Lord Skidelsky has faced sharp criticism from fellow peers over his remarks on Ukraine, with Labour’s Lord Anderson accusing him of failing to condemn Russia’s invasion and offering an overly sympathetic view of both President Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump.
During a debate in the Lords, Skidelsky questioned the UK’s continued support for Ukraine, arguing that the Trump administration had “torn up the familiar script” and suggesting that “there was never going to be a Ukrainian victory.”
He also claimed that “words such as ‘unprovoked’, ‘full-scale’, ‘barbaric’ and ‘criminal’… closed the door to diplomacy.”
His comments sparked immediate backlash. Lord Anderson hit back, saying: “The noble Lord again ploughs his eccentric but consistent furrow. I heard not a scintilla of criticism of President Putin, nor indeed of the invasion of the state of Ukraine.”
Anderson also warned against downplaying Russia’s threat, arguing that security guarantees for Ukraine were essential to prevent Moscow from capitalising on its military advantage.
Meanwhile, Skidelsky’s remarks about Trump’s “active search for peace” and his claim that “if he does succeed in ending the war, he will richly deserve the Nobel Peace Prize” were met with scepticism.
As the debate continued, peers questioned whether the UK government’s stance on Ukraine would shift in response to the changing approach in Washington. However, there was strong consensus that the UK should continue its support for Kyiv and that Russia could not be rewarded for its aggression.
the man with the Russian ancestry sides with Russia. shocker
Start your career journey today and work from the comfort of your home! No experience needed—just your passion and commitment to succeed. With the choice of weekly or monthly payments, you’ll have full control over your income.
Join us now and
Get Started Today!….. 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞/
‘ …and that Russia could not be rewarded for its aggression.’
In a nutshell. President Trump’s mockery threats to Canada and Greenland and President Xi’s towards Taiwan are in similar vein. A dangerous course in an unstable world that cannot be ignored.
‘unprovoked’, ‘full-scale’, ‘barbaric’ and ‘criminal’. Sounds about right. That’s what he thinks closes the door to diplomacy, whereas sending tanks and NLAWS and billions of quids worth of missiles, that hasn’t? Although I suppose the truth can be difficult to hear, Pres Putin must have a very thin skin if those words hurt him more than a Storm Shadow missile. However, one diplomacy door is always still open and Pres Zelensky will take our call.
We picked our side and we should be unapologetic. We are never going to act as an honest broker between an ally and an enemy. (There’s another truthful word his Lordship won’t like. Enemy.) Putin has made Russia our enemy. Putin won’t trust us and we shouldn’t trust him. If he says the sky is blue, go outside and check to see if he picked your pockets while saying it.
Skidelsky probably understands and gives due credence to the complicated recent history of Ukraine. In particular he knows that Russia’s reasons for its invasion were well known in advance and that therefore it was possible to have avoided it. That early peace efforts were negated by Boris Johnson’s flight to Kyiv is less well known. The war was unnecessary, Ukraine was always destined to lose it. Common sense is needed and Skidelsky has it in spades. The Lords would do well to listen instead of parroting the government’s narrative.
Or maybe, just maybe, and given all the evidence the last three years and more – we can recognise that Russia has persecuted an unprovoked, full-scale, barbaric and criminal war against a sovereign people.
The only way to have avoided the war was to have rolled over to Putin. That cannot happen. Skidelsky has about as much common sense as a crowbag private soldier with their first field Army pay in their account after eight pints on a Friday night.
We must always fight against oppressors – not side with them.