What terrorist delisting of Iran’s IRGC would mean for US interests, allies in Middle East

Short Url
Updated 24 March 2022
Follow

What terrorist delisting of Iran’s IRGC would mean for US interests, allies in Middle East

  • Tehran reportedly pressing Biden team in Vienna to remove sanctions against Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
  • Financial lifeline would enable IRGC to plunge vast new swathes of Middle East into chaos, conflict

WASHINGTON D.C.: US President Joe Biden’s administration is reportedly in the final stages of an attempt to revive the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran.

Insiders claim that Tehran is insisting that Washington agree to remove the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from its Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.

The American negotiating team, led by Special Representative for Iran Rob Malley, believes that it can obtain the concessions and guarantees from the Iranian government necessary for preventing it from becoming a nuclear weapons threshold power.

Analysts think a nuclear-capable Iran would significantly empower the IRGC and likely supercharge its asymmetric-warfare campaign throughout the Middle East.




A woman holds up an illustration of a portrait of Qasem Soleimani during a memorial service marking the second anniversary of his death at a school in Beirut. (File/AFP)

Iran has reportedly been pressing the Biden team to agree to an almost total overhaul of not only economic sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program, but those connected to terrorist activities specifically linked to the IRGC.

Sources report that one of Tehran’s conditions to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the formal name of the nuclear deal, is the removal of the terrorist designation, which equates the IRGC with Daesh, and Al-Qaeda.

The Biden administration has not confirmed the leaks but has made clear it hopes to restore the JCPOA. But there are signs that it may acquiesce to Tehran’s demands.

Critics point to what they see as a serious flaw in the Biden administration’s strategic reasoning.




An Iranian missile launched during a joint military drill dubbed the ‘Great Prophet 17,’ in the southwest of Iran. (AFP/Iran's Revolutionary Guard via SEPAH NEWS)

Michael Doran, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, told Arab News that the deal under consideration by the Biden administration would neither prevent Iran from eventually developing nuclear weapons nor dissuade the IRGC from conducting terror attacks against American and allied interests.

He said: “Biden officials and, before them, (former US President Barack) Obama officials promised us repeatedly that the nuclear deal would not prevent the United States from working to contain the IRGC on the ground in the Middle East.

“Clearly, the nuclear deal is about much more than nuclear weapons. It will remove all meaningful restrictions on Iran’s nuclear-weapons program, thus paving the way to Iran’s early acquisition of a nuclear bomb.”

The IRGC was founded as an ideological custodian of Iran’s 1979 revolution and entrusted with defending the Islamic Republic against internal and external threats. Its participation in the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s led to the expansion of both its role and its might, making it Iran’s dominant military force, with its own army, navy, and air force and, later, its own intelligence wing.




A view of a damaged silo at the Saudi Aramco oil facility in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia after the Houthis launched a missile attack on the facility, triggering an explosion and a fire in a fuel tank. (File/AFP)

Over time, it gained an outsized role in executing Iran’s foreign policy and currently wields control over vast segments of the economy. The IRGC has proven to be a favored tool of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to launch plausibly deniable asymmetric attacks using cadres and their proxies who are indoctrinated and trained by Iranian operatives with decades of experience in such operations.

Unsurprisingly, the general consensus of analysts was that lifting both nuclear and terror-related sanctions would inevitably lead to a major cash infusion into IRGC coffers that could only be an incentive for expansion of the organization’s terror activities.

“The move allows people and companies connected to the IRGC to engage in business deals with foreign entities with less scrutiny and move money across the globe more easily,” Saeed Ghasseminejad, a senior adviser on Iran at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Arab News.

“This is in addition to tens of billions of dollars that become available to the regime after the deal, which benefits the IRGC as a key stakeholder of the Islamic fundamentalist regime in Tehran.

“Removing the IRGC from the terror list and lifting sanctions on companies connected to it boosts its financial resources, expands its operational capacity, and increases its political power and regional influence,” he said.

Tehran seems to have seized on signals from the Biden administration, which, while publicly claiming that the Vienna process will not be open-ended, has given Iran significant leeway in dragging out the nuclear negotiations in order to gain maximum leverage and concessions.




Iranian crude oil tanker Sabiti sails in the Red Sea. (File/AFP)

“Washington does not seem to be able to say no to Tehran because the Biden administration wants a nuclear deal almost at any price.

“The IRGC is a terrorist organization and has not changed its behavior or mission. What has changed is that Washington is desperate to reach a deal with the ayatollahs,” Ghasseminejad added.

The IRGC has been implicated in attacks against civilians since the 1980s. Its terror operations have, by most accounts, killed thousands of innocent foreigners, targeting Arabs, Israelis, Americans, and Europeans, from Argentina to Thailand.

Its proxies, particularly the Houthis in Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, actively threaten the Arab world, while building missile capabilities that threaten the very existence of Israel. And while the Biden administration has of late condemned indiscriminate Houthi missile attacks on civilian infrastructure and population centers in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, there has been conspicuous silence in the matter of addressing the root of the problem.

Jason Brodsky, policy director of United Against a Nuclear Iran, told Arab News that there were compelling national security reasons for keeping the IRGC on America’s Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.

“The FTO designation carries unique criminal and immigration prohibitions, and thus has a legal distinction that other counterterrorism designations, like Executive Order 13224 (issued by former US President George W. Bush in response to the 9/11 terror attacks in America), lack.




A view of an anti-aircraft missile launcher firing a salvo during a joint military exercise between the Iranian army and the IRGC. (File/AFP)

“Delisting the IRGC in exchange for a mere public commitment to de-escalation would set a troubling precedent as it risks cheapening the FTO list, which designates organizations due to their behavior,” Brodsky said.

He pointed out that the IRGC’s local branches in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen could not be disassociated from the resulting outcome of granting the organization what could be a game-changing strategic concession if approved by Biden.

Terror networks operating under separate names while belonging to a common ideological and operational umbrella overseen by the IRGC would not feel compelled by a nuclear deal to alter their behavior, he added.

“It also makes no sense to delist the mother ship from which manpower, money, and materiel flows — the IRGC — while including its satellites like Hezbollah on the FTO list.

“The (US) Department of State has already had a bad experience after it delisted the Houthis as an FTO, and it awkwardly has had to condemn every Houthi attack while trying to justify the decision. Delisting the IRGC as an FTO would be worse,” Brodsky said.

And he noted that the potential financial windfall resulting from the removal of terror sanctions would also play into internal power dynamics within the Iranian regime.




The IRGC take part in five-days military exercises in three Iranian provinces. (File/AFP)

“I would not underestimate the importance to Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi of the IRGC’s removal from the FTO list. He harbors ambitions beyond the presidency, specifically the supreme leadership, and he needs the IRGC’s support in that process. This may be one of the reasons why the Iranian establishment has made this a priority,” he added.

In reversing former US President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign, could the Biden team then be setting a precedent that might significantly weaken America’s standing and diplomatic influence in the Middle East?

Brodsky said: “In pressing for the IRGC’s removal as an FTO, Tehran is seeking a propaganda victory. Most importantly it sends a terrible message to US allies and partners in the region, with whom relations are already strained on a variety of issues.”

Biden’s predecessor took a decidedly different tack when it came to the question of how to react to threats emanating directly from IRGC plots. For instance, a decision such as the targeted killing in 2019 of the IRGC’s leader and most capable commander, Qassem Soleimani, in response to intelligence that he was preparing an attack on the US embassy in Baghdad, would be impossible to take were the proposed nuclear deal to go ahead.

Len Khodorkovsky, a former senior US State Department official, said the Biden team was making a fundamental negotiating error in not setting clear red lines for Iran.

“President Biden has decided to do whatever it takes to get back into the JCPOA. That desperation has been used by the Iranian regime to extract outlandish concessions. If you want to know what the IRGC will do after its delisting, just look at what the Houthis have done. Terrorists will always do what they do best — terrorize people,” Khodorkovsky added.

Put simply, if a nuclear deal is signed under the current conditions, Iran’s missiles would continue to threaten Jeddah, Abu Dhabi, Baghdad, Irbil, and Tel Aviv while its long terror arm will be thrown a financial lifeline that will enable it to plunge vast new swathes of the Middle East deeper into chaos and conflict.


35,000 crowd New Zealand’s Parliament grounds in support of Māori rights

Updated 2 sec ago
Follow

35,000 crowd New Zealand’s Parliament grounds in support of Māori rights

WELLINGTON, New Zealand: As tens of thousands of marchers crowded the streets in New Zealand’s capital Wellington on Tuesday, the throng of people, flags aloft, had the air of a festival or a parade rather than a protest. They arrived to oppose a law that would reshape the county’s founding treaty between Indigenous Māori and the British Crown. But for many, it was about something more: a celebration of a resurging Indigenous language and identity that colonization had once almost destroyed.
“Just fighting for the rights that our tūpuna, our ancestors, fought for,” Shanell Bob said as she waited for the march to begin. “We’re fighting for our tamariki, for our mokopuna, so they can have what we haven’t been able to have,” she added, using the Māori words for children and grandchildren.
What was likely the country’s largest-ever protest in support of Māori rights — a subject that has preoccupied modern New Zealand for much of its young history — followed a long tradition of peaceful marches the length of the country that have marked turning points in the history of modern New Zealand.
“We’re going for a walk!” One organizer proclaimed from the stage as crowds gathered at the opposite end of the city from the nation’s Parliament. Some had traveled the length of the country over the past nine days.
For many, the turnout reflected growing solidarity on Indigenous rights from non-Māori. At bus stops during the usual morning commute, people of all ages and races waited with Māori sovereignty flags. Some local schools said they would not register students as absent. The city’s mayor joined the protest.
The bill that marchers were opposing is unpopular and unlikely to become law. But opposition to it has exploded, which marchers said indicated rising knowledge of the Treaty of Waitangi’s promises to Māori among New Zealanders — and a small but vocal backlash from those who are angered by attempts by courts and lawmakers to keep them.
Māori marching for their rights as outlined in the treaty is not new. But the crowds were larger than at treaty marches before and mood was changed, Indigenous people said.
“It’s different to when I was a child,” Bob said. “We’re stronger now, our tamariki are stronger now, they know who they are, they’re proud of who they are.”
As the marchers moved through the streets of Wellington with ringing Māori haka — rhythmic chants — and waiata, or songs, thousands more holding signs lined the pavement in support.
Some placards bore jokes or insults about the lawmakers responsible for the bill, which would change the meaning of the principles of the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi and prevent them from applying only to Māori — whose chiefs signed the document when New Zealand was colonized.
But others read “proud to be Māori” or acknowledged the bearer’s heritage as a non-Māori person endorsing the protest. Some denounced the widespread expropriation of Māori land during colonization, one of the main grievances arising from the treaty.
“The treaty is a document that lets us be here in Aotearoa so holding it up and respecting it is really important,” said Ben Ogilvie, who is of Pākehā or New Zealand European descent, using the Māori name for the country. “I hate what this government is doing to tear it down.”
Police said more than 35,000 people crowded into Parliament’s grounds, with more spilling into the surrounding streets. People crammed themselves onto the children’s slide on the lawn for a vantage point; others perched in trees. The tone was almost joyful; as people waited to leave the cramped area, some struck up Māori songs that most New Zealanders learn at school.
A sea of Māori sovereignty flags in red, black and white stretched down the lawn and into the streets. But marchers bore Samoan, Tongan, Indigenous Australian, US, Palestinian and Israeli flags, too. At Parliament, speeches from political leaders drew attention to the reason for the protest — a proposed law that would change the meaning of words in the country’s founding treaty, cement them in law and extend them to everyone.
Its author, libertarian lawmaker David Seymour — who is Māori — says the process of redress for decades of Crown breaches of its treaty with Māori has created special treatment for Indigenous people, which he opposes.
The bill’s detractors say it would spell constitutional upheaval, dilute Indigenous rights, and has provoked divisive rhetoric about Māori — who are still disadvantaged on almost every social and economic metric, despite attempts by the courts and lawmakers in recent decades to rectify inequities caused in large part by breaches of the treaty.
It is not expected to ever become law, but Seymour made a political deal that saw it shepherded through a first vote last Thursday. In a statement Tuesday, he said the public could now make submissions on the bill — which he hopes will reverse in popularity and experience a swell of support.
Seymour briefly walked out onto Parliament’s forecourt to observe the protest, although he was not among the lawmakers invited to speak. Some in the crowd booed him.
The protest was “a long time coming,” said Papa Heta, one of the marchers, who said Māori sought acknowledgement and respect.
“We hope that we can unite with our Pākehā friends, Europeans,” he added. “Unfortunately there are those that make decisions that put us in a difficult place.”

Hong Kong jails 45 democracy activists in landmark national security trial

Updated 1 min 56 sec ago
Follow

Hong Kong jails 45 democracy activists in landmark national security trial

  • Activists charged with subversion over unofficial ‘primary election’
  • Organizers had faced up to life in prison under national security laws
  • US criticizes trial as politically motivated, calls for activists’ release

HONG KONG: Hong Kong’s High Court on Tuesday sentenced 45 pro-democracy activists to jail terms of up to 10 years in a landmark national security trial that has damaged the city’s once feisty democracy movement and drawn international condemnation.
A total of 47 pro-democracy activists were arrested and charged in 2021 with conspiracy to commit subversion under a Beijing-imposed national security law and had faced sentences of up to life in prison.
Benny Tai, a former legal scholar identified as an “organizer” of the activists, was sentenced to 10 years in jail, the longest sentence so far under the 2020 national security law.
Some Western governments have criticized the trial, with the US describing it as “politically motivated” and saying the democrats should be released as they had been “peacefully participating in political activities” that were legal.
The Chinese and Hong Kong governments say the national security laws were necessary to restore order after mass pro-democracy protests in 2019, and the democrats have been treated in accordance with local laws.

Closely watched trial
The charges related to the organizing of an unofficial “primary election” in 2020 to select the best candidates for an upcoming legislative election. The activists were accused by prosecutors of plotting to paralyze the government by engaging in potentially disruptive acts had they been elected.
After a 118 day trial, 14 of the democrats were found guilty in May, including Australian citizen Gordon Ng and activist Owen Chow, while two were acquitted. The other 31 pleaded guilty.
Sentences ranged from just over four years to 10 years.
Prominent Hong Kong activist Joshua Wong was sentenced to four years and eight months in jail, while Chow was sentenced to seven years and nine months; former journalist-turned-activist Gwyneth Ho, was sentenced to seven years.
Elsa Wu, the mother of Hendrick Lui, who was sentenced to more than four years in jail, was taken away in a police van outside the courtroom and shouted: “He’s a good person … he’s not a political prisoner … why does he have to go to jail?”
She screamed before police slammed the van door.
Hundreds of people had queued from the early hours outside the court, many holding umbrellas in light rain as they tried to secure a seat within the main courtroom and several spillover courts.
Authorities deployed a tight police presence outside the West Kowloon Magistrates Court and for several blocks in the vicinity.
“I feel such an injustice needs witnessing,” said one woman who gave her name as Margaret and had been in the queue since Sunday afternoon. “I’ve long followed their case. They (the democrats) need to know they still have public support.”
The ruling, which critics have said tarnishes Hong Kong’s role as a global financial hub, comes as the city is hosting an international financial summit to attract more business.
US President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee as secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has been a staunch critic of the trial and in an earlier open letter criticized the convictions of the 47 democrats as evidence of the national security law’s “comprehensive assault on Hong Kong’s autonomy, rule of law, and fundamental freedoms.”
Britain, which handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997, has said the 2020 security law has been used to curb dissent and freedom.


Divided G20 fails to agree on climate, Ukraine

Updated 19 November 2024
Follow

Divided G20 fails to agree on climate, Ukraine

  • In a statement, the G20 called for “comprehensive” ceasefires in both Gaza and Lebanon
  • On Sunday, Biden, who is attempting to ringfence support for Ukraine before Trump’s return to power, gave Kyiv the green light to use long-range US missiles to strike deep inside Russian territory

RIO DE JANEIRO: G20 leaders failed on Monday to break a deadlock in UN climate talks at a summit in Rio that was dominated by divergences over the war in Ukraine and Donald Trump’s impending return to the White House.
Ahead of the meeting, the UN had implored the leaders of the world’s richest economies to rescue stalled climate talks in Azerbaijan by boosting funding for developing countries struggling with global warming.
G20 members, who are divided on who should pay, did not make such commitments, saying only that the trillions of dollars needed would come “from all sources.”
“The leaders are kicking the can back to Baku,” said Mick Sheldrick, co-founder of the advocacy group Global Citizen, referring to the capital of Azerbaijan where the UN climate talks are taking place.
“This is probably going to make it harder to achieve an agreement,” he told AFP.
The risk of an escalation in the war in Ukraine and the prospect of a return of US President-elect Trump’s isolationist “America First” policies also dominated the talks in Brazil.
US President Joe Biden is attending the summit, but as a lame duck eclipsed by China’s Xi Jinping, who has cast himself as a protector of the international order in the new Trump era.
Xi, who held back-to-back meetings with other leaders, warned the world faced a new period of “turbulence” and said there should be “no escalation of wars, and no fanning of flames.”
In a statement, the G20 called for “comprehensive” ceasefires in both Gaza and Lebanon.
The summit was riven with divisions over Ukraine, however.
On Sunday, Biden, who is attempting to ringfence support for Ukraine before Trump’s return to power, gave Kyiv the green light to use long-range US missiles to strike deep inside Russian territory.
Biden’s move — a major policy shift by the US — threatens to escalate a war Trump has vowed to quickly end.
Russia on Monday warned of an “appropriate response” if its territory was hit.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said he would not follow Biden’s lead with his country’s Taurus missiles, but French President Emmanuel Macron praised a “good” move by Biden.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva attempted to put issues close to his heart, such as fighting hunger and climate change, at the top of the agenda.
At the opening of the summit, he launched the centerpiece of his G20 presidency: a Global Alliance against Poverty and Hunger backed by 82 countries that aims to feed half a billion people by 2030.
He won further praise from campaigners by garnering support for a bid to make billionaires pay more tax.
The summit statement included a pledge to “engage cooperatively to ensure that ultra-high-net-worth individuals are effectively taxed,” and to devise mechanisms to prevent them dodging tax authorities.
“Brazil has lit a path toward a more just and resilient world, challenging others to meet them at this critical juncture,” anti-poverty group Oxfam said in a statement.
But Lula’s progressive social agenda met some resistance from Argentina’s libertarian president Javier Milei, an ardent fan of Trump and his billionaire adviser Elon Musk.
Milei said he opposed points in the summit declaration, including increasing state intervention to combat hunger and regulating social media but saved Brazil’s blushes by nonetheless signing up to the joint statement.
The meeting comes in a year marked by another grim litany of extreme weather events, including Brazil’s worst wildfire season in over a decade, and the opening of a new front in Israel’s wars with its Arab neighbors.
“Today the world is on a knife edge,” EU Council President Charles Michel warned.
The get-together caps a diplomatic farewell tour by Biden that took him to Lima for a meeting of Asia-Pacific trading partners, and then to the Amazon in the first such visit for a sitting US president.
Conspicuously absent from the summit was Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose arrest is sought by the International Criminal Court over the Ukraine war.
 

 


Hong Kong to sentence dozens of democracy campaigners

Updated 19 November 2024
Follow

Hong Kong to sentence dozens of democracy campaigners

  • The sentencing is “a very important indicator to show the general public (the degree of) openness and inclusivity in our society,” Lee Yue-shun, one of those acquitted, told AFP on Tuesday as he waited outside court

HONG KONG: Hong Kong’s largest national security trial will draw to a close on Tuesday, with dozens of the city’s most prominent democracy campaigners set to be sentenced for subversion, a charge that can carry up to life imprisonment.
Beijing imposed a sweeping national security law on the financial hub in 2020, snuffing out months of massive, sometimes violent, pro-democracy protests.
Western countries and international rights groups have condemned the trial as evidence of Hong Kong’s increased authoritarianism.
The “Hong Kong 47” were arrested in 2021 after holding an unofficial election primary that aimed to improve pro-democracy parties’ chances of winning a majority in the city’s legislature.
Two of the 47 were acquitted in May, but on Tuesday, the rest will learn their sentences, many after more than 1,300 days in jail.
The sentencing is “a very important indicator to show the general public (the degree of) openness and inclusivity in our society,” Lee Yue-shun, one of those acquitted, told AFP on Tuesday as he waited outside court.
A friend of defendant Gordon Ng, named by prosecutors as one of five organizers, told AFP she had been suffering insomnia in the past few days.
“Gordon seemed nervous too,” the woman said about her visit to Ng in prison. “But... he kept telling us not to overthink.”
This case is the largest by number of defendants since the law was passed in mid-2020.
Another major national security trial will see a key development on Wednesday, when jailed pro-democracy media tycoon Jimmy Lai testifies in his collusion trial.
The charges against Lai revolve around publications in his now-shuttered tabloid Apple Daily, which supported the pro-democracy protests and criticized Beijing’s leadership.
China and Hong Kong say the security law restored order following the 2019 protests, and have warned against “interference” from other countries.

At dawn on Tuesday, more than 200 people stood in the chilly drizzle outside the court where the sentencing will take place.
Some had been queuing since Saturday to nab a public seat.
Eric, an IT professional based in mainland China, spent a day of holiday waiting in line.
“I want to bear witness of how Hong Kong becomes mainland China,” Eric told AFP.
“In the future, cases like this may not be open to the public anymore.”
Jack, a law student, said he wanted to witness the sentencing because he found the judgment “was not particularly convincing.”
He said he was pessimistic that the sentencing would be lenient, but that even if it was, “people’s passion for political participation has dissipated in the face of restrictions.”
The aim of the election primary, which took place in July 2020, was to pick a cross-party shortlist of pro-democracy candidates to increase their electoral prospects.
If a majority was achieved, the plan was to force the government to meet the 2019 protesters’ demands — including universal suffrage — by threatening to indiscriminately veto the budget.
Three senior judges handpicked by the government to try security cases said the group would have caused a “constitutional crisis.”

The “principal offenders” face 10 years to life in jail.
Legal scholar Benny Tai has been named “the brain behind the project” by prosecutors.
Others singled out as “more radical” are the ex-leaders of the now-disbanded Civic Party Alvin Yeung and Jeremy Tam, young activist Owen Chow and former journalist Gwyneth Ho.
The oldest defendant is “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung, the 68-year-old co-founder of the city’s last standing opposition party the League of Social Democrats.
His wife Chan Po-ying, the leader of the LSD, told AFP that Leung “does not have any special thoughts on the sentence” after visiting him on Monday.
“I feel rather calm too... I wish for no surprise and no shock,” Chan said.
Emilia Wong, girlfriend of rally organizer Ventus Lau, said Lau appeared more anxious in recent months.
They hadn’t discussed the potential sentence much because “it’s an unprecedented case,” she said.
“A long time ago, he said if the sentence is up to 10 years or 20 years, I should not wait for his release,” Wong told AFP.
“The (sentencing) day may be a significant milestone for the outside world but for me... I will just have to carry on with my normal life, visiting him and handling his matters.”
 

 


Starmer stays quiet on Ukraine’s use of UK Storm Shadow missiles

Updated 19 November 2024
Follow

Starmer stays quiet on Ukraine’s use of UK Storm Shadow missiles

  • Britain, which has provided Ukraine with Storm Shadow long-range missiles, has consistently pushed to ease restrictions on Kyiv’s use of the weapons

RIO DE JANEIRO: British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday said he would not “get into operational details” after US President Joe Biden gave Ukraine permission to use Western-supplied long-range missiles against Russia.
Speaking to broadcasters at the G20 in Brazil, Starmer refused to be drawn “because the only winner, if we were to do that, is (Russian President Vladimir) Putin.”
Kyiv has long sought authorization from Washington to use the powerful Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, to hit military installations inside Russia as its troops face growing pressure.
A US official said Washington’s major policy shift on the missiles was in response to Russia’s deployment of thousands of North Korean troops in its war effort.
Britain, which has provided Ukraine with Storm Shadow long-range missiles, has consistently pushed to ease restrictions on Kyiv’s use of the weapons.
Putin had previously warned that letting Ukraine use long-range weapons would mean NATO was “at war” with Moscow.
In parliament in London, lawmaker Roger Gale asked if Britain planned to “align with the United States” in granting Kyiv permission to use the UK-supplied missiles “as it sees fit in its own defense.”
Junior defense minister Maria Eagle said the government intended to “align with our allies” on how Ukraine “can make use of the capabilities that’s been offered” by its backers.
Starmer added: “I’ve been really clear for a long time now we need to double down.
“We need to make sure Ukraine has what is necessary for as long as necessary, because we cannot allow Putin to win this war,” he said.
Asked if he had spoken to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at the G20, he said: “I haven’t spoken to Russia and I’ve got no plans to do so.”
Foreign Secretary David Lammy, speaking to reporters after a UN Security Council meeting in New York, also refused to discuss the use of British missiles, because it “risks operational security.”
Asked how concerned he was about the implications of Donald Trump’s presidency on the war in Ukraine, he said: “One president at a time.”
“We’re dealing with President (Joe) Biden and we are committed to putting Ukraine in the strongest possible position,” he added.