logo
'UK mothers must be prepared for sons to die defending Finland'

'UK mothers must be prepared for sons to die defending Finland'

Daily Mail​12-06-2025
Ukraine's former foreign minister has starkly warned that British mothers must accept their sons have to die defending Europe, otherwise there is no Nato. Dmytro Kuleba told Metro that Vladimir Putin's goal was to 'expose' the 'falsehood' of the Nato alliance, which has a mutual assistance clause that compels its members to fight for each other in the event of an attack of another member.
He said: 'Putin may invade Nato territory soon – so now what? Is Nato going to send a division to fight back? Many people believe that the real test for Nato is whether the US is going to fight for Europe. The real test will be whether British mothers will actually accept that their sons have to die for Finland or Estonia or Poland. If they don't, there is no Nato.'
The chilling warning comes after Germany's spy chief warned that Putin is plotting to attack a Nato territory to test the bloc's mutual assistance clause. 'This is is how World War II started. 'Why fight for Danzig [now the city of Gdańsk]? Let's give it to Hitler, it is just a city in Poland. Why should we die for it?' That was the question asked by western European nations [at the time]. 'And this is exactly the question that Putin is going to pose to Nato. Europe is already spending money on weapons, but it has to do so much faster. 'But the real question is, who is going to tell the voters that the threat of the war is real?'
Mr Kubela (pictured), who was in office between March 2020 and September 2024, said his warning comes from personal experience, telling Metro that as minister of foreign affairs during Russia's invasion, he made the mistake of believing that Russia would withdraw after losing 'like 10,000, 20,000 soldiers.' But as Russia nears the point of having one million soldiers killed or wounded in Ukraine since war broke out in February 2022, he pleaded with British citizens not to underestimate Putin. He said: 'People in Britain or any other country can listen to what I'm saying or they can decide that I am a warmongering Ukrainian who is trying to pull them into my war. 'I am perfectly fine with any choice they make. What I can say, what I can urge them, is not to repeat our mistakes.
'The biggest mistake Ukraine made was that we did not believe that this can happen to us on this scale. We, in Ukraine, also believed that it is not going to happen to us because Putin would never dare to do it. So this is the mistake that people are making. I look around in Europe and I just see the same pattern happening. The same pattern of behaviour. 'Do you think that if Ukraine was able to attack airfields in Russia, 1,000 miles away from Ukraine, Russia is not able to attack any piece of infrastructure in any European country? That would be a very, very big mistake to think so.' Earlier, Bruno Kahl, the outgoing head of Germany's federal intelligence service (BND), said in a rare interview that it has 'concrete' evidence Russia no longer believes Nato's Article 5 will be honoured. This is the clause which guarantees that if one member is attacked, all others will come to its aid. He told the German podcast Table Briefings: 'We see that Nato is supposed to be tested in its mutual assistance promise. There are people in Moscow who don't believe that Nato article 5 still works.'
He said: 'We are very sure, and we have intelligence evidence to back this up, that [Russia's full-scale invasion of] Ukraine is only one step on Russia's path towards the west.' But Kahl was quick to say: 'This doesn't mean that we expect large tank battalions to roll from the east to the west.' He added that Russia didn't need to do this, as they could simply send 'little green men to Estonia to protect supposedly oppressed Russian minorities.' Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea involved occupation of buildings and offices by Russian soldiers in unmarked uniforms and civilian clothes, who came to be known as the 'little green men' when Moscow initially denied their identity. Kahl, who is set to become Germany's ambassador to the Vatican, did not specify which officials in Moscow were thinking along these lines. He said that Moscow's ultimate aim was to push NATO back to its 1990s borders, 'kick out' the US from Europe and aggressively expand its influence. 'We need to nip this in the bud', he said.
Key to NATO cooperation, he pointed out, was the US and its enormous army. Kahl said his contacts with U.S. counterparts had left him convinced they took the Russian threat seriously. 'They take it as seriously as us, thank God,' he said. It comes after NATO boss Mark Rutte warned that Britons should start learning Russian if the UK doesn't ramp up defence spending. Mark Rutte issued the chilling message while in London for talks with PM Sir Keir Starmer , ahead of a NATO summit later this month. NATO allies are expected to be asked at the gathering to agree a commitment on allocating 3.5 per cent of GDP to core defence spending by the 2030s. A further 1.5 per cent of GDP would be required for 'defence-related expenditure' under Mr Rutte's plan to strengthen the alliance.
It follows pressure from US President Donald Trump on European members of NATO to hike their military budgets. There are questions about how the UK would fund such an huge increase - roughly equivalent to an extra £30billion annually. Britain allocated 2.33 per cent of GDP to defence last year, and Sir Keir has only committed to reaching 2.5 per cent by April 2027. The Labour Government has an 'ambition' of increasing that to 3 per cent in the next parliament - likely to run to 2034. Speaking at Chatham House on Monday, Mr Rutte was asked if he believed Chancellor Rachel Reeves should raise taxes to meet NATO's commitments.
The NATO secretary-general replied: 'It's not up to me to decide, of course, how countries pay the bill. Look, if you do not do this, if you would not go to the 5 per cent, including the 3.5 per cent core defence spending, you could still have the NHS... the pension system etc., but you had better learn to speak Russian.' Mr Rutte (pictured) would not reveal the deadline for when he hopes NATO allies will spend 5 per cent of GDP on defence. Asked about a deadline, he told reporters: 'I have a clear view on when we should achieve that. 'I keep that to myself, because we are having these consultations now with allies, and these discussions are ongoing. 'We will in the end agree on a date when we have to be there.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Starmer to meet Zelenskyy ahead of Trump-Putin summit
Starmer to meet Zelenskyy ahead of Trump-Putin summit

STV News

time21 minutes ago

  • STV News

Starmer to meet Zelenskyy ahead of Trump-Putin summit

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will visit Downing Street on Thursday, ahead of Friday's US-Russia summit in Alaska. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's meeting with the Ukrainian president comes a day after he warned that Britain stands ready to 'increase pressure' on Russia if necessary. US President Donald Trump has likewise threatened Russia with 'severe consequences' if a ceasefire is rejected by Russian President Vladimir Putin at Friday's meeting. Trump's last in-person meeting with Putin was in 2019, during the G-20 summit in Osaka, Japan / Credit: AP During a call with Trump and European allies on Wednesday, Starmer praised the US president for his work to bring forward a 'viable' chance of an end to the war. However, concerns have been raised over the Ukrainian president's exclusion from Friday's meeting. European leaders have consistently stated that discussions around Ukraine's peace should not take place without his involvement. On Wednesday, Trump claimed there could be a meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin 'almost immediately' after the Alaska summit. Speaking after a round of virtual meetings with European leaders and Zelenskyy, Trump told reporters: 'If the first one goes okay, we'll have a quick second one.' 'I would like to do it almost immediately, and we'll have a quick second meeting between President Putin and President Zelenskyy and myself, if they'd like to have me there.' Trump said 'great' things could be achieved with his meeting in Alaska with Putin on Friday, but said its primary purpose was 'setting the table for the second meeting'. 'We had a very good call, he was on the call, President Zelenskyy was on the call. I would rate it a 10, you know, very, very friendly,' he told reporters in Washington. Speaking on Wednesday, Starmer said: 'This meeting on Friday that President Trump is attending is hugely important.''As I've said personally to President Trump for the three-and-a-bit years this conflict has been going on, we haven't got anywhere near a prospect of actually a viable solution, a viable way of bringing it to a ceasefire.' 'And now we do have that chance, because of the work that the president has put in.' Both the US and the UK have threatened consequences should Russia fail to engage meaningfully in the discussions. Starmer said that further sanctions could be imposed, and the UK is already working on the next package of measures targeting Moscow. 'We're ready to support this, including from the plans we've already drawn up to deploy a reassurance force once hostilities have ceased,' he told allies. 'It is important to remind colleagues that we do stand ready also to increase pressure on Russia, particularly the economy, with sanctions and wider measures as may be necessary.' The US president has previously suggested a truce between the two nations could involve some 'swapping' of land. It is believed one of the Russian leader's demands is for Ukraine to cede parts of the Donbas region which it still controls. But Zelenskyy has already rejected any proposal that would compromise Ukraine's existing borders, something that is forbidden by the country's constitution. A joint statement from the Coalition of the Willing, which is co-chaired by Sir Keir, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, said 'international borders must not be changed by force'. It added: 'Sanctions and wider economic measures to put pressure on Russia's war economy should be strengthened if Russia does not agree to a ceasefire in Alaska.' The coalition is made up of 31 countries that have pledged strengthened support for Kyiv, including 27 European countries, as well as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country

Keir Starmer to meet Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Downing Street
Keir Starmer to meet Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Downing Street

The Guardian

time38 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Keir Starmer to meet Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Downing Street

Keir Starmer will be joined by the Ukrainian president at Downing Street on Thursday morning, as Europe braces for the outcome of Donald Trump's face-to-face discussions with his Russian counterpart later this week. The UK prime minister's meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy comes after he said Britain stood ready to 'increase pressure' on Russia if necessary. Meanwhile, Trump threatened Russia with 'severe consequences' if a ceasefire was rejected by its leader. During a call with the US president and European allies on Wednesday, Starmer praised Trump for his work to bring forward a 'viable' chance of an end to the war. Concerns have been raised over Zelensky's exclusion from the meeting between Trump and Putin, which is set to take place in Alaska on Friday. Speaking on Wednesday, Starmer said: 'This meeting on Friday that President Trump is attending is hugely important. As I've said personally to President Trump for the three-and-a-bit years this conflict has been going on, we haven't got anywhere near a prospect of actually a viable solution, a viable way of bringing it to a ceasefire. 'And now we do have that chance, because of the work of that the president has put in.' Further sanctions could be imposed on Russia should the Kremlin fail to engage, and the UK is already working on its next package of measures targeting Moscow, he said. 'We're ready to support this, including from the plans we've already drawn up to deploy a reassurance force once hostilities have ceased,' he told allies. 'It is important to remind colleagues that we do stand ready also to increase pressure on Russia, particularly the economy, with sanctions and wider measures as may be necessary.' Starmer and European leaders have said repeatedly that discussions about Ukraine should not happen without Kyiv's involvement, amid concerns the country is being sidelined in negotiations about its own future. Asked if it was his decision to not invite Zelenskyy to the meeting, Trump said 'no, just the opposite', before adding that a second meeting with the Ukrainian president could take place afterwards. 'We had a very good call, he was on the call, President Zelenskyy was on the call. I would rate it a 10, you know, very, very friendly,' he told reporters in Washington. He added: 'There's a very good chance that we're going to have a second meeting which will be more productive than the first, because the first is I'm going to find out where we are and what we're doing.' The US president has previously suggested a truce could involve some 'swapping' of land. It is believed one of the Russian leader's demands is for Ukraine to cede parts of the Donbas region that it still controls. But Zelenskyy has already rejected any proposal that would compromise Ukraine's territorial integrity, something that is forbidden by the country's constitution. A joint statement from the 'Coalition of the Willing', a European-led effort to send a peacekeeping force to Ukraine in the event of truce, which is co-chaired by Starmer, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said 'international borders must not be changed by force'. It added: 'Sanctions and wider economic measures to put pressure on Russia's war economy should be strengthened if Russia does not agree to a ceasefire in Alaska.'

Trump's data war risks creating false calm
Trump's data war risks creating false calm

Reuters

time38 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Trump's data war risks creating false calm

LONDON, Aug 14 (Reuters) - Political pressure on government statisticians and private forecasters risks sending markets down a rabbit-hole, which could suppress volatility today but lead to seismic reality checks in the future. U.S. President Donald Trump has side-swiped both private and public sector economists this month, firing the Bureau of Labor Statistics boss for what he described as "rigged" jobs data and then lambasting Goldman Sachs for tariff-related research he didn't agree with. These moves seem alarming, even if there are some mitigating factors. Trump is hardly the first person to criticize BLS payrolls data. It has been under scrutiny for years, not because of fears of bias, but because of low survey response rates and delays, which have often resulted in large changes to past data. The most recent report contained one of the biggest downward revisions in decades. The BLS can argue that it has suffered from years of underfunding, but it's still not a good look. What's more, similar questions about data collection have been lobbed at the BLS regarding its compilation of monthly consumer and producer price reports, which are critical now in assessing the impact of Trump's tariff rises on inflation. These statistics, along with the U.S. employment report, are the most important monthly updates for financial markets, mainly because they play a pivotal role in Federal Reserve thinking, given its dual mandate to maintain maximum employment and stable prices. Trump this week appointed Heritage Foundation economist E.J. Antoni - a contributor to the controversial Project 2025, opens new tab wishlist of policies for a second Trump term - to run the BLS. Antoni recently suggested suspending the monthly payrolls report until data problems were fixed, which could result in long data gaps at a critical moment for the U.S. economy, monetary policy and markets. Importantly though, the White House and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have pushed back on that idea. But then came Tuesday's attack on Goldman boss David Solomon, with calls for him to appoint a new chief economist following the release of a report on Sunday by his colleague Jan Hatzius. The report estimated U.S. consumers had so far borne less than a quarter of the cost of tariffs but could see that rise to two-thirds over time. This may simply be nothing more than Trump complaining about a forecast he doesn't like, but it's still a move that risks tinkering with one of the most basic market tenets: the plurality of views. There's an obvious concern that - intentionally or not - these public attacks could cause economic data, research and forecasts to become more pro-government or lead to self-censorship by those keen to avoid seeing their business or careers damaged by presidential opprobrium. To its credit, Goldman said it would keep doing its job regardless of the political pressure. But it would hardly say otherwise. Perhaps more telling was the lack of public outcry from other economists who might reasonably be concerned that Trump's attacks on unflattering forecasts represent a worrying trend for their profession and market transparency overall. Of course, they or their institutions may simply have thought it best to stay quiet, assuming the issue would blow over soon. Does any of this matter long term? To be sure, economic forecasting can hardly be held up as a sacred cow if accuracy is what matters. A University of California, Berkeley study late last year looked at more than 16,000 forecasts, opens new tab by banks and large firms and concluded that while 53% of forecasters were confident in their predictions, they were correct only 23% of the time. But economists' forecasts still play a role, accurate or not. So any type of bias, even unintentional, could have a significant impact on market thinking. Of course, if there were a consensus that official data was likely to be biased to flatter the government, then the process of forecasting those official numbers may just be to mechanically move in that direction. But that would undoubtedly create confusion. To better capture what's really going on, investors may be more inclined to commission private economic data. And yet the cost of doing that on a frequent basis would be prohibitive for smaller players, meaning big information gaps could open up, making markets less efficient overall. If political bias in official data and forecasting were to emerge in the current environment, one might expect to see firmer job creation and softer inflation readouts. That could keep markets calm in the short term. But any weakness in the real economy would emerge eventually, likely resulting in a rude awakening for many, no matter what the official data says. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters -- Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. Follow ROI on LinkedIn. Plus, sign up for my weekday newsletter, Morning Bid U.S.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store