Britain must now be a voice for Ukraine
This conflict now appears to be approaching a possible conclusion, with Donald Trump declaring his intention to open negotiations with counterpart Vladimir Putin. Notably, Europe does not appear to be set to play a significant role in the negotiations.
Diplomats across the continent have made clear their displeasure at this outcome, but the simple reality of hard power is that he who pays the piper calls the tune. European capitals have spent years talking as if this were the second coming of 1938, on the precipice of a potential continental war of cataclysmic proportions. With a few noble exceptions such as Warsaw, however, they have not backed these words with the requisite spending on defence. If Donald Trump feels able to unilaterally decide the future of Europe, it is because Europe has passed up the opportunity to decide it for itself.
With that said, it is clear that Ukraine, at least, should be allowed some say in its future. President Zelensky has stated that it will not accept any deal negotiated without Kyiv's participation. While there is little doubting its will to fight on, there are legitimate questions about its ability to do so without the support provided by the United States.
Just as Britain stepped up at the beginning of this conflict, it should step up again as it approaches its potential end. Our role now is to be a voice for Ukraine and its interests, to ensure that these are not lost in the rush to strike a bargain, and that preparation is made for its reconstruction.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Trump set to bar college graduates from debt relief program if employers undermine ‘American values'
Donald Trump 's administration is considering introducing a new rule that would block college graduates with outstanding loans from having their debt forgiven if their employers are found to be 'undermining national security and American values through illegal means.' The proposal, announced this week by the Linda McMahon -led Department for Education, would bar people from being considered for the federal Public Student Loan Forgiveness program if the businesses they work for engage in 'activities with a substantial illegal purpose.' The examples given by the DOE of what offenses might qualify include 'supporting terrorism, aiding or abetting discrimination or violations of immigration laws, or child abuse.' Announcing the draft rule change proposal, Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said: 'President Trump has given the department a historic mandate to restore the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program to its original purpose – supporting public servants who strengthen their communities and serve the public good, not benefiting businesses engaged in illegal activity that harm Americans. 'The federal government has a vital interest in deterring unlawful conduct, and we're moving quickly to ensure employers don't benefit while breaking the law.' The PSLF was first introduced in 2007 under George W Bush with the intention of rewarding graduates who enter public service professions like teaching or law enforcement by relieving them of the burden of student debt at the outset of their careers. The DOE insists the rule change it is pitching is necessary to preserve the original spirit of the taxpayer-funded program while penalizing companies found to be operating outside of the law. It is now soliciting public comments on its proposal until September 17. According to CBS News, critics of the revision have already warned that it would open the door to DOE officials moving to 'improperly exclude' public servants from the scheme on ideological grounds. In advance of the draft proposal being published, the Student Borrower Protection Center campaign group slammed it last month as 'harmful, horrific, and illegal,' warning it could empower the Trump administration to persecute agencies and firms whose work or ethos conflicts with its own goals. 'To be clear, if implemented this proposal would allow the secretary to disqualify from PSLF any employees of school systems that accurately teach the U.S.'s history of slavery, of healthcare providers who offer gender-affirming care and of legal aid organizations that represent individuals against unlawful deportations,' said the SBPC's legal director Winston Berkman-Breen in late June. The Independent has reached out to the DOE for further comment. Earlier this month, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem offered student loan forgiveness as an incentive to encourage graduates to apply to join ICE as part of a massive recruitment drive to boost the administration's crackdown on undocumented migrants.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
U.S. Senator Sanders favors Trump plan to take stake in Intel, others
WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - Liberal U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders on Wednesday threw his support behind President Donald Trump's plan to convert U.S. grants to chipmakers, including $10.9 billion for Intel, into government stakes in the companies. "If microchip companies make a profit from the generous grants they receive from the federal government, the taxpayers of America have a right to a reasonable return on that investment," Sanders, an Independent who caucuses with Democrats, said in a statement to Reuters. The awards were part of the 2022 Chips and Science Act, which sought to lure chip production away from Asia and boost American domestic semiconductor output with $39 billion in subsidies. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is looking into the government taking equity stakes in Intel and other chipmakers in exchange for the grants, sources told Reuters on Tuesday. Much of the funding for companies such as Micron (MU.O), opens new tab, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co ( opens new tab and Samsung ( opens new tab has not been dispersed.
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Why is Putin so scared of Zelensky? How summit with hero who Vlad dismissed as ‘Nazi comic' will expose tyrant's FAILURE
VLADIMIR Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky have only met in person once before. The next time they set eyes on each other, it could expose the Russian tyrant as a fraud and a failure before the eyes of his people. 5 5 When they first met, Zelensky was the freshly elected President of Ukraine, who soared to office with a landslide win - despite having no political experience. His past career was as an actor and comedian - rising to international fame with his role as an accidental president in the Ukrainian show Servant of the People. The contrast with the stony-faced macho image cultivated by Vladimir Putin could not have been more stark as they say down in 2019 for a summit in France. The pair did not shake hands at the tense, fruitless meeting. Within three years, their two countries would be locked in Europe's bloodiest war since 1945. Putin forced to 'accept failure' Donald Trump's renewed drive to bring the war to a close could bring a once unthinkable second meeting between Zelensky and Putin to reality. However, in the days since Trump's separate meetings with the two leaders, Moscow has been quick to pour cold water on the prospect. Zelensky, whose first language is Russian and performed in Moscow during Putin's rise to power, has said he is "ready" for a meeting with Vlad. But the very act of meeting with Zelensky could undermine Putin and the entire rationale for his war in the eyes of Russia. Orysia Lutsevich, director of Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia program, told CNN that Putin "will have to accept the failure of sitting down with a President he considers a joke from a country that doesn't exist". Undermines Russia's war aims When the Russian despot ordered tanks to assault Kyiv in February 2022, his warped justification was based on claims that Ukraine was a fake country run by Nazis. Zelensky's Jewish identity makes the claim patently absurd, but for Putin to sit down with him would be a tacit admission of how ludicrous the claim was. For Vlad to meet Volod for talks, they would be sat there as two Presidents of legitimate, sovereign nations - something that the Kremlin's narrative could not possibly abide. And so long as Ukraine remains armed and sovereign, concession to Zelensky would prove Putin's war goals a failure. Russia has shown little indication of making major concessions so far, with the handover of vast swathes of Ukrainian territory to Moscow still Putin's core condition for peace. But to avoid Trump's wrath if talks fall through, Putin will want to shift the blame to Zelensky. Loggerheads over location His suggestion that the trilateral summit be held in Moscow - a predictably unacceptable proposal for Ukraine - could have been a calculated move to weasel out. And had the meeting been held in Russia's capital against the odds, Putin would have hailed it as a diplomatic coup for the Kremlin - and a chance to humiliate Ukraine's war leader. But Vlad's surrogates have taken to the airwaves to dampen expectations around a summit. Russia' Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said a meeting would have to be prepared "gradually... starting with the expert level and thereafter going through all the required steps". Lavrov added today that not involving Russia in discussions around Ukraine's security guarantees is a "road to nowhere". Disputes around the proposed location for the summit have also presented headaches for diplomats. While a Moscow meeting between the pair remains unlikely, other venues have also proved controversial. Suggestions for it to be held in Budapest were lambasted by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk. He said: "Not everyone may remember this, but in 1994 Ukraine already got assurances of territorial integrity from the US, Russia and the UK. "In Budapest. Maybe I'm superstitious, but this time I would try to find another place." Switzerland, Qatar and Austria have been floated as other prospective venues. But Putin will be wary of a European location - where most states would be obliged to arrest him under an ICC warrant. 5 5
