LONDON — The United Kingdom has positioned itself as one of Ukraine’s staunchest allies from the start. Now a real test of British mettle begins.
Keir Starmer made a promise from the beginning of his premiership, reiterated on a visit to Kyiv last month, that the U.K. would be a “steadfast” backer of Ukraine in its grinding struggle against Russia’s invasion.
The prime minister has been at pains to signal that his Labour Party will be strong on defense and security, continuing the legacy of previous Conservative leaders in backing Ukraine to the hilt since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.
Outwardly, British officials insisted that there was no shift in its position in the wake of bombshell comments this week by Donald Trump — promising peace talks with Vladimir Putin — and United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, signaling a U.S. retreat from Europe’s security and no NATO membership for Ukraine.
Behind the scenes, however, a new reality was dawning on lawmakers and diplomats in London.
“We knew something was coming,” said one Ministry of Defense official, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, “but not that.”
A Labour member of parliament with a background in national security watched in horror as Hegseth made his remarks. “We need to start speaking about this. We need to wake the public up,” they said.
But with severe spending pressures at home and relations with Washington barely established, London now has a narrow set of options when it comes to demonstrating what “iron-clad” support for Ukraine really means.
Tough choices
The U.K. has limited room to answer the challenges set down by the new U.S. administration, both on the conduct of peace negotiations and in ongoing funding of its fight.
In opening a dialogue with Putin, Trump has, in the eyes of many European observers, effectively sidelined Ukraine.
While some U.K. Conservatives openly likened Trump’s behavior to appeasement ahead of World War II, those at the top of government were more restrained.
Starmer and Defense Secretary John Healey stuck to the line that “there can be no negotiation about Ukraine without Ukraine,” while underlining continued U.K. support for Ukrainian membership of NATO.
The U.K. has long tried to move in lockstep with the U.S. on Ukraine. But it is now faced with the unenviable task of trying to keep Washington onside as their positions move farther apart.
Marion Messmer, a security analyst at the Chatham House think tank, said this week’s events had left the U.K. “more exposed” because “the U.K. and the U.S. have traditionally had such a close relationship” when it comes to strategic decision-making.
The U.K. is also in a tight spot when it comes to the gauntlet thrown down by Hegseth, who told NATO allies that spending 2 percent of gross domestic product on defense “is not enough — nor is 3 percent, nor is 4 percent. More like 5 percent.”
Starmer’s government has already warned it faces “tough choices” to meet its existing target of spending 2.5 percent of GDP on defense — but former defense ministers and military chiefs are now saying even this will not be enough.
Conservative former Defense Secretary Ben Wallace posted on X that the existing target “doesn’t come close if we are to be taken seriously as the U.S. draws down” and anything less than 3 percent by 2030 “will leave us vulnerable and unprepared.”
Starmer — who has previously opened the door to sending British forces to Ukraine to help “guarantee” the peace — would not be drawn on details when pressed again Thursday night.
“I won’t get into the particular capabilities,” he told ITV News, “but I do accept that if there is peace then there needs to be some sort of security guarantee for Ukraine and the U.K. will play its part in that.”
He added, however, that this would need to be a “guarantee that has U.S. backing.”
A leader in Europe?
There are other areas, however, where Britain has the potential to make its influence felt.
A cross-party group of MPs from the Commons defense committee was on a visit to Finland and Estonia when Trump’s remarks landed.
Labour MP Fred Thomas, who serves on the committee, said that the message from Eastern European allies was that they want to see British leadership. “They’d like to see us step forward to build a consensus across Europe” by reaching out to countries such as Italy and Spain which spend less on defense, he said.
He argued the early role played by the U.K. in supporting Ukraine in 2022 “makes us uniquely placed to play a leadership role” and “perform leadership functions that we have not done for some time, bringing leaders together, using diplomatic means to help other countries come to our way of thinking.”
The official from the Ministry of Defense quoted above echoed this, saying the U.K. sees itself as “a leader in NATO and a leader in Europe” and insisted it is prepared to “lead by example” on defense spending.
A diplomat from a Central European country added it was “now even more important” for the U.K. to “act as a bridge” between higher and lower spending nations.
If some might balk at the idea of the U.K. taking on greater diplomatic responsibilities in Europe, others spy an opportunity — arguing that the U.S. change in tack makes the prospect of a U.K.-EU defense pact all the more urgent and feasible.
As Chatham House’s Messmer points out, Britain now has a role to play in spelling out what European defense looks like with the U.S. taking a back seat.
“The biggest concern is that that would be seen essentially as a sign for Russia to do more and to go farther, because they don’t have to worry about the U.S.,” she said.
The post Trump’s Ukraine bombshell puts British support to the test appeared first on Politico.
