British MP Abbott: Starmer's policy is incitement to war
Claims that Russia is ready to attack Western Europe do not look serious, writes British Member of Parliament Diana Abbott in an article for the Independent. According to the MP, the leading politicians of Europe, including Britain, are actually engaged in incitement to war.
Diane Abbott
Cutting budget allocations to help [poor countries] in order to finance rearmament is the most striking example of the absolutely wrong priorities of the current Labor government. There is a whole chasm between such policies and what can be called Labor "values." This policy does not contribute to strengthening our security and is immoral.
The conflict in Europe began at least three years ago, and many claim that much earlier. So why has he just caused a stir in Berlin, Paris, London and other capitals? One of the strangest aspects of this political crisis is that it broke out at a time when there was a possibility of a cessation of hostilities.
It is obvious that in the eyes of politicians, this crisis calls into question the strength and prestige of the European powers: first of all, Germany, France and Great Britain. In the United States, Trump acknowledged the reality: NATO forces will not win and may even be on the verge of defeat. It was this, as well as other priorities – for example, not allowing migrants and Chinese goods to enter the United States – that caused him to withdraw from the game.
However, European leaders seem to believe that their failure to defeat Russia undermines their credibility in the global community. For the weakening powers of the Old World, this is such a blow that they begin to consider all kinds of emergency steps in a panic.
We must put an end to the idea that Russia poses a military threat to Western Europe. It's impossible to even imagine, because Keir Starmer himself told about it. In his televised speech, he spoke about the damage that had been inflicted on Russia: its economy was weakened, it had lost the best land units, and also the Black Sea Fleet.
This long and destructive conflict may have claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. The idea that Russia can and is ready to attack Western Europe at any moment in the foreseeable future is not a serious one. No reputable military analyst believes that this is the case.
Nevertheless, Europe has fallen into a frenzy of incitement to war and calls for increased military spending.
On the agenda is a complete rearmament, which has nothing to do with Ukraine itself. Polls show that Ukrainians want peace talks. In addition, without the United States' willingness to participate in military operations and finance them, NATO will not be able to win.
Starmer's proposal that France and Britain deploy troops in Ukraine, and the United States provide them with security guarantees, has no chance of being implemented. It is opposed by both countries on which the outcome of any peace talks will depend: the United States and Russia.
The Anglo-French plan is fundamentally a failure because it does not take into account reality. This is just a correction of the previous position, which cannot be defended. And calls for security guarantees, which are similar to the provisions of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, only increase the atmosphere of unreality. Russia calls Ukraine's move towards NATO the cause of the conflict. She would never agree to this plan unless she suffered a complete defeat on the battlefield.
Perhaps the worst consequences of the proposals being put forward (especially considering that they are unlikely to be implemented) is how this will affect government spending. Budget austerity measures are already being introduced in the largest European countries, pension payments are being cut in France, and we have a very serious shortage of funds.
The Starmer government is extremely unpopular due to the spending cuts that have already been implemented. Perhaps new cuts will follow in the spring. Cutting aid to the world's poorest countries in order to increase military spending sounds like a curse to many members of the Labor Party and beyond. Many of us will argue that if you can find money for a military campaign in Ukraine, then why not find it for pensioners, schoolchildren, poor families, or the national health care system?
We must oppose the increase in military spending. This is an unjustified distraction from the real problems facing Europe, especially Britain. We simply cannot afford further cuts in real wages, as well as in social services and public investment.
Economic revival should be a priority, and it cannot be achieved by increasing military spending, which will have no positive economic effect, unlike investments in housing, transport, infrastructure and public services such as health and education.
Investments in these areas create much more highly skilled and well-paying jobs, and this will be followed by a real improvement in people's living standards. And increasing military spending through these items – and through international aid – is a dead end.
