Nato fully committed to Ukraine, PM insists, despite no condemnation of Russia
Nato is committed to supporting Ukraine, Sir Keir Starmer has insisted, despite no condemnation of Russia's invasion in a joint statement from the alliance's chiefs.
The position among the alliance has 'not changed on Ukraine', the Prime Minister said.
A communique released on Wednesday after a meeting of leaders in the Hague refers to Nato's unity 'in the face of profound security threats and challenges, in particular the long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security'.
It also reaffirms support for Ukraine, but does not explicitly condemn the Russian invasion.
Donald Trump has taken a softer approach towards Russian leader Vladimir Putin than other Western leaders in his fraught attempts to negotiate an end to the war, leading to speculation that is why explicit criticism of the invasion did not feature in the communique.
Asked if Mr Trump did not want Nato to condemn his Russian counterpart in the summit's concluding statement, Sir Keir said: 'On the question of Ukraine, the position in Nato has not changed, nor has my position changed.
'In fact, over the last couple of days, I would say in my discussions with leaders, there's been a real resolve that now is the time to push again to get Putin to the table for the unconditional ceasefire.'
The communique also referred to every Nato member state's 'ironclad commitment to collective defence', enshrined in Nato's Article 5.
This commits all members of the alliance to come to the defence of each other if attacked.
Allies have signed up to spend 5% of their economic output on defence, comprising 3.5% spending on core defence by 2035, and 1.5% on security and resilience measures.
Sir Keir said the UK was on track to spend 4.1% of GDP on defence by 2027, based on this definition, a figure largely boosted by spending towards the 1.5% commitment.
The Government is seeking to characterise the outcome of the summit as positive and purposeful.
As he travelled to the summit earlier this week, Mr Trump had appeared to pour cold water on America's commitment to the collective defence of Nato allies.
He told reporters on the flight from Washington that it would depend 'on your definition' of Article 5, when asked if he would commit to collective defence.
But speaking to broadcasters on the way into the summit, the Prime Minister said allies were 'absolutely committed to the importance of Nato, particularly in a very volatile world'.
And before the meeting of the North Atlantic Council on Wednesday, Sir Keir appeared to be in deep conversation with Mr Trump.
Sir Keir's message was repeated by Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte, who opened the summit meeting with the words: 'Our joint commitment to Article 5, that an attack on one is an attack on all, sends a powerful message.'
Standing next to Mr Trump, the secretary-general praised the US president for bringing about a commitment from the alliance to spend 5% of GDP on defence, telling him: 'You made this possible.'
Earlier, Mr Rutte had described the US president as 'a man of strength' as well as a 'man of peace', praising him for securing a ceasefire between Israel and Iran.
Mr Trump also compared Israel and Iran to 'two kids in a school yard' fighting.
'They fight like hell. You can't stop them. Let them fight for about two, three minutes. Then it's easier to stop them,' he said.
Mr Rutte then appeared to compare Mr Trump to a 'daddy' figure to the warring Middle Eastern parties.
'Then daddy has to sometimes use strong language,' the secretary-general said.
Alongside the commitment to increase defence spending, the UK has also announced its intention to purchase 12 new fighter jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
Billed as 'the biggest strengthening' of Britain's nuclear posture 'in a generation', the move will see the jets committed to a Nato mission that would see US nuclear bombs fitted to allied aircraft.
It follows a recommendation from the strategic defence review, published earlier in June, to begin negotiations with the US and Nato on joining the alliance's nuclear mission.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
22 minutes ago
- Reuters
Russian air defence units destroy two drones headed for Moscow, mayor says
June 26 (Reuters) - Russian air defence units destroyed two drones targeting Moscow, Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said early on Thursday. Sobyanin, writing on the Telegram messaging app, said specialists were examining debris on the ground. Moscow's Vnukovo International Airport suspended departures and arrivals in response to the threat, news agencies quoted aviation watchdog Rosaviatsiya as saying. Restrictions were also in place for a time at airports along the Volga River. The governor of the border region of Voronezh earlier reported that more than 40 drones had been destroyed throughout the day. In Bryansk region, also on the border, the regional governor said seven drones had been destroyed. The Defence Ministry, in a report earlier in the evening, reported 18 drones had been destroyed over a three-hour period in several regions extending through central and southern Russia.
BBC News
23 minutes ago
- BBC News
The Documentary Podcast Inside the US trans military ban
One of the first executive orders that President Donald Trump signed in his second term of office stated that being transgender is incompatible with the 'rigorous standards necessary for military service'. It set the stage for a ban on trans people serving in the military, regardless of ability, rank or service history. Official figures say there are 4,240 transgender service members in the US armed forces, however research commissioned by the US Defense Department in 2016 estimated there could be up to around 10,000. Over the past four months the BBC has been following the stories of two trans service people as the executive order took effect. Both have served 17 years in the military, and are now facing the threat of a dishonourable discharge. Archive sources: NBC News, FOX News, CBS News, CNN, Chicks on the Right, Newsmax, 9 News, WKYC, ABC News, US Army's School of Advanced Military Studies
Spectator
24 minutes ago
- Spectator
Is the Met finally getting tough on pro-Palestine protests?
It was airily pleasant to walk round Parliament Square on Monday morning. I had come up to London to go to parliament and to interview Kemi Badenoch at a Policy Exchange event across the square. Palestine Action had announced a protest march against Donald Trump's and Israel's 'genocide' for that time. Although the Met had banned it from the area, I had recently witnessed so many ill-contained and threatening protests there – almost all for Palestinian causes – that I fully expected delay, disruption and occasional harassment. This time, however, it turned out that the Met meant business. The protest was well-contained in the designated streets round Trafalgar Square. May this mark the permanent change many of us have long been calling for. The delightful absence of trouble that day brought home to me how oppressive those past protests had become. The Met's blind commitment to 'the right to protest' effectively ceded control of the streets, public spaces and Tube stations, giving the extremists a preposterous media salience. That right kept cancelling more important rights – those of MPs, peers and parliamentary staff to get on with their work and of the ordinary public to attend parliament as they please or go about their normal business. The constant threat to the security of parliament has increasingly cut it off, created ugly physical barriers and intimidated the parliamentary authorities. By besieging parliament, you subtly delegitimate it. The Met Commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, justified his new toughness by saying that Palestine Action is 'an organised extremist criminal group', as witness the expensive damage it claims to have done to RAF planes at Brize Norton. It is, but he could have said much the same 18 months ago of the endless semi-violent anti-Semitic elements which so often march against Israel without a word to say against Hamas's 7 October massacres or Iran's bomb. Theirs have not been what Sir Mark calls 'protests of a different character' from those of Palestine Action. They have been cut from the same keffiyeh. He says the charges against Palestine Action 'represent a form of extremism that I believe the overwhelming majority of the public reject'. What forms of extremism do the overwhelming majority not reject? Anyway, there is joy over the sinner that repenteth. If Palestine Action is to be proscribed, this is the time to pursue its other boasted achievements. In March last year, in my Cambridge college, Trinity, it claimed responsibility for the slashing and spray-painting of de Laszlo's portrait of Arthur Balfour, prime minister, chancellor of Cambridge University and author of the Balfour Declaration. The incident was filmed and posted by the perpetrators, but a year later the police said that 'the investigation has now been filed'. It is hard to believe that these outrages are untraceable, once you identify their Islamist/far-left political motivation and therefore know where to look. By chance, it is 50 years ago this autumn that I matriculated at Trinity. There is a half-century dinner there next month for all of us, but not for me, due to a clerical error in the college's email records. This error has now been corrected with a vengeance and I have since received eight invitations to the Trinity Giving Days in which alumni contribute to bursaries. What is more exciting, however, is that the period in question has also been marked in verse. Four years ago, I drew attention (see Notes, 10 July 2021) to The Examined Life, James Harpur's book of poetry about his time at Cranleigh, his public school in Surrey, which in its 160-year existence has achieved respectability rather than celebrity and is therefore a tricky subject for the muse. The book was a brilliant success, doing what good poetry does uniquely well – suggesting the general from the minutely observed particular. Now Harpur has done this again with Trinity, where he was a year below me, in a new volume called The Magic Theatre. Cambridge has been the subject of rather more poems than Cranleigh, so the bar is higher. But I think Harpur clears it. In my first year at Trinity, I was thrilled to hear that the set I was sharing with Oliver Letwin – G3 New Court – was the same to which Tennyson returns in 'In Memoriam'. It had been occupied by his beloved Arthur Hallam, whom the poem mourns: Up that long walk of limes I past To see the rooms in which he dwelt. Another name was on the door: I linger'd; all within was noise Of songs, and clapping hands, and boys That crash'd the glass and beat the floor; Where once we held debate, a band Of youthful friends, on mind and art, And labour, and the changing mart, And all the framework of the land; When one would aim an arrow fair, But send it slackly from the string; And one would pierce an outer ring, And one an inner, here and there; And last the master-bowman, he, Would cleave the mark.' That could have been an exact description of Oliver's debating prowess, displayed in those very rooms. The trouble with 'In Memoriam', however, is that such exactness is mostly absent. It is a great poem, but more about grief and 'the unquiet heart' ('in words, like weeds, I'll wrap me o'er') than one rooted in the specific. In this sense, I get more out of Harpur's Cambridge than Tennyson's. Whether he writes about revising or punting or amateur acting ('the tinnitus of humiliation') or lost love, he places his young self in those strange three years granted to you in that (then) small town where your life is more imagined than real, and the better for it. On one tiny point I must correct James Harpur. In a poem which turns out to be about me, I have 'a sleeve of navy velvet'. No; it was only corduroy. We were poor students, after all.
