we all strive to make our cities and the nation stronger." About the United States Conference of Mayors – The U.S. Conference of Mayors is the official nonpartisan organization of cities with populations of 30,000 or more. There are more than 1,400 such cities in the country today, and each city is represented in the Conference by its chief elected official, the mayor. Follow our work on X, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Threads, and Medium. View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE U.S. Conference of Mayors
Washington Post
33 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Sending the National Guard is bad. Arresting 3,000 a day is worse.
ICE agents making arrests in the parking lot of a Home Depot helped set off mass protests in Los Angeles. But that wasn't an isolated incident. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is increasingly taking actions at courthouses, restaurants and other spaces it previously stayed away from. President Donald Trump and his top aides have long favored harsh immigration policies. But what's shifted in recent weeks is that the administration has set a specific goal of ICE arresting at least 3,000 people per a quota may help Trump accomplish his goals, but it is leading to overly aggressive tactics that are deeply unsettling Americans across the country. It was perhaps inevitable that a president who promised to deport more people than his predecessors would implement an arrest quota. In the first months of Trump's tenure, the number of deportations and ICE arrests wasn't that much higher than when President Joe Biden was in office. That reportedly frustrated Trump administration officials, particularly Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. So last month, Miller and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem privately gave ICE leaders — and then publicly confirmed — the goal of making 3,000 arrests per day. The administration also replaced ICE's leadership with people it felt would be more aggressive. That's a huge increase: The agency was making between 700 and 900 arrests per day at the end of Biden's term and the start of Trump's. And it appears this new policy is being carried out. ICE officials say they arrested 2,267 people on June 3 and 2,368 on June 4. It's possible these numbers are being inflated by the agency to please Trump and Miller. But there are articles in news outlets across the country about unprecedented ICE enforcement actions in their communities, so I believe the agency is going beyond its usual moves. But this policy is misguided. Quotas are problematic in many contexts. I support increased gender and racial diversity but am wary of organizations trying to hire a set number of women and people of color. In law enforcement, they are more troublesome. Police officers operating under quota systems feel pushed to make arrests for minor offenses. They sometimes target not the most dangerous people but those who are easiest to apprehend. That's what's happening now. Undocumented immigrants showing up to court hearings, working at clothing stores or looking to get Home Depot customers to hire them for day labor are probably not leading human trafficking organizations on the side. I am deeply concerned that ICE will soon start making arrests at schools and hospitals, since those are other places where you can arrest lots of people at once — few of whom will be armed or dangerous. I am opposed to these arrests in part because I don't support Trump's overarching goals of deporting 1 million immigrants a year and creating a climate in which other undocumented immigrants return to their native countries on their own. But you could argue that while Trump did not specifically campaign on 3,000 arrests per day, he promised to crack down on undocumented immigrants, and Americans elected him, so the public wants this. It's hard to determine why people voted for a candidate and what kind of mandate that gives them. But even if Trump campaigned explicitly on arresting 3,000 people a day, we should be wary of that policy — and not just because quotas generally aren't smart. This particular quota is excessive. If ICE arrested 3,000 a people a day, that would add up to about 1.1 million arrests after a year. There are about 11.7 million undocumented people in the United States. So if no individual was arrested more than once, about 9 percent of undocumented immigrants would be arrested in a given year under this policy. Arresting 9 percent of any group would almost certainly result in the other 91 percent being constantly worried about being arrested or jailed. And because about three quarters of undocumented immigrants are from Central or South America, some U.S. citizens and authorized residents who are Brown almost certainly will be unjustly arrested or questioned by ICE. This arrest quota echoes stop-and-frisk policies many police departments used to employ. At the height of that approach, there were about 350,000 stops of the 1.9 million Black New Yorkers. Basically every Black New Yorker had to be on guard for being stopped and frisked, and a judge invalidated the program on the grounds that it was racially discriminatory. Miller and Trump may want all 11.7 million undocumented immigrants to live in terror. But the rest of us shouldn't. The overwhelming majority of those people came to the United States seeking a better life. If we want to deter future immigrants, cracking down on employers who hire undocumented people and making it harder to enter the country in the first place are obvious solutions. Making life excessively difficult for people already here will probably discourage future migrants, but the U.S. government should not be in the business of rushing into restaurants and courthouses with guns to arrest people for the purpose of scaring others into leaving the country. Many Democratic politicians and political commentators have criticized Trump for deploying the National Guard over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, to stop the protests of ICE's actions in Los Angeles. But Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and Lyndon B. Johnson rightly invoked the National Guard, without support from governors, to integrate schools and defend civil rights marches respectively. The problem isn't that Trump is using the National Guard; it's that he's using the National Guard to defend a policy that will target people of color indiscriminately and inhumanely. The quota must go.
