Keir Starmer’s plans to send British troops to Ukraine to police the Russian border has been slammed given Britain is ‘not currently in control of its own borders’.
The Prime Minister became the first British leader to publicly float the idea of sending British forces to Ukraine since Putin’s invasion began in 2022, albeit as a ‘peacekeeping force’.
This is despite the fact Britain’s Army is projected to fall below 70,000 members this year, the smallest since the Napoleonic era, meaning the entire British Army could fit into Wembley with 20,000 seats to spare.
Starmer said he is ‘ready and willing to contribute to security guarantees to Ukraine by putting our own troops on the ground if necessary’ and that securing a lasting peace deal in Ukraine is ‘essential if we are to deter Putin from further aggression’.
But critics have slammed the plan as it fails to deal with what they view as a more pressing problem at home, uncontrolled migration.
Latest ONS data projected Britain’s population to reach 72.5million by 2032 – a rise of 5million- fuelled entirely by migration and not by births outstripping deaths.
That would see the UK’s population outstrip France’s for the first time since 1997, according to Eurostat’s projection for the French population.
A few weeks ago, it was revealed that net migration in 2023 stood at 906,000, much higher than previously estimated.
A contributing factor in all this is migrants crossing the Channel in small boats. Almost 37,000 crossed the channel last year, while 30,000 crossed in 2023.
This means in the last two years 77,000 migrants entered Britain illegally via the Channel, 3,000 more people than are in the entire British Army.
Starmer, who was elected to ‘smash the gangs’ and get a grip on migration after the Tories lost control, has been criticised for potentially prioritising Ukraine’s border of Britain’s.
Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe, who is staunchly pro-Trump and anti-Starmer, said: “We can’t even protect our own borders, and Starmer is aiming to put British troops on the ground in Ukraine.
“Warmongering politicians have got far too many British sons and daughters killed for no reason.
“Our hollowed out Armed Forces deserve so much better.”
TalkTV journalist Isabel Oakeshott said: “Starmer knows perfectly well that you can’t just cobble together a motley crew of European troops to send to Ukraine.
“Who would command them? What is the mission? This is pure theatre by a desperate prime minister trying to have a good – but entirely fake – war.”
Other commentators highlighted the fact Ukraine loses more troops every two months than the British Army has available, begging the question of how effective a British peacekeeping force would be.
Podcaster and columnist Jon Gaunt said: “So Keir Starmer wants to put our troops in Ukraine to defend their borders when the woke fool can’t even protect our own border.”
LATEST FROM MEMBERSHIP:
Reform UK chairmen Zia Yusuf has also been critical of Starmer’s plan to send troops to the Ukraine. Yusuf believes UK forces should be used to stop illegal immigration, not Russia invading Ukraine.
He told GB News: “We’ve been very clear that if you come here illegally, if your first act on coming is to break our laws, you will be deported. But first of all, you need to stop the tap. So if the bath is overflowing, you need to stop the water from coming in.
“The first thing Nigel will do when he becomes the Prime Minister of this country, is to pick up the phone to the First Sea Lord and issue an order to His Majesty’s Royal Navy to ensure that not a single unauthorised vessel crossing the English Channel makes it to the shores of the United Kingdom.
“It will be a humanitarian mission. I speak to many people at the most senior levels inside of His Majesty’s Navy who say all they need is political clarity. They keep using that word. Give us political clarity. We will ensure those boats stop coming, nobody’s harmed, they are taken back to France.”
The Navy would face considerable legal and ethical challenges if it deployed forces to take boats back to France.
International maritime laws, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, stipulate that countries must assist any person in distress at sea, which complicates any policy of turning back migrant boats.
There would also be concerns about the humanitarian aspects, where such actions could lead to loss of life or further endanger migrants.
It comes as Trump and Zelensky locked horns today after the US leader said Ukraine started the war with Russia. Trump also said Zelensky had done terrible job and only wanted to keep the war going as a it was a ‘gravy train’.
Trump also wants Ukraine to pay £400billion in war reparations namely through precious minerals.
In response, Zelensky accused of Trump of living in a ‘disinformation bubble’ and said he would not ‘sell out’ his country (Trumps war reparations demand is currently harsher than Germany’s after WW1).
Some commentators have argued Trump does not believe what he is saying and is merely trying to shock Europe into a reaction, ie step and pay for its defence.
Keir Starmer and Number 10 have remained tight-lipped, stating ‘they are not going to comment on every Trump remark’.
Crunch talks in Saudi Arabia are ongoing.
