Current Affairs

Starmer and Biden are meeting in Washington today, but the question of the war in Ukraine is just a talking point at the moment, but the deeper questions that need to be approached are dependent on whether Biden has the confidence to act on weapons that are critically needed in the Ukrainian theatre. Its not enough to say that Ukraine will win the war, but it is enough to say that Ukraine is holding on. The Red Lines have been written large by Putin again, and the idea that Russia would expand this revanchalist war to include Western Europe is on the cards as the question of long range missiles comes to the foreground.

Zelensky has been asking for weapons to extend the war into Russia. He argues for longer range missiles to hit Russian airforce bases that house missile installations and aircraft that are pummelling Ukraine’s cities, towns, villages and infrastructure. But Zelensky’s argument for long range missiles has been landing on deaf ears because of the fear that Russia will extend the war into Europe. Britain, one of the largest providers of weapons to Ukraine, will under Starmer follow the lead of the US. Biden’s indecisiveness and relative weakness, has led to him questioning the need for longer range missiles however much his generals argue that they are critical to the defence of Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine has taken on a nastier turn as the Russians bomb the cities, towns, villages and infrastructure with missiles, bombs and drones, which leave the safety of Russian territory and are programmed or glide into Ukraine from the Russian border. The ever expanding war in Ukraine is coming to a head and if the West does not provide the Ukrainians with the defensive weapons it needs, then the cities, towns, villages and infrastructure will continue to be attacked. The bombing of the Ukrainian people is a type of psychological warfare that holds no purpose as the Ukrainians are committed to fight the war as a majority. Whether Starmer moves independently with Storm shadow missiles is questionable, the carefulness of this new Labour administration in Britain has not been as proactive as the previous government.

In a pique, Putin has expelled six British diplomats from the embassy in Moscow. The Russian government argued that the diplomats were involved in espionage, this has been denied by the UK who have argued that the Russian argument is “baseless.” But it is the visit to Ukraine by the British Foreign Minister David Lamy and America’s special envoy Anthony Blinken that has underpinned Zelensky’s argument. The idea of an escalation in the war is strange as the concept of weapons has been a seething argument that has demanded all the attention of the Ukrainian President, who has fought hard for the weapons that Ukraine has got over the past two and a half years.

Slowly the weapons that Ukraine needs have come into their possession and the Ukrainians have been able to fight this war successfully. The red lines that Putin has set have come and gone and the idea that this war would spread throughout Europe has been proven to be false. But the war itself is being fought out in the European cities through sabotage events on German railways, assassinations in parks in Berlin, attempted assassination of the CEO of Rheinmetal, Ukrainian warehouses fire bombed in the UK and GRU specialists blowing themselves up in small hotels in southern France before the Olympics.

The information war is at full tilt and TV channels such as RT have been shut down in Europe and the US. National security in the US has shut down foreign influenced websites, blogs, facebook pages and other forms of communication, which they argue have been aimed at persuading voters to vote one way or another during the US elections. Election interference is not new in American elections, especially when Trump was elected, but the reality is that the election interference is known and authorities are aware of the type of interference that is coming into America this time.

As divided as America is, Europe is even worse. The right has moved into the centre of power in a number of European states and the question of Ukraine is written large in their electoral material. Flows of finance have been intercepted by authorities and a realisation that these flows are affecting how people vote has become a concern. Electoral success by these proxy parties has been felt in Germany, France and Slovakia, where arguments of Russian interference has been top of the agenda in these nations. Where the finances come from for the elections has become a contentious issue and questions of electoral spending are at the forefront of arguments in these states. But it is in countries such as Hungary that has challenged the Europeans most.

Hungary holds the presidency of the European parliament for the next couple of months, Victor Orban travelled to Russia and China under the European flag without the consensus of the other European states. Heavily criticised, he met President Putin and Premier Xi, which challenged the European parliaments arguments. He argued that he was representing Europe and when he returned to Hungary, the European Union censored the delegates and threatened to take the Presidency from Hungary. But there are other arguments concerning Hungary’s membership of the European Union and that is their reliance on Russian oil, finance and Russia is building a nuclear reactor. The question about Hungary’s membership of Europe is further questioned by adherence to the Schengen agreement. Hungary a signatory has a policy that keeps migrants out and expels them into other European nations.

With the war in Ukraine has come the polarity of politics in the West. People are more divided than they have ever been and the question of immigration is at the top of the list of many countries in Europe and the USA. This question has been a tool in the propaganda of the Russian state and countries such as Poland and Finland have been at the forefront of arguments in Europe. It is also an argument in the United States and the failure of the centre right to find an argument that challenges this argument has played into the hands of populist politicians.

But it is the question of whether the war in Ukraine will grind on that most concerns the majority of the politicians in Europe and the US. Trump’s belief that the war in Ukraine will come to an end with his presidency challenges how Ukraine will approach this war if Trump comes to power. It is also a question of how NATO will react to a Trump presidency which most concerns the Europeans and NATO members. The realisation that America will move into a revanchalist argument of its own challenges the West and how it approaches the next presidency. So it is critical that Biden, Schultz, Macron and Starmer find an argument that will place Ukraine at the forefront of NATO argument and move NATO onto a footing to counter the arguments that maybe coming over the next four years.

What Biden does now will provide Ukraine with the confidence to find a peace against a threatening Russia and if NATO remains central to Europe and US hegemony, there will be little argument for a revanchalist US government under Trump, which will challenge the revanchalism of Putin. What comes next is dependent on Biden providing the tools for the Ukrainians to defend themselves, but whether Starmer follows the arguments of the US is a question that challenges the independence of the United Kingdoms approach to Ukraine to date.