British Prime Minister Kia Starmar and Ukrainian President Volodimil Zelensky announced on January 16 at a meeting in Kiev for a 100 -year partnership. The night before Donald Trump became the 47th US President, this was a starmer attempt to put the UK in the following position. Ukraine’s best friend now needs a friend as President Zelensky requires as much as he gets. In fact, 100 years of partnership does not seem to provide anything new.
The treaty is a circuit that works on a relationship between the state. When VIP visits other countries, there is a possibility that a battle for the conclusion of the agreement will occur, and it may be announced that the two countries are focusing on strengthening partnerships. Since 1892, the UK has signed over 15,000 treaties. This agreement with Ukraine must be seen from that point of view.
For example, the UK and Qatar, in December 2024, were visited by Shake Tamam Bin Hamad Al Shany, in addition to the $ 1.3 billion agreement on Fintech and Green Energy, and increased the joint funds. We have reached many agreements, including agreements. A humanitarian project.
Occasionally, to celebrate something, one side may promote this agreement more vigorously than the other side. While visiting President Megawati Skarnopotri in 2002, I brokered a cultural agreement between the UK and Indonesia. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reluctantly agreed with a meaningless document, knowing that it was important for Indonesia.
Prime Minister Starmar and Zelenceky have been sincere in their “100 -year partnership.” But that doesn’t make sense. While the western policy of western countries is likely to change, they are both trying to grasp good news.
The newly appointed President Trump has set a goal of ending the Ukrainian war within 100 days. It is doubtful that even if the US government continues to provide some military support to Ukraine, it is comparable to a huge amount of $ 175 billion since the war in 2022.
Germany, the second -largest supporter of Ukraine, has halved financial support in the past year, and leaders are fighting for an additional $ 3 billion support for elections.
For this reason, Ukraine is the third largest aid, and probably the most enthusiastic supporters, the UK, must strive to fill the gap in political, financial and military support for the country. I will.
However, it is simply impossible.
According to government expenditures, more than £ 4 billion ($ 5 billion) has been given to Ukraine every year since 2022. In fact, it is insignificant than what Americans gave, and not much more than a more generous payment by Germans.
Also, no matter how much Prime Minister Starmar wants, there is no more money to donate in the UK pot.
The current Labor Party government has been upset by bad news about the economy since the government in July 2024. UK government debt gradually exceeds 100 % of the General Production (GDP), and in response to the record rising of interest paid by the United Kingdom, Starmar has pardon public services during his stay in Ukraine because of borrowing from the government. We had to warn the people that it could be reduced.
In response to poor winter fuel costs for the elderly, the Labor Party seems to reduce the provisions of the disabled.
This is a bad news for the British people and for Zelenceky in Kiev.
Unlike the United States, the UK’s anti -Ukraina policy has gained strong support from the parliamentary parliament. British mainstream media has also cut off the conservative and labor government governments from any criticism of spending on Ukraine.
However, President Trump is promoting Ukraine and Russia’s ceasefire negotiations, and in the UK has a lot of economic bad news, and the UK government’s expenditure to Ukraine is not forever.
Based on this, despite the eye -catching titles, there were few new announcements last week’s partnership. The UK and Ukraine have already agreed on 568 pages of politics, free trade, and strategic partnership agreements in 2020, and were finally submitted to Congress in January 2022 just before the war.
The strategic dialogue announced last week was included in the 2020 Treaty. 3 billion pounds ($ 3.7 billion) have been introduced since the start of the war, and the G7’s temporary entry promotion loan for Ukraine is $ 2.2 billion ($ 2.7 billion) in 2024 Agree to the moon.
The only new funds are £ 40 million to support the development of small and medium -sized businesses in Ukraine’s devastated economy, and the funds will be covered by the UK development aid budget.
There was no big exposure. There is no amazing moment.
Just say a lot of “So what?”
UK cannot afford to provide any more funds to Ukraine.
It may change 100 years later, but it will not change soon.
Your Majesty’s government does not intend to write an iron promise to provide Ukraine with £ 3 billion for 100 years. Any government on the earth will not do that.
The fact that Starmer positions this support as “as needed” only gives an exit to reduce expenditures if the ceasefire is agreed with Trump’s intermediary.
The ceasefire in Ukraine will put pressure on Kiev to reduce the huge military spending of 50 % of the government expenditure every year and one quarter of the gross domestic product (GDP).
If a ceasefire is realized by President Trump’s intermediary, at least the need for foreign aid should be reduced.
Since the nation can always withdraw from the treaty, it is legally meaningless to include “100 years” in the name of this agreement. In recent years, Russia and the United States have left several nuclear armament management treaties, including the Medium -range nuclear force all -the -art terms (INF) and the new Start Convention on Reduction and Restrictions.
There is no guarantee that the British government will not destroy this agreement because this agreement is potentially costly political stone mortar.
The 100 -year agreement is just a political stunt. This supports the support of Britain’s inclination to Ukraine on the west when President Trump (who is a terrible relationship with him in the eyes) is trying to reconsider the long -awaited realism in the Ukrainian policy. It’s a breathtaking attempt to show what you can do.
Ian Proud was a member of the British King’s Laboration Department from 1999 to 2023. Ian was a senior member of the Moscow British Embassy from July 2014 to February 2019, when the relationship between the United Kingdom and Russia was particularly nervous.
(Source: Aljajira)