Prime Minister Andy Burnham has hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the UK as his first international visitor since taking office, the Prime Minister’s Office stated.
The two leaders met at Portsmouth Naval Base, where, according to Zelensky, they held their first meeting aboard the aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth. The visit came a week after Burnham took office, having spoken to Zelensky in one of his first calls as Prime Minister and invited him to visit at the earliest opportunity. Downing Street said Burnham used the visit to underline the UK’s support for Ukraine through the war and beyond.
Burnham was quoted as saying: “Britain stands with Ukraine, shoulder to shoulder, and our support remains unwavering. Russia should be in no doubt of our resolve, and we will not back down until we achieve long lasting and just peace for Ukraine. Stone Cloak is the best of homegrown British innovation and proven on the frontline, and it will be vital to protecting our security in both our countries.”
The centrepiece of the visit was the announcement that the UK will share the intellectual property behind a British capability known as Stone Cloak. According to the government, the electronic jammers are the size of a tablet computer and hinder Russian air defence systems from tracking and targeting the drones they are fitted to. By sharing the intellectual property, the government said, Ukraine can now mass-produce Stone Cloak itself, strengthening front-line defences.
The government said thousands of the jammers have already been gifted to Ukraine by the Ministry of Defence, helping its armed forces maintain drone operations. It framed the device as an example of the rapid innovation being developed between the two countries under the 100 Year Partnership signed earlier in the year.
According to the government, Stone Cloak is expected to be built into the next generation of UK deep-strike capabilities following its roll-out in Ukraine. That includes Project Brakestop, the government’s initiative to develop a new low-cost cruise missile. The arrangement means a capability first fielded on Ukrainian drones is intended to feed back into British weapons development, an unusually direct example of battlefield lessons shaping domestic procurement.
Fitting electronic warfare protection to strike drones addresses one of the central problems of the war, in which both sides rely heavily on uncrewed aircraft but lose large numbers to jamming and air defences. A device that degrades an air defence system’s ability to track a drone extends the reach and survivability of those aircraft, and doing so at low cost and in a form that can be produced at scale is the stated aim behind sharing the design with Ukrainian industry.
Zelensky set out his own account of the meeting in a post on X, reposted by the Ministry of Defence. He wrote that the two leaders discussed Ukraine’s need for sufficient capabilities to protect lives in the air and at sea, along with the development of joint defence production. “I am grateful to the United Kingdom for today’s decision to provide Ukraine with electronic warfare technologies to protect Ukrainian drones,” he wrote, adding that he had invited Burnham to visit Ukraine.
During the visit, the leaders also met more than 200 Ukrainian military personnel and sailors who have spent the past three weeks in the UK taking part in Exercise Sea Breeze, a maritime security and counter-mine exercise preparing for future missions in the Black Sea.
The government said the exercise builds on the wider support the UK provides Ukraine, including £3 billion a year for as long as it takes. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion, it said, the UK’s total support for Ukraine has reached £25 billion, including £16 billion in military assistance and £5.6 billion in non-military support.
It didn’t take long for our new PM to change out of his new ‘London suit’ for ‘Manchester rig’! It probably made Zelensky feel more comfortable.
Seriously…a great idea for the PM to meet Zelensky at Pompey on the carrier and at a very early stage in his premiership. Is Zelensky the first foreigh leader Burnham has met since taking office?
Yep, first one. Certainly sends a good message.
Agreed, I thought it was a good take.
Yes, this is apparently the first visit he’s hosted- which I think sends a good message in and of itself. A soft start for Burnham too, seeing as Zelensky is hardly going to rock the boat!
Why did queen Elizabeth leave Portsmouth under tow?
When? It’s still there I’m looking at it at Portsmouth
Well I guess she wouldn’t let a little thing like death stop her from reviewing the fleet as Monty Python might put it.
rename it h.m.s starmers folly
give it to Ukraine so the Russians can capture it, a bit like Abrams/C2/L2A6 etc so gthey can catch up and know how are kit works,
Give it to Ukraine so they can defend their country, and by extension Europe.
We also give them weapons and they blow them up almost immediately! What a waste!
We know the Russians will get it and when they do we go to version 2 and so on.
Don’t worry, lots of people in HMG far far better informed than your self taking all this into account. They are not flying anything into Russia we can’t afford to lose plus we get the benefit of real world use.
Indeed and reverse engineering threat is hardly a new problem so anti handling devices and baked in cyber security all round.
There’s good reason why weapons have Remove Before Flight tags on them, and require a defined loading and activation procedure to be followed.
In commercial terms protecting intellectual property, in military terms safeguarding operational security, in plain speak, don’t touch those as it will blow up.
“Do you know how zis works?”
“No, I was going to ask you”
Yes i think the PM off to a great start with regards to Ukraine , very encouraging . A floating office ! , perhaps he will move the Queen Elizabeth to the Mersey Docks .
Probably seeing if contractors can widen the Manchester Ship Canal quickly…..
What happened to those missle boats we were meant to be building for Ukraine?
Shift of focus to unmanned systems and drones.
Canceled, or at least postponed indefinitely.
They couldn’t have got through into the Black Sea once the war started due to the Montreux Convention and would have been priority propaganda targets while not being all that useful.
The minesweeper donation was especially incompetent since all HMG needed to do was sell to Romania, a NATO country not at war, for £1 and let RO gift them to UA from RO territorial waters thereby avoiding the Bosphorus blockage. Given their defensive vessel type, I doubt that Türkiye would care. They’d probably like having less mine countermeasures cost in the Black Sea.
I think Turkey would feel obliged to prevent such a transparent attempt to circumvent the convention. There is still a large Russian lobby there.
Except that the convention wasn’t broken at all. Romania is not at war.
What Romania decides to do with vessels in their territorial waters is a sovereign matter outside jurisdiction of Türkiye.
Less maritime hazard is a win for merchant mariners and ship owners everywhere.
That’s exactly what circumvent means. Giving vessels to Romania for them to pass on to Ukraine doesn’t directly breach the convention but is not how it is supposed to operate either.
It could be in Turkey’s interests but would open them to potential legal trouble.
Hope Zelensky hasn’t asked Burnham for any F35B jets . AFVs gone Mobile Artillery ( AS90 ) gone tow 105mm light Artillery gone .Thousands of ATW gone and on top of that some of our minehunters from the RN . 🙄
All killing doing what they were designed to do, kill Russians.
And they’re all gone
Hmmm…
£16.0 Bn (UK military support to UKR)
+ £5.4 Bn (UK non-military support to UKR)
+ £3.6 Bn (UK Black Hole, HMG Rounding?)
= £25.0 Bn (Total expenditure to date)
Simply curious. New accounting rules for HMG Treasury? 🤔😉
Money well spent, what’s the issue?
The non-categorized £3.6 Bn. No one intrigued?
Probably certain military support the UK doesn’t want public.
I suspect it’s this year’s funding yet to be allocated or spent. If not then it’s probably IMF or European collective funding.
It’s to cover all of the UKSF that are apparently running around Ukraine supporting Ukrainian forces and carrying out direct action against the Russians!
Joe16,
Certainly a plausible scenario, but would it not be more intelligent to combine w/ military support to more effectively disguise the specific amount? 🤔
Besides equipment, military or not, there are operational costs or investment in joint collaboration in Ukraine or UK.
Part of the Strategic direction is moving from recipient of aid to collaborator in innovation to independent sovereign capabilities.
Freedom from ITAR is a given from collaboration onwards rather like it is for the European NATO defence investment surge to 3.5% GDP 2035.
European taxpayers expect their tax to be spent on European jobs, profits and taxes not US MIC. The Defence leadership understands the journey to sovereign capabilities will be a long one but is not optional. Purchasing power parity agrees.
I assume the P50 U missile boats of which eight were originally planned with four being built in Ukraine are intended for post war production. I do not suppose the minesweepers donated to that country will be going there anytime soon either – their intended purpose is to help clear the Black Sea.
Can’t send the minesweepers yet – ‘Turkey closed the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits to warships from all countries, implementing restrictions under the 1936 Montreux Convention on February 28, 2022, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine’. P50s not going to be built; ‘ the original plan to build the eight P50-U missile boats has effectively been shelved or paused, with only the lead ship remaining under construction in an unknown status at the Babcock Rosyth shipyard.Active Shift in Strategy: The full-scale invasion fundamentally changed Ukraine’s naval requirements. Crewed, conventional surface vessels are highly vulnerable to Russian air attacks and missiles while confined to port.Focus on Unmanned Warfare: The UK-Ukraine Maritime Capability Coalition has shifted funding away from large hulls. Resources are now prioritized toward de-mining vessels, Sandown-class minehunters, and rapid production of low-cost uncrewed surface vehicles (USVs)’
Montreaux Convention seems to permit passage of warships back into the Black Sea if returning to home ports. So Ukrainian minesweepers could likely return to (new) home ports. But risk of destruction, should that occur, seems too great.
I think the key term is ‘returning’. Otherwise Russia declares that the (new) home port of any ship they want to send to the Black Sea is a Black Sea port.
Thanks Rob for your contribution, I was aware of the straits closure but as I recall there was early talk of smaller vessels going via the canals and rivers – all off the table now for the reasons you mention.
The Main-Donau-Kanal is very shallow tbf. 4m normally, but in some of the locks it’s less than 3. Sandowns have a two and a half meter draft so, bit risky sending one. Overladen or a bit too much silt and maybe you get an Evergiven? But more importantly, IIRC the Ukranians want them to demine after the war, rather than try and do it when the Russian’s might lob a few effectors their way or simply remine after they risked trained crews.
Andy Burnham seems to have much more of a flair for the media than starmer ever did. He is making all the right noises and popular moves as well. Very surprised for him to lead on defence spending and now openly talking about benefit cuts. I suspect this might be why he choose Healy
Perhaps as much as 3% of GDP for direct defence expenditure before the next Parliament? A 0.1% increase per annum should not be beyond the wit or device of a democracy rearming for probable future existential conflict.
I suspect 3% by 2030 is very much on the cards now however I suspect there will be more of an industrial component to it. I think more E7 being modified in Birmingham for sure especially if they can attract more US orders. Maybe a rapid expansion of the Freya ABM system with radars made by Saab in the UK.
“A rising tide lifts all boats.” Always believed win-win scenarios are not only feasible but also desirable. 🤔😉
Yes, I believe it’s the only way he can justify the rapid spending increase but it should benefit all of defence.
Yes bug can we push the little boats back to France please.
I love the vernacular, pushing them back, like they are on a raft or something rather than high speed power boats 😂
How do you “push a boat back” without entering France’s 12 mile limit, please do tell.
They tend not to be high speed power boats, the pictures I’ve seen are all of soft bottom inflatables, with a board at the stern for an outboard. Like a giant inflatable dinghy, but recreational ones never have the capacity for more than 4 or 5 people.
How the really obvious giant inflatables don’t get spotted on the websites of whoever sells them, I don’t know. They have no possible purpose apart from moving large numbers of people cheaply and unsafely.
I have always wondered why they are not pulled back to the 12 mile limit and handed over to the French patrol boats to escort home. Al Capone was finally got off the streets by using tax evasion as a charge. If the small boats are breaking maritime safety regs just use them and deny access in our waters due to safety infringements. They are already charging the helmsmen for endangering life which might discourage some from skippering the boats but more could be done. If they have chucked passports etc that’s thier problem to get back into France from the daytrip they set off on. And yes we could set up centres to filter out those who are genuinely in need and help but the current open door situation is not really sustainable at all. Lets face it, most of us would belt the crap out of someone breaking into “Mon Repose” so not dissimilar.
Why is it Streeting is on resignation watch then? Burnham won’t commit to the defence uplift apparently! Still all the ‘good’ things are still getting money,foreign aid going up,another net zero fanatic for GB energy,boats still piling across in record numbers yep he is making all the right noises and popular decisions isn’t he? NOT!!
🥱 Righttrash pablum…
He’s spent £2bn? of unfunded money on a charm offensive…! Then announced a Reform (political speak for ‘cuts’ to Welfare) .. That’s the Easy bit ..
Paying and getting this through the Party as kier and Rachel found out is the hard bit..Healeys Up coming Budget will give us a better idea of were we’re actually going with Burnham..Don’t get to Exited with them yet… Taxes and Extra borrowing including War bonds may derail this train..
Pat McFadden was interviewed in Derby this morning on the issue of NEETS and benefits. The govt are adopting a carrot and stick approach to the the problem. There will be more options for technical subjects and employment experience at 14+ in schools to open up pathways to local jobs and the govt will incentivise local employers to take on existing NEETs, and pay their wages for a period. In return the young NEET is expected to ‘engage with the opportunity’ being offered. I think technical schools were part of the 1948 education plan but they never got funded and education got hijacked by the British obsession with class. Anyway, good to know we are pushing forwards ‘at pace’ with technical education – give us another 75 years and who knows what we can achieve. 😂
1944
But we are short of technically literate people…..
Increasing tech training and reviving the old poly sector is essential.
Agree. Ironic that the French Polytechniques are élite institutions. It’s a British cultural problem. I wish Burnham luck in changing the mindset.
Yes but in the bigger scheme of things no one in the world has ever heard of a French poly technique, Oxford and Cambridge and half a dozen other universities are global mega brands able to attract billions in capital for spin offs.
Different cultures. The French defence industry has prospered through being closely networked into the French establishment, where buy French is the default. But in a global world as you say, branding counts and Oxbridge and a handful of other institutions should be winners. Must finish that train line between Oxford and Cambridge 😂
We really should finish that train line and force through building of tens of thousands of new houses between the two universities. The UK is held back by home counties NIMBYS.
That’s why we can’t compete with San Francisco despite having even better universities, talent and ideas. They are trapped in two small towns surrounded by a bunch of farmers and landed gentry.
I attended one for a year as part of my studies- far and away better quality practical technical education than my engineering course in the UK. Would recommend a placement at one to any student that has the opportunity!
Thanks Paul. Back in the late 50’s I went to a newly built secondary school which was sometimes referred to as a ‘Secondary Tech’ school. Indeed, it had a fully fitted woodwork room, including two lathes; a metalwork room with lathes and a furnace; two well-equipped science labs, a ‘rural science’ lab with a large greenhouse alongside the school allotment. For the girls, they had a well equipped ‘domestic science’ area including fully fitted kitchen, plus a small flat with a bedroom (or two?) where the girls could stay the weekend and learn to survive for themselves.
Not saying it produced physics professors but, for me, it laid down basic ‘life skills’ which set me up for looking after my own home.
I’m afraid the impression I get is that many youngsters today wouldn’t even be interested in learning basic skills.
The philosophy behind comprehensive schools, which took off in mid 1960s was well meaning but incomplete and poorly thought through as regards the role of education in the economy. The corollary of ‘grammar school for all’ was thw implicit devaluing of the conyribution of secondary schools. It was a tragedy really. It beggars belief that wr have had so called ‘comprehensive’ education for over 70 years and Labour is only now including technical ( read secondary school) subjects in the curriculum at 14. What a bunch of plonkers.
P.s. my father really was a toolmaker 😅
The king is dead, long live the king!
Stone Cloak, you have to hand it to the UK, we come up with the best names for weapons.
And they’re all gone
Dern – I think we can forget about these boats for Ukraine for the foreseeable future! Later in the year I am going on a river cruise along the Danube and Rhine, previous clients have had issues with low water levels causing the abandonment of their cruise so what you say about lock depths make a lot of sense.
Wonder if Burnham is telling Zelensky this is how full the Hanger is When they go to sea..?
🫡
‘Give me more money’
I agree with the points raised. Every system sent to Ukraine carries risks, including the possibility that Russia will recover or study captured equipment, but that is a reality of every major conflict and is already factored into military planning. What we should not lose sight of is the battlefield requirement. Ukraine’s recent successes create an opportunity that must be exploited, and that means having the heavy mechanized capability to breach and roll back entrenched Russian defensive lines. Drones and precision fires are indispensable, but they do not eliminate the need for armored breakthrough forces. Challenger 2, Leopard 2, Abrams, and the engineering assets that support them remain critical for penetrating fortified positions and enabling exploitation. If the objective is to restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity, now is the time to ensure that heavy armor is available where it can make the greatest operational difference.