🇺🇦 Ukraine

Commons Chamber

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

In a crucial parliamentary session, the UK reaffirmed its strong support for Ukraine, pledging £4.5 billion in military aid this year, with an additional £150 million recently announced for drones, tanks, and missiles. Amidst concerns over potential US withdrawal from peacekeeping efforts, European NATO countries have stepped up, contributing the majority of the €50 billion committed to Ukraine in 2024. The session emphasized the importance of involving Ukraine in any peace negotiations, ensuring a durable peace and security guarantees to prevent future Russian aggression. The urgency of increasing defence spending was highlighted, with the strategic defence review set to address current threats and enhance UK and European deterrence capabilities.

Summary

  • The Minister for Defence Procurement and Industry, Maria Eagle, responded to an urgent question about Ukraine, highlighting the strong international support for Ukraine at the recent Ukraine Defence Contact Group meeting. Nearly 50 nations and partners committed to supporting Ukraine with billions in arms and ammunition to equip its fighters and increase pressure on Putin.

  • The US and European nations, including significant contributions from non-US NATO allies, have committed substantial funds to Ukraine for 2024 and beyond, emphasizing the importance of stepping up European support.

  • The UK has pledged £4.5 billion in military support for Ukraine in the current year, the highest amount to date, including additional funding for drones, tanks, and air-to-air missiles, bringing the total artillery shell support to over 500,000.

  • The consensus remains in the UK Parliament to support Ukraine strongly, with a clear stance that any negotiations on Ukraine must involve Ukraine itself, stressing the country’s sovereignty and the need for a durable peace.

  • There was concern about the implications of President Trump’s approach and the US’s potential withdrawal from future peacekeeping efforts in Ukraine. This highlighted the urgency for increased UK and European defence spending and support for Ukraine.

  • Several MPs emphasized the need for justice alongside peace, urging the UK to focus on prosecuting war crimes and ensuring that future peace deals do not incentivize further Russian aggression.

  • The Ukrainian diaspora in the UK was acknowledged for their efforts, and parliamentarians expressed a commitment to not let these communities down and to continue supporting Ukraine’s fight for freedom and justice.

  • Discussions also touched on the need for the UK to enhance its own defence capabilities and collaborate more closely with European and NATO allies, considering the evolving global security threats and the role of other nations in supporting Russia’s efforts.

  • The session concluded with an emphasis on the necessity of a durable, just peace for Ukraine, with security guarantees to prevent future aggression, acknowledging the tragic loss of life and the ongoing suffering in Ukraine.

Divisiveness

The session transcript indicates a relatively low level of disagreement among the participants. The general consensus across the session is on the importance of supporting Ukraine and ensuring a durable peace that involves Ukraine in negotiations. Most speakers from various parties, including Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrats, SNP, DUP, and Green Party, expressed strong support for Ukraine and emphasized the need for continued assistance and involvement in peace negotiations.

However, there were some points of contention:

  1. US Involvement Critique and Betrayal Claims: James MacCleary (Liberal Democrat) suggested that the US actions might represent a ‘betrayal’ of Ukraine and other European allies. This sentiment was countered by Maria Eagle, who rejected the notion of betrayal, citing the US commitment to a durable peace.

    Example: - James MacCleary: “Yesterday, the leader of my party warned the Prime Minister that we might be facing the worst betrayal of a European ally since Poland in 1945.” - Maria Eagle: “I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman says about being betrayed by our allies.”

  2. Defence Spending and Strategy: There were inquiries and concerns about NATO member countries not meeting expected defence spending levels, highlighted by James Cartlidge, and the potential need for the UK to step up its defence capabilities. There were also specific references to the strategic defence review and its implications for UK defence strategy.

    Example: - James Cartlidge: “Is not President Trump right to consistently highlight the point that some NATO nations spend far below what is expected and required on defence?” - Sir Bernard Jenkin: “As some of the defence chiefs have been expressing, we must be ready, if necessary, to fight a war with Russia if we are to deter it…”

  3. International Relations and Diplomacy: There were differing perspectives on the Trump administration’s approach to peace negotiations, with some expressing fear about US actions and others highlighting the importance of European allies stepping up in response.

    Example: - Ellie Chowns: “Is the Minister concerned that President Trump is repeating false Kremlin propaganda…” - Maria Eagle: “We have made quite clear with our 100-year partnership with Ukraine that we back it in the long term.”

Overall, while there were specific points of disagreement, they did not dominate the session. Most speakers aligned on the fundamental goal of supporting Ukraine and achieving a just peace. The disagreements that did occur were more focused and measured, resulting in a generally cooperative atmosphere rather than overt conflict or deep division.