USED ​​Pose Stammer’s Ukraine bets on strategy

President Trump’s decision to prevent military aid in Ukraine may prove to be one of the most important moments in the struggle as Vladimir Putin started his full -scale invasion.

As far as the UK is concerned, it will not change the approach of Sir Kir Stmper, but creates issues that are more intense and more important than the last few days.

The Prime Minister still looks at his main functions as finding a way to bring President Trump and Zelancesi back together, and portray the foundation of a practical peace deal that can be presented to America.

As we saw in the House of Commons on Monday, where MPs from various parties definitely appreciated the Prime Minister for their diplomacy, it is a strategy with widespread support in the political spectrum.

But how deep is that support? We can be the finding of this.

It is one thing for the Prime Minister to bring the presidents to bring Trump and Zelancesi back together.

But to have a bridge between the two countries, Sir Kir will need evidence over time that it has influence on both sides of that bridge.

At the end of his statement in the Commons, the Prime Minister was asked about the US media reports that Trump was considering withdrawing military assistance.

He replied that he did not understand about the American situation. Obviously, it soon turned out to be wrong.

Now we know that later on Monday at some point, the stormer and Trump spoke on the phone – their third phone call in four days.

But we do not know whether Trump had given a prior warning to his decision warning on military aid.

It may be that the Stamor tried to convince Trump not to move forward and fail. Or it may be that Trump did not tell the starrer what he was about to do.

None of those scenarios will be positive for the Prime Minister.

As it is, it seems that Downing Street is still waiting on the full details of the US administration’s decision and how it will work.

And it is worth emphasizing that it is a temporary break in aid, not a permanent termination. This may be another attempt by Trump to pressurize Zelansky. Help may begin again.

Or, this may be the most obvious example – despite the undisputed heat, the stormers have managed to promote the US President – the fundamental frame through which they look at this struggle and the Western alliances are more commonly differently different.

JD Vance has arrived in this rapidly frightening transatlantic environment, ridiculing the US vice -president, “Ukraine can be protected by 20,000 soldiers from some random country, who have not fought in 30 or 40 years”.

Till now only the UK and France have publicly committed soldiers to pollute any possible peace deal in Ukraine, and their comments were interpreted by many as being a zib in both countries.

Vance has now stressed that he was talking about other, anonymous countries – limiting diplomatic results for that time.

Nevertheless, even though Vance was referring to other countries, which may be ready to take some military burden of protecting Ukraine, it is rarely encouraging the UK in its coordinating role in Europe if the American vice -president’s response is to make fun of their abilities.

Perhaps this is only a more blunt-speaking approach from a new American administration that has been determined to remove with nuances.

After all, most European countries are now accepting themselves that their defense spending is very low for a long time.

But all the signs suggest that before a long time, questions about the approach of Sir Kir Stmper for Ukraine can give a lot of fundamental questions about Britain’s location in an intensively changed world.