This article was reprinted with permission after being published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer met with President Donald Trump at the White House to discuss a safety backstop for the United States as part of a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine.
A harmony deal between Russia and Ukraine has advanced as the two countries met on February 27 and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will visit one time after.
Trump accepted an offer to attend the U.K. in the near future, but the two exchanged compliments in front of the press, reversing Europe’s need for measures to ensure safety being an integral part of the cease-fire deals.
He likewise reiterated earlier assertions from Washington that joining NATO “is not going to arise.”
We’ve spoken and we’ll discuss how we’ll collaborate with you, Mr. President, to make sure that this agreement is one that is kept, because it’s crucial that we keep it, Starmer said.
Starmer announced the nation’s largest boost in defence spending since the end of the Cold War two days prior to his crucial meeting with Trump.
Starmer announced plans to accelerate a reduction in defense spending to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2027 and set an 3 % target for the next Parliament ( 2029 ).
We’ve known that this decision has been coming for three years, according to” I think in our hearts,” according to the statement. ” Starmer said to reporters after his address to lawmakers that his thinking has accelerated the last few weeks.
Starmer’s choice came as intercontinental relations were at a lower following the Cold War, as Trump questioned NATO’s worth, criticized Ukraine’s management, and looked into negotiating a deal with Russia regarding European security.
Starmer, a center-left legislator who took office in July, hopes that by accelerating defense-spending target, the United Kingdom will be able to address Trump’s long-standing grievances about NATO supporters not making their share.
Starmer’s visit comes in the wake of French President Emmanuel Macron’s February 24 visit to the White House, where he also urged Washington to remain engaged in German protection and help a good Ukraine peace deal.
The second high level visits highlight growing concerns in Europe that a U.S.-Ukraine deal that leaves Ukraine susceptible could disturb the continent.
U.S. Policy Change
Trump has violently acted since taking office five days ago to meet his campaign promise to end the conflict in Ukraine, turning three years of U.S. plan on its mind.
Trump shocked his European rivals earlier this month when he revealed that he had a protracted phone contact with Vladimir Putin and that his national security team had “immediately begin discussions with the Kremlin on ending the war.”
Trump’s secretary of state Marco Rubio discussed business opportunities for U.S. companies in Russia while his secretary of state Marco Rubio discussed business prospects for Russia. Afterwards, he said he would enjoy Russia to join the Group of Eight’s leading industrial countries.
Any lifting of sanctions on Russia, which is required in order to conduct business there once more, would let the Kremlin to rearrange, putting a threat to Western security, according to analysts.
Trump’s strategy represents a significant change from his political and economic loneliness of Russia under his leadership.
Officials in Europe now worry that Trump’s direct contact with Moscow will enable a deal that prioritizes U.S. Russia connections over European security concerns, leaving them largely unaffected by decisions that affect the balance of the region.
Macron held emergency speaks with EU officials on February 17 to develop a unified response in order to prevent that result.
In his first term, Trump’s former Russia director Fiona Hill said,” The United States has changed, and Europe has realized that if it wants to get serious about both its own stability and a long-term arrangement of Ukraine, which is necessary to Western security, then they need to alter as well.”
Starmer and Macron want U.S. support, but they have a 30-person European force.
The United Kingdom is “ready and willing to support this peace agreement” with troops on the ground. In the end, a U.S. backstop will be necessary to stop Russia from starting another invasion in a few years, Starmer said earlier this week.
Promises of U.S. air, logistics, and communications support in the event of a violation of a peace deal by Russia could be included in that , backstop , which is likely to be at the center of discussions at the White House.
Is that enough?
Trump’s shift in foreign policy is influenced by his belief that the United States must concentrate its military and financial resources on the Indo-Pacific to deter China, who he perceives as the biggest threat to American national security.
From Trump’s point of view, Europe must bear the cost of imposing a higher defense budget to defend itself from Russia. The majority of Europe’s nations have long been accused of riding on American coattails and questioning the value of the alliance because they have failed to meet NATO’s 2 percent defense spending target.
Trump has recently asked NATO members to increase defense spending to 5 % of GDP, a goal that some experts find unrealistic and would put a lot of EU budgets under significant pressure, requiring them to either raise taxes or reduce benefits. About 3 % of GDP is used for defense in the United States.
Starmer intends to reduce international aid in order to finance the U.K.’s increase in defense spending to 2.5 percent. By the end of the decade, tougher fiscal decisions would be required due to the potential increase to 3 percent.
Prior to Starmer’s announcement regarding the defense and security agenda, senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute ( RUSI), a London-based defense and security think tank, wrote in a February 24 note that a U.K. increase of 2.5 percent of GDP would probably not be enough to win over Trump.
Arnold argued that Starmer” will need to commit 3 percent, not” as soon as fiscal conditions allow,” but” as soon as the fiscal conditions permit.”
However, Arnold pointed out that Starmer’s toolbox is not the only one in his arsenal as he travels to Washington. Starmer might use Trump’s “ego and emotions” to influence the president of the United States in terms of a peace deal with Ukraine.
Starmer must “make a strong case” for Trump’s future if he is portrayed as a potential puppet by Russia during negotiations, he said.
In a geopolitically dispersed world where there is no such thing as Starmer, Starmer’s partnership with Trump could influence how European security is headed in the future and show whether Washington can still find common ground with its traditional allies.
