Lt Col Joby Rimmer, the UK’s Senior Military Advisor to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), lauded Ukraine’s resilience in the face of Russia’s ongoing war, calling it “nothing short of extraordinary.”
Delivering remarks on 12 February in Vienna, he highlighted Ukraine’s “unbreakable spirit and an unyielding commitment to its sovereignty, freedom, and the rules-based international order.”
In his speech, Lt Col Rimmer addressed Russian claims of holding “the strategic initiative along the entire line of contact.” Countering these assertions, he noted that Ukrainian forces “continue to hold their ground, not only defending their homeland but also reclaiming and securing additional territory, including in Kursk.” Referring to open-source reports, he stated that the “Russian VDV 11th Airborne brigade commander has been relieved of duty following his failure to stop this recent Ukrainian counterattack.”
He went on to criticise Russia’s “complete disregard for human life” in deploying DPRK troops to the front line, saying that “as of mid-January 2025, DPRK forces had highly likely sustained c4,000 casualties, more than one third of the 11,000 troops deployed to Kursk.”
Highlighting the absence of genuine diplomatic efforts, Lt Col Rimmer remarked that “there is no evidence of a Russian willingness to compromise.” He dismissed the notion of a “special military operation,” asserting instead that it is “a full-scale invasion and occupation attempt, a blatant violation of international law, and a direct challenge to global stability.” Stressing that “no one desires peace more than Ukraine,” he called for a settlement that “respects the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act.”
Citing the Russian delegation’s rejection of a “freeze along the line of contact,” he agreed that “Russia must withdraw from all of Ukraine’s sovereign territory.”
Emphasising the broader implications of the conflict, Lt Col Rimmer said that “any peace that fails to hold Russia accountable will only invite further aggression – not just against Ukraine, but against other nations that dare to assert their independence.” He described President Putin’s approach as “built on a demand for total submission through violence,” insisting that “no sovereign nation could or should, accept such terms.”
Concluding his remarks, the UK Military Advisor underscored the international community’s obligation to stand with Ukraine. “Our commitment to Ukraine remains absolute,” he stated. “We will continue to confront Russian aggression through military, economic, and diplomatic means… It is our responsibility to ensure that they do not stand alone.”
Much of what he said is true. But was said on the 12th.
The US re-wrote the rules on the 13th.
Trump is an absolute piece of shit for selling out Ukraine.
I hope, if there is a hell, he burns there for a long time.
Europe is like a drug addict which has lost belief in itself. Trump has thrown a bucket of cold water over the patient. The EU and the UK will now have to go cold turkey.
I’m not angry at Trump for backing off from NATO. I agree that Europe, us included, need to spend far more on defence.
I’m angry at Trump for throwing Ukraine under the bus.
It’s Trump’s nature to provoke. Our task is to challenge the channel the anger into constructive action.
Agree, people are dying and this draft dodger is throwing them to the wolves and acting like he is doing them a favour.
Steve R…The US cannot afford to fund European defence this is a fact…too many freeloading European countries (and the UK is a freeloader too). I’m personally not worried about any Russian bogeyman that has been constructed by the MSN…What I’m worried about is the undocumented people we are letting into the country and Europe…they are far more dangerous than the Russian’s to our national security and they are aided and abetted by the far left extremist government we currently have in office. Look at the news in Germany and Austria and tell me we should fear Russian and the millions of illegals crossing the borders of Europe.
I’m finding it increasingly difficult to tell the difference between comments made by Russian or MAGA bots and those from Putin apologists who largely seem to congeal in the Socialist Workers Party and Reform UK.
Because there is no difference, authoritarians uniformly hate democracies more than each other. But more than that, they hate any domestic democratic opposition.
Ask the tens of millions dead at the hands of Hitler or Stalin if they noticed a difference.
Mathew. Why do you say the UK is a freeloader? We spend over 2% and bring nuclear weapons to the alliance. Our Navy is probably rhe strongest in Europe.
The Uk entered the 20 year long war on terror and burned almost 70 billion dollars of defence spending on the war on terror..all to support our ally the U.S., to say the Uk has been freeloading on the U.S. is a fundamental lie the Uk has supported the US in a large number of ways…let’s look at the U.S. UK relationship from a different fact based perspective.
1939-1942 The US sold war materials to the UK at market value, taking a large number of Uk key possessions and gold as payment.
1942-1945 The US joined the allies only after being attacked itself..until that point it was happy to see the European democracies fall and the British empire be taken apart.
1946-1991 The US and it’s allies took on equally the war against the Soviet Union in the Cold War …which was a U.S. war as much as a European war. At the same time the US used UK war debt as a tool to destroy UK world influence..it wanted the Uk as an unsinkable carrier in the eastern Atlantic and to take some of the nuclear load, it also wanted its support in the UN and the U.S. world order but it did not want a competitor..so it purposefully limited the UKs recovery of power.
1991-2000 it do is not much care what western Europe did as it had won the world was completely enamoured of the end of history and went full Tonto on market exploitation..but it still expected its allies to turn up to help maintain its world order AKA gulf war one and the 10 years air policing of Iraq.
2001-2020 US launched its war on terror and NATO tiggered article five for the first time in its history..the UKs contributed was around 70 billion dollars, 10,000 casualties and 600 dead
And now the message is Europe is freeloading…I’m sorry it’s utterly MAGA one sided let’s blame someone. Yes we now need to spend more but during the Cold War we spent the same percentage as the US….for most of 1990-2010 we spent 2.6-3% which is not far of the percentage of the US and they have world wide commitments we don’t have…that are FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT. The only thing we did wrong was not regard Russia as a threat..but the simple fact is the military Europe has could stomp the Russian military into the ground our big problem is the U.S. alway insisted it control NATO so most of the command control and enablers sit with the US and that’s on purpose because they did not want Europe to be a cohesive competitor on the world stage.
There is only one nation that has been truly freeloading of the U.S. and that is Isreal.
See it’s all perspective and if I wish to take a really one sided view as MAGA have to Europe, it actually makes the US look a bit like a geopolitical competitor to Europe…and that’s the problem MAGA are now forcing a split in the west into two power groups essentially a 50% split that will now be unlikely to act together…if they keep down this road the US will end up facing a peer enemy without European support and it will be a disaster for the US if that happens…because the U.S. has not in modern history faced off on its own against an actual peer…and people denigrate china but in all the things that matter in fighting and winning a long existential war china matches the U.S…especially Europe is sitting in a neutral position.. MAGA want their cake and to eat..but when china does come calling they will find the have eaten the European bit of the western alliance cake and the have lost 23% of the worlds wealth and industrial capacity.
well said!
Once again, this ⬆️⬆️ You paying attention Daniel Morgan et al?
You don’t know the meaning of far left. You just repeat parrot style the sounds the right wing media feed you.
He treats his ideological enemies better than his allies.
What on earth make you think they’re his ideological enemies??
The US holds almost no Russian money under sanctions, it never bought any Russia gas or ever traded much with Russia. Europe holds most of the cards on sanction relief.
Ukraine is supplying 100% of the forces currently fighting Russia.
European NATO members are supplying the bulk of the money and armaments Ukraine is using to fight the Russians.
Even under the Biden administration US weapon supplies were unreliable leading to major gains for the Russians. Europe has a significantly larger industrial base than the USA and now out produces the USA for most armaments that Ukraine is using like 155mm shells.
It’s really not up to Donald Trump or the USA when the war in Ukraine ends.
If America doesn’t want to be involved that is their right, but they should not go around bravely surrendering with honour for the rest of us that want to stay in the fight.
100% 👍🏻
Not far off jim. Trump wants to sell out Ukraine he’s not offering to station troops on the border, can’t see him giving weapons to Ukraine so why is he the one to talk to Putin. Europe and nato need to stand up
Because he is a blowhard who lives to be in the limelight, to be the centre of attention and doesn’t give a damn about anybody but himself.
👍Exactly!
Well already on MSM the narrative is starting to turn on Ukraine for not accepting Trumps sellout! This will only get worse when they start on we could save loads of money if Ukraine would stop fighting.
Nothing to do of course the fact fighting could stop in the next hour if Pootin gave the order🙄
If only we had made investments in our industrial base and invested in hard power we wouldn’t have trump doing what trump does.
If the UK government, and other Western governments, really believed in Ukrainian independence, they would do more than provide training and weapons. In 1914 Britain declared war on Germany for its invasion of Belgium. In 1939, Britain and France declared war on Germany in response to the invasion of Poland. So why the unwillingness to commit western forces? Russia could hardly complain having used North Koreans in the front line. Positioning western ground forces in defensive positions in western Ukraine would send a message to Russia without involving immediate ground combat. Air patrols well away from the front line could add to the deterrent effect.
Britain guaranteed Belgium in 1914 via treaty before the war and Poland in 1939. No such treaty existed with Ukraine. Britain takes international treaties very seriously unlike some other western nations.
Britains guarantee of Belgian independence dates back to 1839 and the Treaty of London. Signed by Britain, France, Russia, Austria and Prussia. But the guarantees of polish borders was only made in August 1939, after the molotov ribbentrop pact.. it didn’t really go much further than the Budapest agreement of 1994 signed by USA,UK and Russia, guaranteeing Ukraine’s borders against attack.
Putin broke that agreement but western countries have made little attempt to enforce it beyond supplying arms and training. Whether Ukraine s retention of nuclear weapons ( the background to the security guarantees) would have deterred Putin is doubtful. But the half hearted support provided hasn’t and won’t.
The Budapest agreement only required the signatories to guarantee they would not attack Ukraine. Russia broke this treaty, neither the UK or the USA was required to guarantee Ukraine’s boarders from another party.
The difference is Russia has nukes.
Without those NATO would already have gone in and repeated Gulf War 1991 on Russia
Your assertion is that Russia’s nuclear arsenal is the primary deterrent preventing NATO from directly intervening in Ukraine. Here is my take:
While nuclear weapons undeniably raise the stakes, their deterrent effect against conventional military actions, like a NATO intervention in Ukraine, is not absolute and can be significantly overstated. The provided comparison, referencing Iran’s missile attacks on Israel, highlights this. Furthermore, the following points weaken the argument that Russia’s nukes are the only factor preventing intervention:
The Nature of the Conflict is such that the situation in Ukraine is vastly different from a direct, conventional attack on a nuclear power’s homeland. NATO’s objective would be limited: expelling Russian forces from Ukrainian territory. This isn’t an existential threat to Russia itself, making nuclear retaliation less likely and less justifiable in the minds of Russian leadership. The Russian military doctrine states conditions for using nuclear weapons, which include the use of WMD against Russia or an existential threat to the Russian state. The loss of territory in Ukraine, while a serious blow to Russian ambitions, would not necessarily trigger a nuclear response.
The Risk Calculus for Russia: A crucial factor is the calculation of risk and reward. While Russia would likely view a NATO intervention as a grave threat, the potential consequences of using nuclear weapons (i.e. a large-scale nuclear war) are orders of magnitude greater than any possible benefit from preventing the loss of Ukraine. Russia would have to assess whether the use of nuclear weapons is worth the destruction of Russia. The risk of a catastrophic counter-attack from NATO would be extremely high. Russia’s willingness to risk such an outcome to maintain control over Ukraine is questionable. The assumption that nuclear deterrence is absolute doesn’t consider these complex considerations.
Graduated Response and Conventional Military Superiority: NATO possesses overwhelming conventional military superiority. In a hypothetical scenario where NATO decided to intervene, it would likely employ a strategy of graduated response. NATO would likely not move directly into Russia, but instead act directly on Ukrainian soil to weaken Russia’s forces in Ukraine. NATO’s forces could utilise conventional precision strikes, cyber warfare, and other non-nuclear means to cripple Russian military capabilities. This strategy would be designed to minimise the risk of escalation and give Russia the option to de-escalate. NATO might also rely on economic and diplomatic pressure to isolate Russia.
Deterrence is Not Just About Nukes: Other factors are already deterring NATO, like the potential for high casualties in a conflict with Russia, the economic and political ramifications of a wider war, and the complex international political landscape. The commitment of resources and potential for a protracted conflict are significant deterrents, even without considering nuclear weapons. The fear of getting drawn into a long-term conflict with large numbers of casualties for NATO forces, as well as a possible economic recession due to disruption of trade, could be substantial deterrents to intervention in the region.
Limited Goals vs. Full-Scale War: The Gulf War in 1991 is not a perfect comparison. NATO’s hypothetical intervention in Ukraine would have a more limited objective than removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and installing a new government. The Gulf War required the complete destruction of Saddam Hussein’s conventional forces. Russia is a nuclear power. NATO would not have the same objectives, making the comparison less useful.
While Russia’s nuclear arsenal is undoubtedly a factor in NATO’s calculations, it does not necessarily prevent intervention. It is more likely that any NATO response is going to be calculated in scope and not be an all-out attack on Russia that risks nuclear war. Other political, military, and economic factors play a critical role. The assumption that nuclear weapons are an absolute deterrent in all circumstances oversimplifies a complex strategic situation. NATO could choose to act if the situation warranted.
Back in those days we had the industrial capacity, military infrastructure and the wealth to engage in attritional warfare with near-peer countries.
Absolutely. Yet we continue to seek further cuts. Navy losing another frigate with no relpacement for a year or 3, plus the Albions, Wave RFAs. Insanity. We’ve been doing Putins job for him whittling our forces down to neglegable levels.
If we’d not fannyed about so long & deployed allied forces in support of UKR Putin would’ve wound his neck in years ago or been defeated.
And it’s not just a ship cut here or there. We cut nearly a third of the Navy/RFA (all ships/subs>100t) since the Ukraine invasion in 2022. Who in their right minds cut a third of the navy when there’s a war next door? In theory we can still save half-a-dozen of those ships; nevertheless, we wont.
It will come to UK and other EU boots on the ground in Ukraine quite soon. Plus a Typhoon squadron in Ukraine. A new Europe is coming into being; the EU + The UK + Ukraine. The tricky bit is navigating the politics, leadership and command structure of ground forces in Ukraine. If there is no US contingent then who commands? Will the Ukraine front line with the East be partitioned into sectors like Berlin; a UK sector, a French sector and a Ukrainian sector?
Of course, better to invade Russia toeards Miscow, so.e Times I believe people have no mindvin the head, do you do do you know what are nukes ? , would you like to see misiles flying towards Europe, Jesús.
Ukraine will lose territory and this was versión clear longi time ago, only Dreamers as some persons here wete thinking that Russia would lose.
What Britain and Europe as a whole has to do is to increase at least defence budget to 3% ,this is the better deterrent for a possible russian agressión.
Sorry for the mistakes due to the fuc… mobile phone keyboard.
Russia has already successfully targeted and destroyed notable C3 nodes in Ukraine – do you think ‘Western’ Ground Troops deployed in Western Ukraine would be immune from the same treatment ?.
Peter. The big difference is that we are a less dominant European power with small armed forces.
Also we are in NATO and have less freedom to act unilaterally.
Do you think that UK alone should have sent forces into Ukraine? I wonder how long our hollowed out armoured division would have lasted.
There is another nail in the coffin of NATO where VP Vance spent 20 mins telling European nations they were essentially authoritarian anti democratic regimes under the influence of forces stifling free speech and democracy and that European governments were essentially the enemy within..and that he did not fear Russia or china, but European governments..this was at the Munich Security Conference where the nato and western nations were meant to be discussing the security threats of china, Russia, Iran and its proxies…
This was purely for the US domestic audiences to build yet another reason for the MAGA movement away from a shared future of collaboration with other western liberal democracies.
It’s my personal view that essentially there is a high risk that NATO and the western world order it supported is now in its death throes. As the US removes its support from all the structures it creates to enforce that order the UN, IMF and NATO.
It makes me sick to think it for what it means but I think US liberal democratic hegemony is now breathing its last and European nations now need to be utterly focused on what that means.
We may be looking at a complete realignment with the world divided up between multiple great powers who are not really aligned but all working for there own benefit and essentially using and abusing minor powers
Super powers
USA
EU
China
Major powers Independent
India
Russia
UK
Japan
Major regional powers
Big list
Minor regional powers
Bigger list
There will be a big decision for the major powers on that list as to what super power they align with clearly Russia has aligned with china, Japan by geostrategic necessity will need to align with the US as will most of the mine powers in the western pacific, some will end up aligning with china though necessity as well. India may well be able to maintain independence as a very large major power..but that could be difficult if and when china really starts looking at it..but china will spend the next couple of decades focused east on the western pacific before looking west. The minor Regional powers in Easter Europe will be forced to an EU or Russia stance.. The UK many need to decide were its core security lays as although we are still a major power like Russia I think we may need to align with a super power ( as Russia will need to do) and the EU is closer geographically and now probably in values as well, although it may well be able to navigate a path as being the bridging power between the US and EU..we are still a major power and have the sway and ability to do that.
So if this continues to play out as it is and the trump administration is seriously doing what it’s doing is I think we could see essentially three super powers..with possibly changing relations, the US and EU Alliance may change to neutrality and the U.S. china conflict may also change to neutrality..you never know…with all the small regional powers essentially under their sway as they compete..possibly with proxy wars etc and a small number of independent major powers ( UK, Russia, India, Brazil, Japan) who will hold some of the balances of power in play but will probably need to align carefully.
I don’t think that Russia has ‘aligned’ with China in any meaningful cultural sense. It’s a case of my enemy’s enemy is my friend.
Indeed, I think Russia has made a very very big geostrategic error in not aligning with Europe to be honest… personally I think Russia has backed itself into a corner made an enemy of a sleeping giant ( the European powers) and that giant is being poked awake by a number of shocks. So I think Russia will fall into the Chinese power grouping through no other choice. But china wants what Russia has and that is land….
Two different US cabinet secretaries, Trump and Vance managed to set out four completely different and contradictory negotiations positions over Ukraine in the space of 24 hours. These people are idiots.
The biggest concern is 76 million people voted for these idiots.
The good news is that from farmers to retirees in America a whole bunch of people who voted for Trump are about to get what they voted for. People in Alabama and Arkansas are going to find out why they really need federal money while people in California and New York are going to be just fine after the federal government is gone.
Vance’s speech could have been written by Putin and delivered by Lavrov, such was the level of Russian inspired misinformation and twisting of truths. Imagine being lectured on democracy by an individual who continues to support the orange toddler’s lies about the 2020 election being stolen..
It’s pretty clear that Trump has shown himself to be a true Manchurian character and along with the immigrant tech bro, has begun a Russian backed coup in the US. Everything he has done since inauguration has been to the benefit of the CRINK alliance. Meanwhile an immigrant extremist with links to hostile governments begins to dismantle domestic US institutions.
Give it till the end of Trump’s term (assuming he doesn’t try to hold on to power), we’ll be referring to CRINKUS alliance.
Sadly for us in Europe, Trump sees the world like Putin with a tripolar world. 1. The US. 2. Russia. 3. China. In the same way the US knocked the British Empire off its dominant position, under Trump it now wants to diminish the whole of Europe into becoming Russia’s backyard.
Cat, pigeons time. I listened to Vance. He will be the next Potus. What he said, rightly made the Europeans squirm. People forget how much Europe has freeloaded on the back of the US for decades. Apart from Poland, Finland and the Baltic states who is taking it seriously? No one. Oh we have “Eaglespeke” and 2TK mincing in MTP whilst pretending to understand some squaddie for a photo op. The threat we face is a European issue, like Ukraine has always been a Slavic issue. Do not forget the MIC loves a good war, proxy or otherwise. If you want defence? You are going to have to pay for it, trouble with UK governments? Too busy rolling over to have their belly rubbed by Chicoms.
School assembly: Headmaster Trump sent his deputy J.D. to read the riot act to the pupils; tell the students its time to pull yourselves together 🙂
Vance will only be the next POTUS if the orange lunatic croaks from a surfeit of hamburgers before the end of his term, which is by no means impossible. The damage these people are doing to the American state will redound massively on those who can least afford it – many of whom did indeed vote for these pillocks – and Vance, whether as an incumbent VP or POTUS, will be rightfully associated with the miserable consequences. Vance is clearly an intelligent man, and I’m not convinced that even he believed most of the shite he came out with yesterday, but he’s riding the fascist train wherever it takes him. Despite their assertions of a massive electoral mandate, Trump won with only a narrow majority, and the Republican majority in both houses of Congress is wafer-thin. He will have to keep all the Republicans in Congress happy just to get his spending plans through, and unlike Trump many of them will be hoping for re-election and much more willing to listen to their increasingly angry constituents. Trump will probably lose control of one or both Houses at the mid-terms – assuming there will still be elections in the US – at which point he’s done.
As for your other comments, no-one has freeloaded on the United States – it’s been their choice to fund a massive military that goes far beyond any collective defensive needs, their choice not to fund a decent welfare state, and their choice to embroil themselves in disastrous and futile wars. On the contrary, they’ve taken the piss out of us by invoking Article 5 and dragging NATO into the shitshow that was Afghanistan. Ukraine is not a Slavic or even a solely European issue, it’s a freedom and common decency issue. Unlike in Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, the Ukrainian people have freely chosen to live in a liberal democracy, and that choice is worth defending. There are enough enemies out there that democracies must hang together, or most assuredly we will hang separately. All the world’s democracies should be chipping in whatever resources are required, especially if we’re not going to be fighting ourselves. Europe is doing it’s bit – primarily with finance, rather than weaponry – but Europe is frankly not as wealthy as the US, and it is largely unavoidable that we cannot achieve the economies of scale that they do, especially with so much duplication of military effort across 30-odd different countries. It is not unreasonable to expect the world’s wealthiest country and most important democracy to lead, both practically and morally. As for the British government, I don’t see anyone getting their belly rubbed by the Chinese – communist or otherwise – but frankly the Chinese are not the ones trying to violently take over a European country. If dealing with them can boost our economy in any way and help us pay for our defensive needs, then it needs to be done, even if we have to hold our nose.
As far as geostrategic blocks, it’s a question of core culture. As the saying goes, all roads lead to Constantinople. Russia is Orthodox, Europe Catholic, Ottoman Turkey is Islamic, the Nordics are Protestant and the US is Jewish. Good old Imperial, diverse UK can’t decide what we are so we are in an excellent position to provide impartial leadership…..Geronimo a European army 😂
Paul, we dismantled the Empire a very long time ago. Plenty of time to have worked out our post-Imperial role. I am not puzzled by it.
I’m glad you are clear on our national identity, Graham. Perhaps you could let the C of E synod in on the secret 🙂
Trump doesn’t care about Ukraine or the EU. The only reason why he hasn’t already pulled out of NATO is that he wants the Europeans to agree to his peace plan. Then probably a year or so after the peace plan he will withdraw from NATO using some spurious reason, and when Russia has reconstituted its military, it will have another go at Ukraine and the even the Baltic states. Why? Because Trump hates China and Europe. He is quite happy for Russia to turn Eastern Europe into a wasteland. It gets rid of Europe as a competitor.
Trump is a c*nt and I hope he dies a painful death.
Hopefully he’ll go like Elvis, and there’ll be pictures 😈
What a fucking childish comment. I see the quality of conversation has dropped somewhat.
Cry me a river.
I’m angry at Trump throwing Ukraine under the bus. Sue me!
Along with others we were guarantor s of ukraine soveignty not that long ago. Shame on all for not taking the relevant action when russia broke the agreement.
I think we have to get realistic about Russia….it has a significant nuclear arsenal and has a doctrine that allows their use in tactical situations. I can’t stand Europeans (including Russians) killing Europeans on a mass scale it is so senseless. Russian people are good people as are the Ukrainians and moreover they are in many cases family. It’s a tragedy that the Democrats and left wing governments in Europe pushed this war so hard…they have blood on their hands. Moreover, with the very significant Islamism threat from around the world we need to focus on energy on the enemies within….which is where the real threat resides. Far credit to Trump who is a fantastic president as he has realized this war needs to end so the threat from the Islamists can be met head on.
Europe and the democracies did not push this war, Ukraine defended itself, that’s it nothing more…if some nation invaded the UK we would fight and try to get any aid we could.
It’s profoundly incorrect to say Europe pushed this war, only Putin has done that, only he has the power to leave Ukraine and end the war.
Well, that’s debatable. Language is important. Ukraine provoked Russian aggression when the Ukrainian Orthodox church declared itself ‘autocephalus’ i.e. independent of the Moscow partriarch. The people of Ukraine asserted their cultural identity. ‘European democracy’ is synonymous with ‘national cultural identity’. The situation is not dissimilar to the Brexit vote or Irish independence; there are always residual issues and possible conflict if not all of the people affected agree with the change. We are still coping with the fall out from the Easter ‘rebellion’ and the Balfour declaration! Here we go….third time lucky…Minsk 3?
In the end Paul a sovereign nation should be able to do as it wishes. As for the Ukrainian Orthodox church declared itself ‘autocephalus’ i.e. independent of the Moscow partriarch that happened in 2018 four years after Russia first invaded Ukraine.
Indeed, but there is a process of birth. Like babies, sovereign nations don’t always pop out. And children don’t have the wherewithal to make mature decisions while they are in the middle of formulating their constitution. Ukraine looks a bit like Siamese twins.
Ukraine did not provoke Russian aggression at all.
You and I might not think so, but in 2019 Bartholomew I, Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople signed the ‘tomos’ (decree) which formally recognized the Orthodox of Ukraine and granted it autocephaly. This reversed the annexation of the Kyiv metropolis by the Moscow Patriarch in 1686. In other words, for over 300 years Moscow has understood that it ‘owns’ the Ukraine. Moscow Patriarch Kyrill, big KGB buddy of Putin fell out of his pram. In Russian culture, notwithstanding 1917, the state and the Russian Orthodox church are inseparable and Putin unashamably weaponises the church. We are dealing with a very inflexible mindset.
Spoken like a true trump-tard
Helmet.
It’s not a war, it’s a Special Military Operation, which you are claiming has been pushed by US democrats and left-wing European governments. An odd claim given the number of visits to Russia by both Democrats and European powers ahead of the invasion, almost begging Putin to stand his troops down. Russia is the country in bed with Iran, so if you really mean you want to counter the Islamist threat, getting Putin out of power should be your top priority.
Matthew, Trump, Vance and Pete have zero diplomatic skills. They are likely to end this war with Putin having ‘won’ on nearly every point. Putin will be emboldened to continue his aggression elsewhere.
We’ve been on the back foot since Putin ‘converted’ Crimea in 2014. Then we screwed up by not supplying armour fast enough when Russia invaded eastern Ukraine. The cost in money and lives of reversing Russian territorial gains is now unacceptably high for the US. Now we have a Korean 38th parallel situation. A mess. Putin has implemented Minsk 2 by force. We are where we are. Now we have to learn the lesson and rearm. Reculer pour mieux sauter…..later.
Sadly I think you are probably correct, the west should have reacted hard over the 2014 invasion. Robust security guarantees as well as massive support and even peacekeeping forces…Crimea was always a losing proposition, but the eastern provinces of Ukraine could have been stabilised and Ukraine could have been made to hard for Russia to ever crack.. instead the west’s policy has alway been to make sure Ukraine did not loss but not win…which in the end is always as asking for loss because the west is rubbish at supporting long drawn out wars.
I personally think Ukraine may have to give up on most of the land it’s lost..but I also think European nations need to redraw the red line map with Ukraine and make it clear to Russia that any infrastructure will mean war no if no buts.
I also think essentially NATO is now likely dead and cannot serve the purpose of stabilisation of the Eastern European boarder and normalising some form of mutual destruction relationship with Russia ( which is the only thing Putin will respect). If that is the case Europe now needs a new defence alliance based around the core European nations, with the capabilities, leadership and enablers from European nations. As well as a new focus on some core capabilities.
1) security of the eastern boarder..essentially that’s a coherent and large European army, made up of deployable divisions from each nation.
2) a coherent air policing policy and air defence capability and policy
3) ground based air defences up to and including defence against a small scale ICBM attack or a larger scale MRBM-IRBM attack
4) navel forces to dominate the a European artic as well as the Norwegian,North Sea, med and eastern Atlantic
5) expeditionary navel forces that include the ability to deploy 2 carrier battle groups ( France needs to build another carrier)
6) permanent navel forces in the eastern Indian Ocean to ensure access to Indian ocean sealanes
7) land and air based expeditionary forces to operate a 2 division effort in Africa as well as the sea and air strategic lift to support
8) full nuclear triad, including nuclear weapons in Germany, Poland and Italy at a min..should include up to 1000 active warheads cohesive cover of 2 BM submarines ( 1 UK 1 french with a 200 warhead load ), air launched nuclear weapons for Germany, Poland and Italy as well as ground launched missiles at least another 100 active weapons each.
It needs to look at tightening alliances with Middle Eastern nations especially nations it already has relations with as a priority. It should tighten its defence ties with Indian as well..essentially it needs a defence and alliance posture that supports its access to the Indian Ocean.
It needs to redefine its relationship with the US and to essentially see what the art of the possible is around a new defensive alliance around the security of the Atlantic.
Europe in the new world may need to redefine its relationship with china, yes it’s a communist authoritarian dictatorship..but as the US has so eloquently put it with its relationship with Russia.. “your problem is not our problem” and essentially we are to far away from china for it to ever be our problem..so let’s get the best for Europe from that relationship and let the pacific nations sort their own issues.
We do have an enemy within.
It’s you and people like you..
Cue Reform Party racist who believes anyone to the left of Farage is automatically a Communist…
So many here missing the point with Trump.
All Trump cares about is money, and in respect to the federal government that means slashing spending to reduces taxes and the national debt.
Calling for Europe to increase defence spending to 5% (the USA only spends 3.5%) is disingenuous because he wants to half the US Defence Budget. The reason why he is selling out Ukraine is because he wants to negotiate with Russia and China a massive reduction in nuclear weapons.
I agree, Europe could spend 5% of GDP on defence and Trump would still be saying he is doing them a favour. Trump wants to gut the federal budget and that means gutting defence. Everything else is distraction. It’s also pretty clear that Trump has no plan, he says the first thing that comes in to his head and that’s why four different cabinet members showed up in Munich with four different “plans”.
What is very clear is that America is no longer a serious country and should not be allowed to hold the senior position in the western aligned world. Europe and the UK must step up and move defence spending to 3%. Once we achieve this level we will have a strong degree of strategic autonomy and we can let the Autocracy’s and America play out what ever nonsense they think they can on the world stage.
We need a sufficiently large army and nuclear forces to deter Russia which is not that hard and sufficient power projection capability to secure energy reserves in the Middle East and shipping routes to Singapore and that’s about it. We don’t need to go toe to toe with China in the pacific.
The UK desperately needs to get away from trident as quickly as possible, it’s now our strategic Achilles heal. We need to work on a UK version of M51 SLBM and we can work with France and probably the EU to produce an ASN/4G weapon that can be used to replace the US B61. These weapons could be offered on a dual or even tri code basis to Germany, Poland, Italy and the Netherlands. The tri code meaning that either a British or French code could be used to arm the weapon.
Talk about living in cloud cuckoo land. The UK which, if it were a US state, would rank with Alabama or Mississippi – a nation whose GDP is one tenth of the US and with a population twenty percent of the US, with no major industry, a hollowed out armed forces, no real manufacturing base, deficient in advanced technology, unable to heat its homes and businesses, an energy suppliant, is going to deny the US it’s super power status. I’d suggest medication but I don’t think that would help.
Bigger than Canada though.
You’re really pitiful, you haven’t a clue what you are talking about. I doubt you’ve ever been to the UK or Europe. You’ve swallowed the bullshit MAGA narrative so much that you’re blind to the fact that there’s been a foreign takeover of your country and your so called president is a shill for the Kremlin. An unvetted, unelected immigrant is now accessing classified national data, and placing it where America’s enemies can access it. Real superpowers don’t allow that to happen.
You’ve been milked.
No-one’s denying the United States’ superpower status – for the time being, at least. But it can no longer claim to lead the free world if it deliberately throws its allies under the bus. It will just be another very powerful but slowly diminishing malignant state. Rather like a bigger and flashier version of Russia, in fact. All empires come to an end eventually, there’s no shame in it. Ours did, and it was always going to. The shame is in how you go down, and America does seem intent on doing it badly and quickly, and that’s a bit concerning for the rest of us. As for being unable to heat our homes, I just wish I could persuade my wife to turn the bloody heating off occasionally. As I tell her, our love for our country should keep us warm!
Are you actually joking the GDP of the UK is 3340 billion dollars the gdp of Alabama is 247 billion dollars… get a grip…
Your ignorance is the only vaguely good thing about you. Something I have noticed in other Trump apologists.
The UK’s GDP is just over 16% of the USA’s. An interesting fact is that America’s wealth production is overwhelmingly in the blue states who collectively subsidise the red states. If you were ever to split we would be richer than the red states on our own although the gap to the blue states would widen.
A lot of this is cultural choice. America chooses to keep the right to be alive as part of the incentive pattern. We share the Euro-wide consensus that we are rich enough so have what you call socialised medicine. You spend 17.3% of your wealth on medical care, we spend 12.5% (state and private all together). We live on average 2.5yrsa longer.
It is not because you are subsidising us. Your system is horribly wasteful, largely because it is run be crooked scrum like Trump and blaming Europe is just their cover.
🙄
Spock, not sure about that. Doge has been told not to cut welfare or defence spending.
They updated their plans to include welfare and defence spending, Hegseth said 8% cut in defence which would be pretty devastating to existing programs given how tight the US budget is. They are already begging to mothball their land based nuclear weapon modernisation. Medicaid also being looked at new proposed budget will cut all programs.
I hate defending the likes of Trump, Musk and Hegseth but cuts could easily be made to the US military without any major impact on their capability.
Example: do they really need to have USMC air wings and national guard air squadrons for so many states? Surely the US Air Force and US Navy would be plenty of air power between them. Just seems ludicrous that they have so much unnecessary duplication.
I think the defence spending debate is all over bar the shouting. The Times is reporting that Starmer will ‘overrule’ Reeves and increase defence spending. I believe an increase to 2.5% is only about £5b and that the SDR may be assuming 2.7% or so. I doubt the forces or UK industry could process more in the short term. Small beer really; I’m sure Rachel from accounts can finesse that. I’ll be interested to see how the SDR says the money should be spent. The Babcock – Patria proposal to build 6×6 APCs in the UK looks a good investment.
I think we can already see what the SDR is going to deliver, territorial army for Britain made up from reservist, missile defence system probably arrow 3 maybe Patriot too, North Atlantic drone fleet with type 93 and type 92 drones. Most of the rest of any new money will just go to keeping existing programs going. SSN A could see massive cut backs.
$64k question….does it have to deliver the ability to maintain a persistent divisional presence as part of our Ukraine peacekeeping contribution?
There is no way the upscale the British army in the short to medium term to the level it can maintain a division.. it already essentially uses the heavy division to maintain the essentially brigade level deployment on the Northern Europe flank. Essentially the UK would need the equivalent of 3 new divisions.. so back up to the Cold War size army..
If we are to put a Division on the Ukraine boarder then the only feasible way is to physically base it there as we did with BOAR divisions in Germany. Even the USA would toil to permanently base a Division on a 3 to 1 rotational basis for a long period.
I understand. I’m not qualified to argue size but I note Jim’s thought ( to which I can’t reply). I’ve seen opinions that the total size of an effective peacekeeping deterrent force in post settlement Ukraine would require several divisions; UK, France, +, +
I think we may also see the removal of any UK participation beyond the western Indian Ocean.
I think Europes stance now needs to be no military involvement beyond the western Indian Ocean and essentially stay neutral with China no matter what happens. If the US abandons the European nations then we need to essentially abandon back not concerning ourselves. Let the US deal with its own problems..
Tend to agree. That said no-where between the Chagos Islands , the Falklands and Iceland should be more than a day’s sailing from a RN gunboat. A minimum of dozen or two T31’s
Yes there needs to be a concerted effort to get the frigate fleet back to 20.
After we arrange the peace treaty between R. and U. we should then line them all up and give them an untested vaccine against believing the bollox that is routinely put out by the universal propaganda and public enlightenment departments and if you think that this is a conspiracy theory you can always book a springtime booster shot for yourselves. ❤️☮️
Careful; better put on your tinfoil hat to protect against those Jewish Space Lasers!
Getting rid of BAOR will go down as one of the biggest blunders in British Military History. Hope the good old boys are enjoying their Gold Plated pensions for that cluster of a decision.