In all of Sir Keir Starmer’s interventions on a possible Ukrainian peace process, there seems to be a significant gap between his careful public pronouncements and more pragmatic private views.The only constant is the PM’s regular condemnation of Russia’s President Putin and support for President Zelensky.Some argue the Starmer strategy is sensible when handling complex negotiations involving unpredictable world leaders.There was significant anxiety in Westminster about Friday’s Alaskan meeting between presidents Putin and Trump.Yet UK ministers stayed diplomatic and avoided the punchy language of former PM Boris Johnson. He called that meeting “the most vomit-inducing episode in all the tawdry history of international diplomacy”.Sir Keir has not said it explicitly but I am told the UK government privately accepts the premise of “land for peace” – Ukraine ceding territory as part of a peace deal with Russia.That might only involve land already under the control of the Russian military, but it nonetheless points to a painful process ahead for Kyiv.No 10 sources have stressed, however, that any questions about territory are ultimately a matter for Ukraine, and Ukraine only.”There are three issues”, one British official told me. “How much land, which land, and whether de facto or de jure.”This final issue refers to a possible grey area in negotiations. Ukraine could accept land as “de facto” Russian territory because Moscow controls it militarily. Or it might be accepted as Russian “de jure” and internationally legally recognised as such.I am told the UK government is hoping for two things from today’s mass leaders’ visit to the White House.Firstly they want to encourage President Zelensky to carefully listen to and consider what Donald Trump is offering. Memories of February’s Oval Office argument re …
Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source
[mwai_chat context=”Let’s have a discussion about this article:nnIn all of Sir Keir Starmer’s interventions on a possible Ukrainian peace process, there seems to be a significant gap between his careful public pronouncements and more pragmatic private views.The only constant is the PM’s regular condemnation of Russia’s President Putin and support for President Zelensky.Some argue the Starmer strategy is sensible when handling complex negotiations involving unpredictable world leaders.There was significant anxiety in Westminster about Friday’s Alaskan meeting between presidents Putin and Trump.Yet UK ministers stayed diplomatic and avoided the punchy language of former PM Boris Johnson. He called that meeting “the most vomit-inducing episode in all the tawdry history of international diplomacy”.Sir Keir has not said it explicitly but I am told the UK government privately accepts the premise of “land for peace” – Ukraine ceding territory as part of a peace deal with Russia.That might only involve land already under the control of the Russian military, but it nonetheless points to a painful process ahead for Kyiv.No 10 sources have stressed, however, that any questions about territory are ultimately a matter for Ukraine, and Ukraine only.”There are three issues”, one British official told me. “How much land, which land, and whether de facto or de jure.”This final issue refers to a possible grey area in negotiations. Ukraine could accept land as “de facto” Russian territory because Moscow controls it militarily. Or it might be accepted as Russian “de jure” and internationally legally recognised as such.I am told the UK government is hoping for two things from today’s mass leaders’ visit to the White House.Firstly they want to encourage President Zelensky to carefully listen to and consider what Donald Trump is offering. Memories of February’s Oval Office argument re …nnDiscussion:nn” ai_name=”RocketNews AI: ” start_sentence=”Can I tell you more about this article?” text_input_placeholder=”Type ‘Yes'”]
