Starmer fails to convince Trump to commit troops to Ukraine

Brussels – A lot is going on these days at the court of Donald Trump. After Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer paid his respects yesterday, and this afternoon, it will be the turn of Volodymyr Zelensky. But “King Donald” does not seem too impressed by the demands of those who are supposed to be his closest allies. Thus, even the British PM’s pilgrimage did not produce concrete results, at least on the hottest of the dossiers crowding the Oval Office desk: the conflict in Ukraine.

As befits a vassal visiting his lord, the occupant of Downing Street went to the White House, ensuring he did not show up empty-handed. Among his gifts, the British prime minister first brought, first and foremost, a personal invitation from His Majesty King Charles III to Trump for a second state visit to the UK (after Queen Elizabeth II’s in 2019), an “unprecedented” event.

Demonstrating London’s good faith and its government’s commitment to the security issue, Starmer then put on the table the recent decision to lift the defense budget from the current 2.3 to 2.5 percent of GDP, bringing forward to 2027 the target initially set for 2030.  It should have been music to the ears of the president, who, since his first term, has not tired of repeating that Europeans must take responsibility for security on the Old Continent.

The bond between the UK and the US couldn’t be stronger.

Thank you for your hospitality, @POTUS. pic.twitter.com/tcAtp2hzCY

– Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) February 27, 2025

Chancelleries on this side of the Atlantic are taking that warning more and more seriously, as evidenced by the hectic summits in recent weeks — after the two meetings in Paris, a third summit is scheduled for the day after tomorrow (March 2) in London, dedicated to the topic of continental defense. Some, like German Chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz, even imagine a potential European military alliance that could exist independently of NATO.

It is probably a pipe dream, at least in the immediate future. However, such leaps forward (especially from a staunch Atlanticist like the leader of the CDU) highlight the panic gripping Europe as the new US administration swiftly proceeds toward thawing relations with the Kremlin, as demonstrated from yesterday’s talks in Istanbul between diplomats of the two superpowers, apparently intended to divide (again) the world.

Hence, the offensive charms. The British leader lavished flattery on his powerful (and erratic) interlocutor. Following Macron’s example on Monday, Starmer, too, performed several political balancing acts. Being as friendly as possible but correcting the tycoon when the latter repeated the (false) remarks that European countries would finance Kyiv only through loans and not, like the United States, through outright grants — the carrot and, if not quite the stick, a gentle twig.

Trump has “changed the conversation on Ukraine,” the Labor prime minister told the press. The US president, Starmer says, has opened “a window of enormous opportunity to reach a historic peace agreement” that would end the conflict. And now, “we want to work with you” and ensure it is “lasting.” However, we need to see if everyone means the same thing when talking about this phantom peace agreement.

One of the British prime minister’s main demands – and the real reason for the giveaways – was a commitment from Washington to provide “cover” (backstop) for any European peacekeeping troops in the former Soviet republic. Like Zelensky, Macron, and the other leaders of the Old Continent, Starmer also keeps repeating that the security guarantees that Kyiv needs will only be credible if they involve the US military.

However, Trump’s commitment is not precisely what London, Paris, and Brussels expected. “We will have a lot of people working” in Ukraine, the tycoon explained, due to the agreement on critical raw materials that he is expected to sign this afternoon with Zelensky. “It’s a security guarantee,” he reasoned, “I don’t think anyone will mock us if we are there with lots of workers.” After all, the US president said he believes that his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin will “keep his word” and respect a ceasefire when one is made.

But what if that does not happen? Will Uncle Sam defend His Majesty’s peacekeepers if attacked? “The British are incredible soldiers,” Trump said, “and they can take care of themselves.” “If they need help, I will always be with the British,” he clarified, reiterating that “they don’t need help.” Not exactly a reassurance to the European allies, who are wondering about the fate of NATO and the deterrence guaranteed by Article 5 of the Atlantic Charter (that enshrines the principle of collective defense): “I don’t think we will have any reason” to activate it, the president says.

In the end, from his bilateral meeting, Starmer brings home vague promises about a future trade agreement between the US and the UK to strengthen the special relationship between Washington and London: nothing more concrete. Indeed, if anything, it again confirms that the US military will not set foot in Ukraine. However, in this day and age, when the Europeans (or rather the EU leadership, that Trump believes “was formed to screw the US“) have to humiliate themselves like in Canossa to meet someone of the US administration, already to have been received at the White House is an achievement.