Connect with us

Published

on

Sir Keir Starmer has talked up the US-UK relationship after a White House meeting with Joe Biden, but questions remain over Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles.

The prime minister travelled to Washington this week to meet with President Biden to discuss the wars in Ukraine and Gaza – among other issues.

Speaking before the “long and productive” meeting held in the White House on Friday, Sir Keir said the two countries were “strategically aligned” in their attempts to resolve the war.

Afterwards, he skirted around questions regarding Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles, saying: “We’ve had a long and productive discussion on a number of problems, including Ukraine, as you’d expect, the Middle East, and the Indo-Pacific, talking strategically about tactical decisions.

“This isn’t about a particular decision but we’ll obviously pick up again in UNGA (UN General Assembly) in just a few days’ time with a wider group of individuals, but this was a really important invitation from the president to have this level of discussion about those critical issues.”

Ukraine war latest: Putin threatens NATO with ‘war’

Decisions loom for Ukraine’s key Western allies as Volodymyr Zelenskyy has recently increased pressure on them to permit his forces to use long-range missiles to strike inside Russian territory.

More on Joe Biden

However, despite repeated calls for a decision, the West has so far resisted green-lighting the use of the missiles.

Sir Keir Starmer and David Lammy speaking to the media outside the White House. Pic: PA
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer and David Lammy speaking to the media outside the White House on Friday. Pic: PA

Two US officials familiar with the discussions said they believed that Sir Keir was seeking US approval to let Ukraine use British Storm Shadow missiles for expanded strikes into Russia, according to Reuters news agency.

They added that they believed Mr Biden would be amenable.

The president’s approval would be needed because Storm Shadow components are made in the US.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Military analyst Sean Bell looks at how serious Putin’s threats could be

But when speaking to journalists after the meeting, Sir Keir was repeatedly pressed on the long-range missile question but evaded giving a firm decision.

“This wasn’t a meeting about a particular capability. That wasn’t why we got our heads down today,” he said.

The US has been concerned that any step could lead to an escalation in the conflict and has moved cautiously so far, however, there have been reports in recent days that Mr Biden might shift his administration’s policy.

It wasn’t much, but it’s a start

There wasn’t much to say at the end, but it’s a start.

Both sides in these discussions had spent some time playing down expectations and the Americans were insistent their stance wasn’t changing on Ukraine and long-range missiles.

“Nothing to see here” seemed to be the message.

Only, there clearly was – a glance at the headlines gave that the lie.

It’s not every day a Russian president threatens war with the West.

The UK and US were discussing a change in strategy because they must – anything less would be a dereliction of duty for two leaders pledging a commitment to Ukraine’s fight.

Just ask Kyiv’s president Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Following the meeting, Sir Keir Starmer said they’d talked tactics and strategy.

It will have had missiles, range, and Russian territory at the heart of it.

That is the material change in strategy demanded by Ukraine and supported widely among its backers.

A plan discussed by both sides of the special relationship will now be floated to other, allied nations in an effort to build a coordinated coalition behind a change in strategy.

And they’ll do it against the clock.

There is the unpredictability of the war itself in Ukraine and no less certainty surrounding the political battle at home.

A Trump victory in November’s US election would change the picture – here and there.

Vladimir Putin previously threatened the West, warning that allowing Ukraine to use long-range missiles to strike inside Russian territory would put Moscow “at war” with NATO.

Speaking to Russian state television, he insisted the decision would “significantly change” the nature of the war.

President Joe Biden, left, hosts a bilateral meeting with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, right, in the Blue Room of the White House, Friday, Sept. 13, 2024, in Washington. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
Image:
Pic: AP

He added: “This will be their direct participation, and this, of course, will significantly change the very essence, the very nature of the conflict.

“This will mean that NATO countries, US, European countries are at war with Russia.

“If this is so, then, bearing in mind the change in the very essence of this conflict, we will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created for us.”

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

When asked about the threats, Mr Biden brushed them aside, saying: “I don’t think much about Vladimir Putin.”

Read more:
Biden ‘not ruling out’ allowing Ukraine to fire into Russia – Blinken

Iran supplying Russia with ballistic missiles – Blinken
Analysis: Russia’s links with Iran are growing stronger

There remains some scepticism within the US over the impact that allowing Kyiv to unleash long-range missiles would have.

US officials, according to Reuters, have pointed out that Ukraine already has the capability to strike into Russia using drones, and while US missiles would enhance that they are too costly and limited in number to change the overall picture.

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump says Musk ‘off the rails’ for forming political party to rival GOP

Published

on

By

Trump says Musk ‘off the rails’ for forming political party to rival GOP

Trump says Musk ‘off the rails’ for forming political party to rival GOP

US President Donald Trump has blasted Elon Musk’s plan to start a new political party that could splinter the Republican vote in the 2026 midterm elections.

Continue Reading

Politics

MP recalls childhood abuse as he calls for law change to make domestic abuse a specific criminal offence

Published

on

By

MP recalls childhood abuse as he calls for law change to make domestic abuse a specific criminal offence

An MP who decided until recently to “never speak” about the abuse he suffered as a child has shared his harrowing story so that “no kid has to go through” what he did.

Josh Babarinde describes being physically abused by his mother’s former partner from the age of four, and remembers crying himself to sleep under the covers “hearing shouts, hearing screams and things smash”.

He says he became hypervigilant growing up and felt safe at school but “like he was treading on eggshells” in his own home.

The Eastbourne MP, who is also the Liberal Democrats’ justice spokesperson, says his experience has driven his politics. He is calling on the government to stop abusers “slipping through the net” and being released from prison early.

Opening up about his story in his twenties was “difficult” but looking back, Mr Babarinde says, he is “so proud of the resilience of that kid”.

The MP recently found his childhood diary containing Star Wars drawings alongside an entry he wrote from the bathroom. The diary, he recalls, wrote: “I’m really going to try to go (to the toilet) but I can’t. Oh my goodness, I’m gonna be in so much trouble, I’m going to get smacked so hard.”

Then an entry five minutes later: “I still haven’t done anything, I’m going to be in so much trouble.”

More from Politics

He says reading the entry reminded him of how “helpless” he felt.

“It was mortifying,” he says. “An abuser takes away your sense of self-worth.”

Josh Babarinde speaking to Sky's Ali Fortescue.
Image:
Mr Babarinde says he wants the government to ‘properly recognise domestic abuse crimes in the law’

The 32-year-old is calling on the government to change the law to make domestic abuse a specific criminal offence. The change would mean, he argues, abusers can no longer effectively disguise their history under other offences like assault.

He says the Ministry of Justice’s early release scheme, which has seen thousands of prisoners released early to ease overcrowding, has failed to exclude domestic abusers despite government promises because there is no formal categorisation for offenders.

It is impossible, he argues, to know exactly how many domestic abusers are in prison currently so perpetrators are “slipping through the net” on early release.

Read more from Sky News:
Remembering the bravery of 7/7 victims and responders 20 years on
Met Police chief calls for ‘mega’ forces in push for shake-up

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

January: Rising violence against women and girls

Mr Babarinde says the uncertainty means victims and survivors are not able to prepare for their abuser’s release.

He said: “They might need to move house or move their kids to a new school, shop in different places. All of these kind of things are so important, and so that’s why that commitment the government made was so important.”

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice said: “Our thoughts are with all victims of domestic abuse – it takes immense courage to speak out.

“We are building a justice system that puts victims first – strengthening support, increasing transparency, and giving people the confidence to come forward and be heard.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Another tantrum from the Labour backbenches is inevitable

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn

In common with many parents across the country, here’s a conversation that I have with my young daughter on a semi-regular basis (bear with me, this will take on some political relevance eventually).

Me: “So it’s 15 minutes until your bedtime, you can either have a little bit of TV or do a jigsaw, not both.”

Daughter: “Ummmm, I want to watch TV.”

Me: “That’s fine, but it’s bed after that, you can’t do a jigsaw as well.”

Fast-forward 15 minutes.

Me: “Right, TV off now please, bedtime.”

(Pause)

Daughter: “I want to do a jigsaw.”

Now replace me with the government, the TV and jigsaw options with axing welfare cuts and scrapping the two-child cap, and my daughter with rebellious backbenchers.

Politics latest: Former Labour leader calls for wealth tax on assets above £10m

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Rachel Reeves’s fiscal dilemma

That is the tension currently present between Downing Street and Labour MPs. And my initial ultimatum is the messaging being pumped out from the government this weekend.

In essence: you’ve had your welfare U-turn, so there’s no money left for the two-child cap to go as well.

As an aside – and before my inbox fills with angry emails lambasting me for using such a crude metaphor for policies that fundamentally alter the lives of some of the most vulnerable in society – yes, I hear you, and that’s part of my point.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Welfare U-turn ‘has come at cost’

For many in Labour, this approach feels like the lives of their constituents are being used in a childish game of horse-trading.

So what can be done?

Well, the government could change the rules.

Altering the fiscal rules is – and will likely remain – an extremely unlikely solution. But as it happens, one of Labour’s proverbial grandparents has just popped round with a different suggestion.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Welfare: ‘Didn’t get process right’ – PM

A wealth tax, Lord Neil Kinnock says, is the necessary outcome of the economic restrictions the party has placed on itself.

Ever the Labour storyteller, Lord Kinnock believes this would allow the government to craft a more compelling narrative about whose side this administration is on.

That could be valuable, given one of the big gripes from many backbench critics is that they still don’t really understand what this prime minister stands for – and by extension, what all these “difficult decisions” are in aid of.

The downside is whether it will actually raise much money.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is Corbyn an existential risk to Labour?

The super-rich may have lots of assets to take a slice from, but they also have expensive lawyers ready to find novel ways to keep their client’s cash away from the prying eyes of the state.

Or, of course, they could just leave – as many are doing already.

In the short term, the future is a bit easier to predict.

If Downing Street is indeed now saying there is no money to scrap the two-child cap (after heavy briefing in the opposite direction just weeks ago), an almighty tantrum from the backbenches is inevitable.

And as every parent knows, the more you give in, the harder it becomes to hold the line.

Continue Reading

Trending