Following on cue from his master on the other side of the Atlantic, it seems that warmonger Starmer has given permission to Ukraine to fire British made Stormshadow cruise missiles to strike at targets inside Russian territory.
This is obviously nothing but a brazen act of provocation, which will make no real difference to the course of the war in Ukraine but will certainly elicit a response on Russia’s part.
The Starmer-Lammy warmongering duo have been raring to take this decision for months. Lammy accompanied Blinken to Kyiv and Starmer travelled all the way to Washington, only to be told off by the US president.
This humiliating treatment clearly reflected the real character of the so-called “special relationship” between the US and Britain: that of a master and his poodle.
Finally, Biden overcame resistance from the Pentagon to a move which clearly had no military value in itself. Motivated mainly by his desire to make things difficult for his successor in the White House, he decided to allow the Ukrainian army to use US-made ATACAM ballistic missiles to strike targets within Russia.
Of course, Starmer had not been told in advance, the decision caught him on a plane over the Atlantic. Not to be left behind, however, he privately decided to also allow the Ukrainians to do the same with the British-French Stormshadow cruise missiles.
In any case, they still need the assistance of US guidance systems to reach their targets.
Playing with fire
As we have pointed out, this decision will not have any real impact on the course of the conflict. All military experts agree on this point. Russia is advancing decisively at an increasing pace on the eastern front and Ukraine is struggling to draft enough men to stop it.
The amount of medium and long range missiles Ukraine has been given by the West is extremely limited, as these countries are averse to depleting their own stockpiles.
So what could be the aim of this latest decision by Starmer? Biden’s intentions are clear: to put a finger in Putin’s eye, thus complicating Trump’s ability to fulfil his election promise to put an end to the Ukraine war.
But Starmer? Well, his intentions are anybody’s guess. To follow his master’s voice. To show off in the international arena, as a way to compensate for the ever decreasing role UK imperialism plays in the world. To demonstrate to the British ruling class that he is someone to be trusted to follow the same imperialist policy of his Tory predecessor.
Whatever the reasons, this decision is completely reckless and irresponsible. Russia had already warned in advance that, since these missile systems require British personnel to actually operate them.
Their use to attack Russian territory would be interpreted as putting the two countries in a state of conflict.
Furthermore, Putin modified Russia’s nuclear doctrine to include a response to a conventional weapons attack on Russian territory carried out by a country in collaboration with a nuclear power.
In a press statement after the Ukrainian army had used the British missiles, Putin reiterated that the decision meant that military installations of the countries supplying Ukraine with such weapons would be considered legitimate targets.
This is a serious threat, which should not be taken lightly. To underline the point, Russia used a hypersonic medium range ballistic missile capable of carrying nuclear weapons to attack missile manufacturing installations in Dnipro, Ukraine.
Down with the warmongers
The decision to put Britain in a state of conflict with the world’s largest nuclear power was taken by Starmer without any semblance of democratic oversight. Not even as much as a discussion in Parliament. There was not even an official announcement by Starmer explaining his rationale for taking it!
These missiles cost up to £2 million each, an enormous waste of money by the same government which has decided to cut the winter fuel allowance to old age pensioners, a decision which is likely to cause thousands to die.
While inflicting austerity cuts at home, under the refrain that the cupboard is bare, millions of pounds are found to continue funding imperialist wars abroad.
What about the argument that Ukraine is under attack by Russia which has illegally invaded it? Leaving aside that the war in Ukraine is the result of constant provocations by Western imperialism over the years, this is a justification that holds no water.
If Britain is really interested in the defence of national sovereignty, international law and other such niceties, why is the Starmer government fully supportive of the Israeli genocide in Gaza, its invasion of Lebanon (a sovereign country), and its bombing of Iran, Syria, Gaza, and Yemen?
Should Britain not be supplying Challenger tanks, Stormshadows, air defences, ammunition, and money to the Palestinians and Lebanese to defend themselves from Israeli aggression?
To ask the question is to answer it. We have seen graphically in the last year how the rules based order really means one rule for the friends of US-UK imperialism and another one for our foes.
For all these reasons, we say:
- Books, not bombs!
- Healthcare not warfare!
- No imperialist adventures abroad, no austerity at home!
- Down with the warmongers!
