The Prime Minister (Boris Johnson) With permission, Mr Speaker, I
will make a statement about the United Kingdom’s response to the
situation in Ukraine. This winter, we have witnessed a spectacle
that we hoped had been banished from our continent: a large and
powerful country massing troops and tanks on the border of a
neighbour with the obvious threat of invading. Russia has, of
course, already attacked Ukraine, illegally annexing 10,000 square
miles of her territory in...Request free
trial
The Prime Minister ()
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement about the
United Kingdom’s response to the situation in Ukraine. This
winter, we have witnessed a spectacle that we hoped had been
banished from our continent: a large and powerful country massing
troops and tanks on the border of a neighbour with the obvious
threat of invading. Russia has, of course, already attacked
Ukraine, illegally annexing 10,000 square miles of her territory
in 2014 and igniting a war in the Donbass region. Ukraine has
scarcely known a day of peace ever since. Now, Ukraine faces the
danger of a renewed invasion and, this time, the force arrayed on
Ukraine’s frontier comprises over 100,000 troops—far bigger than
anything that Russia has deployed against her before. If the
worst happens and the destructive firepower of the Russian army
were to engulf Ukraine’s towns and cities, I shudder to
contemplate the tragedy that would ensue.
Ukrainians have every moral and legal right to defend their
country, and I believe that their resistance would be dogged and
tenacious and the bloodshed comparable to the first war in
Chechnya, or Bosnia, or any other conflict that Europe has
endured since 1945. No one would gain from such a catastrophe.
Russia would create a wasteland in a country that, as she
continuously reminds us, is composed of fellow Slavs, and Russia
would never be able to call it peace.
For months, Britain has worked in lockstep with the United States
and our allies across Europe to avoid such a disaster. We have
sought to combine dialogue with deterrence, emphasising how a
united western alliance would exact a forbidding price for any
Russian incursion into Ukraine, including by imposing heavy
economic sanctions. At the same time we stand ready, as we always
have, to address any legitimate Russian concerns through honest
diplomacy.
On 13 December, I spoke to President Putin, and I stressed that
NATO had no thought of encircling or otherwise threatening his
country, and that Russia enjoyed as much right as any other state
to live in peace and security. But, as I said to him, Ukraine
also enjoys an equal and symmetrical right to that of Russia, and
I said that any attack on his neighbour would be followed by
tougher sanctions against Russia, further steps to help Ukraine
defend herself and an increased NATO presence to protect our
allies on NATO’s eastern flank. The truth is that Russia’s goal
is to keep NATO forces away from her borders, and if that is
Russia’s goal, then invading Ukraine could scarcely be more
counterproductive.
My right hon. Friends the Foreign and Defence Secretaries have
both conveyed the same message to President Putin, and I am of
course prepared and ready to speak to him again. Meanwhile, the
American deputy Secretary of State met her Russian counterpart in
Geneva on 10 January, and the NATO-Russia Council gathered two
days later, as the House knows. The American Secretary of State,
Antony Blinken, met the Russian Foreign Minister last Friday, and
the US Administration have confirmed President Biden’s
willingness to have another meeting with President Putin,
continuing the bilateral dialogue they began last year.
But credible deterrence is the other side of the coin. Last
night, I held a virtual meeting with President Biden, President
Macron, Chancellor Scholz, President Duda, Prime Minister Draghi,
Secretary-General Stoltenberg, President Michel and President von
der Leyen. We agreed that we would respond in unison to any
Russian attack on Ukraine—in unison—by imposing co-ordinated and
severe economic sanctions heavier than anything we have done
before against Russia, and we agreed on the necessity of
finalising these measures as swiftly as possible in order to
maximise their deterrent effect.
We in the UK will not hesitate to toughen our national sanctions
against Russia in response to whatever President Putin may do,
and the House will soon hear more on this from my right hon.
Friend the Foreign Secretary. We have already declassified
compelling intelligence exposing Russian intent to install a
puppet regime in Ukraine, and we will continue to disclose any
Russian use of cyber-attacks, false flag operations or
disinformation.
Amid all these pressures, Ukraine asks for nothing except to be
allowed to live in peace and to seek her own alliances, as every
sovereign country has a right to do. Last week, the UK acted to
strengthen Ukraine’s ability to defend her soil by supplying
anti-armour missiles and deploying a small training team of
British personnel, in addition to the work of Operation Orbital,
which, as the House will know, has trained 21,000 Ukrainian
troops since 2015. Yesterday, we took the responsible precaution
of temporarily withdrawing some staff and dependants from the
British embassy in Kyiv, though I emphasise that the embassy
remains open and will continue to provide consular assistance for
British nationals in Ukraine, and I am particularly grateful for
the dedication of our ambassador in Kyiv, Melinda Simmons.
I commend our NATO allies for the steps they have taken and are
taking to protect the eastern flank of the alliance. Denmark is
sending a frigate to the Baltic and deploying four F-16s to
Lithuania to join NATO’s long-standing air policing mission;
France has expressed its readiness to send troops to Romania
under NATO command; and the United States has raised the alert
level of 8,500 combat troops, preparing to deploy them in Europe
at short notice. The British Army leads the NATO battlegroup in
Estonia, and if Russia invades Ukraine we would look to
contribute to any new NATO deployments to protect our allies in
Europe.
In every contact with Russia, the UK and our allies have stressed
our unity and our adherence to vital points of principle. We
cannot bargain away the vision of a Europe whole and free that
emerged in those amazing years from 1989 to 1991, healing the
division of our continent by the iron curtain. We will not reopen
that divide by agreeing to overturn the European security order
because Russia has placed a gun to Ukraine’s head, nor can we
accept the doctrine implicit in Russian proposals that all states
are sovereign but some are more sovereign than others.
The draft treaty published by Russia in December would divide our
continent once again between free nations and countries whose
foreign and defence policies are explicitly constrained by the
Kremlin in ways that Russia would never accept for herself. More
than half of Europe, including a dozen or more members of NATO
and of the European Union, would be only partially sovereign and
required to seek the Kremlin’s approval before inviting any
military personnel from NATO countries on to their soil. The
Czech Republic—at the very heart of Europe, hundreds of miles
from Russia—would have to ask the Kremlin for permission if she
wanted to invite a company of German infantry to join an exercise
or even to help with flood defences.
There is nothing new about large and powerful nations using the
threat of brute force to terrify reasonable people into giving
way to otherwise completely unacceptable demands, but if
President Putin were to choose the path of bloodshed and
destruction, he must realise that it would be both tragic and
futile. Nor should we allow him to believe that he could easily
take some smaller portion of Ukraine to salami-slice, because the
resistance will be ferocious.
Anyone who has been to Kyiv, as I have, and has stood by the wall
of remembrance and studied the portraits of nearly 4,500
Ukrainians who have died in defence of their country since
2014—the total death toll stands in excess of 14,000—will know
that the Ukrainians are determined to fight and have become
steadily more skilled at guerrilla warfare. If Russia pursues
this path, many Russian mothers’ sons will not be coming home.
The response in the international community would be the same and
the pain that will be inflicted on the Russian economy will be
the same.
When I spoke to President Putin, I reminded him that at crucial
moments in history, Britain and Russia have stood together. The
only reason why both our countries are permanent members of the
UN Security Council is the heroism of Soviet soldiers in the
struggle against fascism, side by side with ourselves. I believe
that all Russia’s fears could yet be allayed and we could find a
path to mutual security through patient and principled diplomacy,
provided that President Putin avoids the trap of starting a
terrible war—a war that I believe would earn and deserve the
condemnation of history. I commend this statement to the
House.
1.28pm
(Holborn and St Pancras)
(Lab)
I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement and
am grateful to the Defence Secretary for keeping the Opposition
informed of developments throughout the crisis.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, Britain, Russia and the United
States made a solemn agreement with Ukraine: in exchange for its
giving up nuclear powers and weapons, Ukraine’s security was to
be guaranteed and its independence respected. Ukraine has kept
its end of the deal; President Putin has not. His Russia has
annexed Crimea, has supported separatist conflict in Donbass and
has now amassed more than 100,000 troops on Ukraine’s
borders.
These are repeated and unjustifiable acts of aggression, so
Labour stands resolute in our support of Ukraine’s sovereignty,
independence and territorial integrity. That was made clear when
our shadow Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for
Tottenham (Mr Lammy), and our shadow Defence Secretary, my right
hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth and Dearne (), visited Kyiv a fortnight ago,
and I made it clear to the Ukrainian ambassador when I met him
last week.
This is not just a local dispute on the other side of the
continent. It is an attempt by President Putin to turn back the
clock, to re-establish Russian force as a means of dominance over
parts of eastern Europe, and it is a direct threat to the
anti-imperialist principle that sovereign nations are free to
choose their own allies and their own way of life.
That is why it is crucial that we in this House are united in
opposing Russian aggression. Let me be clear: the Labour party
supports the steps that the Government have taken to bolster
Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. We support international
efforts to deter Russia from further aggression and the vital
diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the situation.
Will the Prime Minister assure the House that the UK and our
partners will be resolute in our defence of Ukraine’s sovereignty
and the security of our NATO allies? For too long, the implicit
message to Moscow has been that President Putin can do what he
likes and the west will do little to respond. We must now change
course and show Russia that any further aggression will result in
severe, real-world consequences. For Britain and our allies, that
will mean taking tough decisions. It will not be easy.
Widespread and hard-hitting sanctions must include cutting
Russia’s access to the international financial system. Europe’s
overreliance on Russian energy supplies is well documented and
simply must be addressed. In Britain, we have failed to rid our
economic and political systems of the ill-gotten money used to
support the Putin regime. If we take our obligations to global
security seriously, we cannot go on allowing ourselves to be the
world’s laundromat for illicit finance.
Labour has a four-point plan. [Interruption.] Really? First, we
must reform Companies House to crack down on Shell companies.
Secondly, we must have a register of overseas entities to lift
the veil on who owns property and assets in the UK. Thirdly, we
need tougher regulation of political donations. Finally, we
should implement the recommendations of the cross-party Russia
report to bolster national security. Will the Prime Minister
support those measures to rid the UK of the loot of the corrupt
Russian elite? We cannot stand up to Russian aggression abroad
while facilitating Russian corruption at home.
After the chemical attacks in Salisbury, after the annexation of
Crimea and now the threat of invasion in Ukraine, it is time to
send a simple, clear and united message. We support Ukraine’s
sovereign right to choose her own destiny. We will stand with the
Ukrainian people in the face of President Putin’s threats. His
aggression will come at a high price for himself and his
regime.
The Prime Minister
I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman and I am glad that
he supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
He is right to ask about the assurances that this country has
given to Ukraine. I have repeatedly told Volodymyr Zelensky, as I
told his predecessor, Petro Poroshenko, many times, that we stand
four-square behind the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine
and we always will. We have a hard-hitting package of sanctions
ready to go. It would be fair to say that we want to see our
European friends ready to deploy that package as soon as there
were any incursion at all by Russia into Ukraine.
The right hon. and learned Gentleman asks what we are doing to
track down Russian money in this country and in the City. As he
knows, we are bringing forward measures for a register of
beneficial interests. I do not think that any country in the
world has taken tougher action against the Putin regime. It is
this Government who brought in Magnitsky sanctions against all
those involved in the poisoning of Alexei Navalny. It is this
Government who got the world together—got 28 countries
together—to protest against the poisoning in Salisbury. The world
responded to that British lead by collectively expelling 153
diplomats around the world.
I am grateful for the general tenor of the right hon. and learned
Gentleman’s comments and his support for NATO—belated though it
may be from the Opposition Benches. I am grateful for it now.
What I can tell him is that that same leadership in assembling a
response to Russian aggression is being shown by the UK now, and
it is absolutely vital that the west is united now, because our
unity now will be much more effective in deterring any Russian
aggression. That is what this Government will be pursuing in the
days ahead.
(Bournemouth East) (Con)
As the Prime Minister articulates, the west is now regrouping,
but the penny is also dropping: the threat of sanctions will not
deter the Russian aggression, and a total or even partial
invasion will have severe economic and security consequences felt
right across Europe and beyond. Ukraine’s grain exports to Africa
will be affected, global gas prices will be impacted and
skyrocket, and where might an emboldened Russia turn to next? I
ask the Government to liaise with the United States and consider
a simpler and more effective option to deter this invasion by
belatedly answering Ukraine’s call for help. It is not too late
to mobilise a sizeable NATO presence in Ukraine, utilising the
superior hard power that the alliance possesses to make Putin
think twice about invading another European democracy.
The Prime Minister
I thank my right hon. Friend very much and I know that,
emotionally, many people will share his view. He knows a great
deal about Ukraine and the issues that that country faces. Of
course, instinctively, many people would yearn to send active
physical support in the form of NATO troops to Ukraine. I have to
tell him that I do not believe that to be a likely prospect in
the near term. Ukraine is not a member of NATO, but what we can
do—and what we are doing—is send troops to support Ukraine. I
have mentioned the training operations that we are conducting
under Operation Orbital, as we have for the past six or seven
years, training 21,000 Ukrainian troops. Of course we are now
sending defensive weaponry, which I think is entirely
appropriate. We have sent 2,000 anti-tank weapons to the
Ukrainians and we join the Americans in that effort; as my right
hon. Friend knows, the Americans have sent about $650
million-worth of military assistance to Ukraine. That is the
vital thing to do to stiffen Ukrainian resistance, but the real
deterrent right now is that package of economic sanctions. That
is what will bite; that is what will hurt Putin; and that, I
hope, is what will deter him.
(Ross, Skye and Lochaber)
(SNP)
I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement and
join the Leader of the Opposition, the right hon. and learned
Member for Holborn and St Pancras (), in congratulating the
Defence Secretary on making sure throughout that we have been
kept informed of developments; it is most appreciated. It is
important that all of us in this House stand together in
solidarity with our friends in Ukraine in defence of their
sovereignty.
We on the Scottish National party Benches share the deep concern
over the escalation of tension, the prospect of military
aggression and the threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty. Russia’s
actions in recent weeks and months of amassing troops, tanks and
heavy military equipment near the border of Ukraine are
unacceptable. We continue to support, above all, measures to
resolve the crisis through diplomacy, so will the Prime Minister
provide reassurance that work to deliver a peaceful and
diplomatic outcome remains this Government’s main priority? The
threat of bloodshed on European soil is what is at stake.
We stand with the people of Ukraine and understand the fears and
concerns of Ukrainians across these islands, many of whom live in
the UK but have family in Ukraine. The bedrock of NATO as a
defensive alliance remains the solidarity between its member
states, and it is clear that we need that united alliance. It is
becoming increasingly apparent that, should an incursion occur,
what will be required is a tougher package of sanctions that are
robust and have real, measurable impact.
We on the SNP Benches have called for co-ordinated economic
sanctions against the Putin regime and the banning of Russia from
the SWIFT—the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial
Telecommunication—banking system. Can that be confirmed as on the
table today? The measures must also include tougher action on
Russian money laundering and include action by the Treasury to
tackle the ongoing and improper use of Scottish limited
partnerships, which have been used to funnel millions of pounds
in dirty money. Without that, our credibility will lessen.
The Prime Minister raised the issue of Magnitsky, and let me say
to him that it was cross-party support that led to these
sanctions. He may well remember the meeting I had with him when
he was Foreign Secretary to make sure that we worked collectively
to deal with those threats. Will he also commit to introducing a
transparent system of company registration and proper reform of
Companies House?
Meanwhile, we all stand solidly with the people of Ukraine and
urge the Government to continue efforts for diplomacy, as long as
that is possible.
The Prime Minister
Again, I thank the right hon. Gentleman and echo many of his
sentiments. He is completely right to say that we should pursue
every possible diplomatic avenue, in every appropriate forum;
whether it is the NATO-Russia Council, the UN, the OSCE, the G7
or the Normandy Format, we must follow every avenue. He is right
to press on what we are doing to track “dirty Russian money”, for
want of a better expression. That is why we have the unexplained
wealth orders and why we are bringing in measures to have a
register of beneficial interests.
The right hon. Gentleman asks about SWIFT and financial
transactions across the world, and there is no doubt that that
would be a very potent weapon. I am afraid it can only really be
deployed with the assistance of the United States—though we are
in discussions about that.
The House needs to understand that one of the big issues we all
face in dealing with Ukraine and with Russia is the heavy
dependence, of our European friends in particular, on Russian
gas. It was clear in the conversations last night that in this
era of high gas prices we are bumping up against that reality.
The job of our diplomacy now is to persuade and encourage our
friends to go as far as they can to sort this out and to come up
with a tough package of economic sanctions, because that is what
the situation requires.
(Tonbridge and Malling) (Con)
My right hon. Friend will recall that when he was Foreign
Secretary the Foreign Affairs Committee published a report
entitled “Moscow’s Gold”, which was about dirty Russian money
flowing through our system and the call for us to have various
registers not only of ownership but of foreign agents operating
within our system. We have had a reminder only a week ago of why
that is so important. Will he tell me what he is doing to work
with partners across Europe to make sure that we stand together
and do not just act as a voice outside the Kremlin, but make sure
that Putin’s acolytes, who have profited from his kleptocratic
regime, act as voices inside the Kremlin telling him what he is
risking? The impressive work that the Defence Secretary has done
in helping to support our Ukrainian friends could be undermined
if the Kremlin does not listen to the very real danger it faces
today.
The Prime Minister
It is absolutely right that the best way to get attention in the
Kremlin and in Moscow generally is to have sanctions that are
directed at the individual—like Magnitsky sanctions, for
instance; that is what we will be coming forward with—as well as
sanctions directed at companies that are of crucial strategic
Russian interest.
(Rhondda) (Lab)
In Kyiv and in Kramatorsk last week, we met politicians and
community leaders who will not only be worrying for the future of
their country, but be fearful for their own lives. I have been
saying for a very long time that the arguments that President
Putin uses about Russian speakers in Ukraine are exactly the same
as Adolf Hitler advanced over the Sudeten Germans in
Czechoslovakia in the 1930s. I agree with the Chair of the
Foreign Affairs Committee, the hon. Member for Tonbridge and
Malling (), that we need to see full implementation of the
“Moscow’s Gold” report. I am sure there will be other sanctions
coming—I do not quite understand why we have sanctioned only 25%
of the people the American Government have already sanctioned.
This House will stand ready alongside the Prime Minister if he
needs, for instance, to introduce further legislation to seize
Russian assets in the UK and to make sure that the unexplained
wealth orders, which have worked in only three cases in the past
four years, actually have an effect. We stand ready to stand by
the Ukrainian people.
The Prime Minister
I thank the hon. Gentleman very much, and I think he is
completely right in his analysis of Russian, and certainly
Putin’s, intentions towards Ukraine. I am sure he has read the
5,000-word essay by Vladimir Putin about Ukraine and the origins
of Russia. It is clear what the psychological and emotional
wellsprings of his thinking are.
I am grateful for what the hon. Gentleman says on sanctions. As
he knows, we are bringing forward a statutory instrument greatly
to toughen up our ability to sanction people, and I hope he will
support it.
(New Forest East) (Con)
President Putin has not even waited for the gas to start flowing
through the Nord Stream 2 pipeline before exploiting the
stranglehold that he has been building on the German economy. My
right hon. Friend has already indicated that it may be difficult
for Germany to impose severe sanctions against Russia if this
invasion goes ahead, so does he not agree that it is vital from
our security point of view that anyone with strong Russian or
communist Chinese links should be kept well away from our own
critical national infrastructure?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is completely right. That is why we brought
in measures to protect our national security and our critical
national infrastructure, and to ensure that we are able to stop
investment that we think would be detrimental to our national
security. I am afraid that he is also right about the German
dependence on Russian gas. We have to be respectful of this, but
the simple fact is that about 3% the UK’s gas supplies come from
Russia, whereas about 36% of German energy needs come from
Russian gas. Germany is in a very different position from us, and
its sacrifice is potentially very large. We must hope that in the
interest of peace it is willing to make that sacrifice.
(Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I thank the Prime Minister for his statement. It is right that we
stand united across the House to support Ukraine and to stand
against Russian aggression, which we should remember has already
resulted in over 13,000 casualties in the last few years. The
Prime Minister has rightly talked about gas being an issue,
particularly in Germany but also across central and eastern
Europe. It could also impact this country, with the threat of
increased gas prices at a time when families are already facing
rocketing heating bills. Could I ask him to take further action
on energy, as I did during the Russian invasion of Crimea?
Alongside all the measures he rightly proposed in his statement,
will he convene a summit of the G7 Energy Ministers, as we had
back in 2014, to look at how we can improve short-term and
medium-term energy security, protect consumers in this country
and elsewhere against rocketing gas prices and give ourselves a
much stronger hand in the face of Putin’s aggression?
The Prime Minister
I thank the right hon. Gentleman. By the way, I think that much
of the work he did on renewables when he was in office was
prescient and valuable for this country, and it has put us in a
stronger position to resist the Russian gas blackmail. As I told
the House just now, only 3% of our gas supplies come from Russia,
but he is right about the spike in prices, which is why we are
working together with President Biden and other colleagues to see
what we can do to increase the supply of gas both to Europe and
of course to this country.
Karl MᶜCartney (Lincoln) (Con)
If Russia invades Ukraine, does my right hon. Friend see the
potential, as I do, for it to lead to a flood of refugees
crossing from Ukraine into the EU? Poland, Romania and Slovakia
could see massive flows of displaced people. Indeed, it could be
part of Putin’s thinking that the EU could be so distracted and
full of infighting over refugees that it could not respond
militarily. What does my right hon. Friend think the response
from Brussels would be? Maybe the Poles should have a bus station
at the border crossing ready to take people to Germany and
France, especially as it is Berlin and Paris that have watered
down any NATO response thus far. If this massive flow of refugees
happens, it may well be the end of the EU.
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is making a valuable point, because we have seen
only recently how refugees from Belarus have been used as tools
of political warfare. We have to be conscious of the potential
for the Kremlin to trigger exactly the kind of refugee crisis he
describes.
(North Durham) (Lab)
I thank the Prime Minister for his statement, and agree with him
that should Putin invade Ukraine, tough sanctions will be
necessary. However, the Putin regime exists because it floats on,
and relies on, an ocean of illegal and illicit finance, much of
which flows through the City of London. The Prime Minister has
just said that the UK has the strongest laws against illicit
money; I am sorry, but that is just not true. He should look at
what our allies in the United States are doing. It is now time to
attack what is happening, because that is the way to cripple this
regime. Can the Prime Minister tell me when he will implement the
recommendations of the Russia report? As my hon. Friend the
Member for Rhondda () has said, if that requires us
to pass emergency legislation, let us do it.
The Prime Minister
Let me repeat what I said earlier. The right hon. Gentleman is
right to suggest that it is vital to guard against Russian dirty
moneys flowing through the world, and he is right in his analysis
of the way the kleptocracy works. That is why we have the
unexplained wealth orders, why we are introducing a register of
beneficial interests, and why we have a new corporate offence of
failure to prevent tax evasion. We will and we do come down very
hard on all those who are exploiting the City of London, or
anywhere else, to wash dirty money.
(The Wrekin) (Con)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s strong underlining of Ukraine’s
sovereignty and territorial integrity. Back in November, there
was no unanimity across Europe, and increasingly even across the
Atlantic, on the issue of Ukraine. That has changed over the last
few months through the good offices of the Prime Minister, the
Defence Secretary and the Foreign Secretary.
The Prime Minister mentioned his conversation last night with
Chancellor Olaf Scholz. The Germans are a critical part of all
this, in respect of both diplomacy and defence. They are a key
international partner and ally. We can do it with the Americans
and we can do it with others, but it will be far more effective
if we do it with the Germans.
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is completely right. I want to say a word or
two in praise of Olaf Scholz, because it was clear from our
conversation last night—as I have said to the House—how difficult
this is for Germany. No one should be in any doubt about that.
However, it was also clear that the new German Chancellor is
determined to stand with the rest of the west to maintain a
united front. Among other things, Germany has made it plain that
Nord Stream 2 cannot go ahead—Germany cannot take part in it—if
there is a Russian invasion of Ukraine.
(Exeter) (Lab)
The Prime Minister is right to say that western unity is key. Can
he therefore explain why the UK began withdrawing some of our
diplomats from Kyiv this week, unlike most of the rest of
NATO?
The Prime Minister
We are actually in lockstep with the United States, and, as the
right hon. Gentleman knows, we have kept at least 30 of our
diplomats in Kyiv, including Melinda Simmons, our outstanding
ambassador. The UK presence continues to be very strong there,
but those are sensible precautionary steps.
(Chingford and Woodford
Green) (Con)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend, the Foreign Secretary and
the Defence Secretary on forming a very robust leadership with
NATO and our European allies, and with the United States. Does my
right hon. Friend agree, however, that right now we are facing an
even wider threat? It is Ukraine today, but the powers of
dictatorship have watched as we did nothing about Georgia, Crimea
and South Ossetia, and they have been encouraged. Even now China
is looking at Taiwan, watching to see what our reaction will be.
Does my right hon. Friend not agree that we have to get our
allies to recognise that we must never put ourselves in the
position, when it comes to energy, of being dependent on these
terrible regimes for our future? We need to get security into our
energy now.
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is completely right in what he says about
the need for us to guarantee the independence of our energy—that
is why it is so vital that we are building our wind power and
other renewables so fast—but he is also right in his analysis of
what is happening. What Putin basically wants is to go back to
the Yalta system of spheres of influence. It is not just Ukraine
that he has his eye on. Therefore, this moment now matters for
the whole geometry and security architecture of Europe, and we
must stand firm.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
Short, concise questions please, because I will be finishing this
statement at 20 past 2.
(Leeds Central) (Lab)
The military reality is that President Putin knows that if he
invades he will not be facing NATO troops, and therefore the
sanctions that we put in place have to be the strongest possible.
Is the Prime Minister not concerned, given the answer he just
gave about the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and the fact that
discussions are still continuing about exclusion from the SWIFT
system, that we are not demonstrating determined, united resolve
at the very moment when we need the credible threat of strong
sanctions to try and deter President Putin from invading
Ukraine?
The Prime Minister
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his very important point. I
think actually we are making a huge amount of progress. I want to
thank my right hon. Friends the Foreign Secretary and the Defence
Secretary for the work that they are doing, because I think we
are bringing together the west on a very tough package, and that
is what we need.
(Beckenham) (Con)
I remind the House that we do actually guarantee the sovereignty
of Ukraine, having signed the Budapest memorandum in 1994, along
with the United States and Russia, and I think later France, and
even China. Does my right hon. Friend agree that if we really
economically and financially strangle Russia with sanctions,
Russia could well become bankrupt, and that alone might be
something to cause Mr Putin to blink before he gives agreement to
using military power and turning it into military force?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is completely right that we have the
potential—the potential—to do very serious economic damage to
Russia. What we have to make sure of, as everybody said on the
call last night, is that we do not inflict damage on the western
economies just as people are suffering in particular from high
gas prices. That is what we have got to do. Do not forget, it is
quite right to say that 41% of Russia’s GDP comes from oil and
gas.
(Glasgow Central)
(SNP)
The truth about unexplained wealth orders is that only a handful
of them have been issued, and that the Registration of Overseas
Entities Bill has now been waiting for four years for action. So
when the Finance (No. 2) Bill returns to this House, will the
Government bring forward measures to tighten up on the flow of
dirty Russian money in the UK—or is the truth really that he is
perfectly content with that because so much of it appears to end
up in Tory party coffers?
The Prime Minister
No, we do not accept foreign donations, as the hon. Lady knows
very well. What we will do is bring forward targeted sanctions,
which I think are the most effective way of doing it, targeting
the sanctions at the personalities that surround President Putin
and making them understand the price that they will pay.
(South West Wiltshire)
(Con)
There is no public appetite for using UK combat troops in
Ukraine—absolutely none—but we do have other tools in our
toolbox. Is the Prime Minister contemplating using the
full-spectrum approach to cyber, including offensive cyber, that
he talked about in March in connection with the integrated
review?
The Prime Minister
Yes. The National Cyber Security Centre is indeed offering help
to Ukraine for precisely that purpose. Russian cyber-attacks, as
the House knows, can be extremely damaging and we can do a lot to
help.
(Aberavon) (Lab)
The Government’s position is that sanctions will be deployed
against Russia if there is an incursion, but would the Government
consider deploying some sanctions now, as a clear signal to
Russia, and saying that if President Putin stands down his troops
and withdraws his forces, further sanctions will not be deployed?
Would that not be a more effective sequencing of the process?
The Prime Minister
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his thoughtful argument. As I have
said, we already have Magnitsky sanctions in place on the Russian
regime, sanctions in response to the seizure of Crimea and
Sevastopol already in place—a wide variety of sanctions. I think
what we need to do, if I may say so, is build up an instant,
automatic package of western sanctions that will come in
automatically in the event of a single toecap of a Russian
incursion into more of Ukraine.
(Thurrock) (Con)
I welcome the robust sentiment behind my right hon. Friend’s
statement. It is important that the unity that exists across this
House is expressed in opposition to Putin if we are to make that
a reality. My right hon. Friend mentioned Bosnia in his opening
remarks, and he will be aware of the sabre rattling in Republika
Srpska, encouraged by Russia. He will also be aware that there is
still occupied territory in Moldova. Can he reassure me that
these areas are also under discussion with the allies?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. The crisis around
Ukraine will be replayed across the whole map of eastern Europe
if we fail now, and if we do not stand up to Putin. She is
entirely right in what she says about the Balkans.
(Caithness, Sutherland and
Easter Ross) (LD)
It is not just Ukraine; we have military forces in Estonia, which
is a member of NATO and a true friend of the UK. The Prime
Minister said that if Russia invades Ukraine, we will bolster up
our NATO allies. Should we not have more forces in Estonia
now?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman makes a very good point. I have been to see
the 850 troops in Tapa, as I am sure he has. They do a fantastic
job in Estonia. We are looking potentially to increase our
presence in the NATO south-eastern flank as well.
(Harwich and North Essex)
(Con)
I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement, which puts the
United Kingdom at the forefront of the response to President
Putin’s monstrous military intimidation. Will my right hon.
Friend personally pledge himself to the defence of the new
democracies of eastern Europe, who suffered under the Soviet yoke
for so long and still want to be free? Will he acknowledge that
this change must happen anyway, whether or not the invasion takes
place? We must make sure that we are prepared in a new cold war
against this kind of intimidation until the Russian regime is
removed.
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend, and I know that he speaks for many
friends and many good allies in eastern Europe. In Poland, in the
Czech Republic and in the Baltic states there are people who
would precisely echo his sentiments, and that is why we have to
stand strong and united today for Ukraine.
(Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
(Lab)
The Prime Minister describes Ukraine and Russia as equal parties,
and we know he likes a party. He also said that
“Ukraine has scarcely known a day of peace”
since the 2014 Russian invasion and illegal annexation. Indeed,
in December there were 128 shellings of Ukrainians in Donetsk,
and three Ukrainian soldiers have been murdered by Russian-backed
forces since January. The question is why the Prime Minister has
not acted sooner, and why is he even now saying we must wait for
full-scale invasion before further sanctions—including on access
to SWIFT—and the “Moscow’s Gold” report recommendations are
implemented? Why wait?
The Prime Minister
I am afraid the hon. Gentleman must have missed what I already
said. We already have a very wide package of sanctions in place
since the Russian incursion of 2014. We have personal sanctions
and other sanctions for what the Russians did in Crimea and
Sevastopol. What we are going to do now is to ratchet those
sanctions up very considerably. I am afraid he is not right in
what he says about abandoning Ukraine since 2014. With Operation
Orbital, the UK has been out there in the front, helping to train
21,000 Ukrainian troops since 2015.
(Bracknell) (Con)
The Prime Minister will know that Ukraine is not a full member of
NATO, but may I ask him to comment on the feasibility of direct
military action by NATO, notwithstanding that article 5 does not
apply?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend very much, and I go back to the answer I
gave to my right hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Mr
Ellwood). I know that, emotionally, many people will want to
commit NATO troops to the defence of Ukraine. We have UK troops
there now, and members of the Ranger Regiment are going to
supplement those we already have.
I have to say that no member of NATO is currently willing to
deploy in Ukraine in large numbers to fight Russian aggression in
the way that my hon. Friend suggests. Indeed, we have to beware
of doing things that would constitute a pretext for Putin to
invade. We have to calculate and calibrate what we do very
carefully, and I think that the right approach is to build a
strong package of economic sanctions, continue to supply
defensive weaponry and do all the other things that we are
doing.
(Dundee East) (SNP)
The Prime Minister said that we have already declassified
compelling intelligence exposing Russian intent and that
“we will continue to disclose any Russian use of…false flag
operations or disinformation.”
How much of that declassified information will be made fully
public so as to blunt or halt the spread of Russian
disinformation by letting the people who see it know that it is
false before they decide to press the “share” or “send”
button?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. It is very
important that people in Ukraine and around the world should be
able to trust the information that we are giving out. I have no
doubt that the intelligence that we shared about the coup
attempt—or the people conspiring against the regime—in Kyiv was
right, but we will divulge as much of our sourcing as we can
without compromising our intelligence sources.
(Vale of Glamorgan) (Con)
Naturally, we are all alarmed and share concerns at the risks
that the people of Ukraine face but we take confidence from the
Prime Minister’s statement and actions in helping to co-ordinate
the western response. Does my right hon. Friend agree that NATO
must always leave the door open for Ukraine joining?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is completely right and puts his finger on
the fundamental point and the thing that we cannot bargain away.
A sovereign country must have the right to choose her own
destiny, and that is what Ukraine must have. Of course, the path
to NATO membership will not be easy for anybody and no one is
saying that that is going to happen immediately. But a country
must be allowed to choose its own way forward, and that is what
we are sticking up for.
(North Down) (Alliance)
Any Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a very serious breach of
the terms of the United Nations charter. In 2014, the seizure of
Crimea was discussed in the Security Council on seven occasions,
I think. Eventually, a resolution was passed to the General
Assembly that left Russia extremely isolated. What plans do the
Government have to pursue the current crisis through the UN?
Given the reality of a Russian veto at the Security Council, we
could perhaps look once again to the General Assembly.
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman is completely right. It is an underestimated
point in our favour that I do not believe, in the end, that
Russia wants the kind of isolation that would ensue. Of the
global institutions, Russia takes the UN very seriously. Russia
values her membership of the UN Security Council. What he
proposes about using the General Assembly is entirely right. But
it is very important that we not only have tough measures but
provide the avenue for diplomacy as well.
(Wolverhampton North East)
(Con)
I thank the Prime Minister for sending such a strong and clear
message to Vladimir Putin and everyone across the House for
backing the Prime Minister on such a crucial issue. At such a
worrying time, can the Prime Minister reassure British nationals
in Ukraine that our embassy in Kyiv remains open to provide
assistance should they require it?
The Prime Minister
Yes, I am very happy to give that reassurance. As I said just
now, the embassy continues to function. At least 30 staff are
there to look after British interests in Kyiv and around
Ukraine.
(Plymouth, Sutton and
Devonport) (Lab/Co-op)
The Kremlin does not act in isolation; it acts against a plan.
Will the Prime Minister set out what additional support we will
be providing to our allies on NATO’s eastern flank, especially
that using UK forces already stationed in those countries, to
deter any future Russian aggression after any invasion of
Ukraine?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman is making an important point. What we are all
discussing at the moment is what we can do to fortify NATO’s
eastern/south-eastern flank. The French are looking at Romania.
There are questions about Hungary and what we might do there; as
he knows, there are complex issues involving the Hungarian
minority in Ukraine. Everybody—particularly the Americans; he
heard what I said about the 8,500 troops getting ready to go to
Europe—can see the need now to move NATO forces, to fortify
NATO’s eastern flank.
(South Dorset) (Con)
The diplomacy of the velvet glove must be supported by a steel
fist if it is to be effective. Does the indirect threat to NATO
inform the Prime Minister that NATO must spend more money on its
conventional forces? In that respect, will he reconsider the
10,000 cut to our Army?
The Prime Minister
We have spent record sums on our wonderful Army and it is now
more agile, lethal and deployable around world, which is why we
are able to move at speed and not just deploy in Estonia but, as
I said to the hon. Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
(), look to move to other parts
of NATO’s eastern frontier.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Prime Minister and the Secretaries of State for
Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs and for Defence for
their resolute and strong stance. The UK, NATO and the USA have
committed troops to the Baltic states and Poland; to combat and
stop Russian aggression, similar support needs to be given to
Ukraine. The pictures in the press last week that showed
Ukrainian militia training with wooden guns very much illustrated
the David and Goliath struggle. Will the Prime Minister confirm
that military assistance and boots on the ground are needed
urgently in Ukraine right now?
The Prime Minister
I too saw those pictures of Ukrainian civilians training with
wooden weapons. I can tell the hon. Gentleman that we are
supporting the Ukrainian army. There is now a strong tradition in
Ukraine of militias and people who understand how to fight a
guerrilla war. The message we need to get across to the Russian
people is that it would be a disaster for them and a political
disaster for Vladimir Putin.
(Huntingdon) (Con)
In his very strong statement, my right hon. Friend rightly spoke
about the need for western unity. It seems bizarre that Germany,
of all countries in Europe, needs to be reminded that murderous
dictators will never be satisfied with a single land grab and
that any attack on Ukraine is, ultimately, an attack on all of
Europe. Will my right hon. Friend remind the Germans of that?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend and I have discussed these types of issues over
many years. Actually, given the extreme delicacy of the matter in
Germany—given the dependence on Russian hydrocarbons that I have
described to the House—I really think that Olaf Scholz is doing a
huge job of moving and getting us to a position where we have a
united western approach and I commend the German Government.
(Glasgow South)
(SNP)
For reasons we do not need to go over just now, Germany has
blocked some NATO allies from providing certain military
assistance to Ukraine. What assessment have the Government made
of that blocking? Where it is necessary for Ukraine to defend
itself, will the UK Government and others ensure that it gets the
maximum spread of capability we are able to provide?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point but, as he knows and
as I have told the House, given the NLAWs, or next-generation
light anti-tank weapons, that we have sent in addition to all the
aid we have given under Operation Orbital, we are the
second-biggest contributor to the defence—I stress: the
defence—of Ukraine. I saw a poll of the Ukrainian people that
said that the UK was now the most popular foreign Government in
Ukraine, second only—[Interruption.] Not second only to the
Scottish Government but second only to Lithuania.
(Newark) (Con)
The UK is proving to be the pre-eminent European nation in the
support and defence of Ukraine, so I thank my right hon. Friend
for his leadership on that. Nobody could doubt our commitment to
European security. I have been encouraged by my right hon.
Friend’s remarks about Germany, but it is critical that the
German Government play a full part if we are to deliver the
unprecedented package of financial and other sanctions that he
described and that were set out in the call last night. How
confident is my right hon. Friend of that and what more can he do
with Chancellor Scholz to ensure it is delivered?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is right: Germany is absolutely critical to
our success in this matter. We have just got to keep the pressure
up together.
(Oxford West and Abingdon)
(LD)
I heard what the Prime Minister said earlier to the Leader of the
Opposition about the introduction of a register of beneficial
interests, but my question is: when? It has been six years since
such a register was promised at that Dispatch Box and nothing has
happened. Every moment that we wait undermines our position. I
have introduced my private Member’s Bill on the issue and it has
support from both sides; will the Prime Minister please take it
up? We need to send the message that cronies’ money is not
welcome in this country.
The Prime Minister
The hon. Lady is completely right. In addition to the unexplained
wealth orders and the crackdown on tax evasion, we want a
register of beneficial interests. I can tell her that the Leader
of the House tells me that we will do it as soon as parliamentary
time allows.
(Colne Valley) (Con)
I have a vibrant Ukrainian community in my constituency, many of
whom I met earlier this month. Will the Prime Minister reassure
them of our commitment to the defence support package for Ukraine
and our readiness to unleash economic sanctions on Russia, and
will he stand firm for freedom and democracy alongside the
Ukrainian people?
The Prime Minister
Yes, the UK has been at this for a long time now. It was an
important signal, which I hope my hon. Friend will take back to
his constituents, that we stuck up for Ukrainian rights of
navigation when we sent HMS Defender through that route. If hon.
Members remember, the Government came under pressure from people
for taking what was described as a “provocative” route, but all
we were doing was sticking up for the rights of freedom of
navigation for the Ukrainians.
(Stirling) (SNP)
The Russian regime is a clear and present danger to the
rules-based international order, so the SNP will be part of the
coalition in Ukraine’s defence. In that spirit, does the Prime
Minister accept that the real frustration of Opposition Members
is that his credibility and the credibility of his Government and
of us all has been undermined by continued inaction in
implementing the “Moscow’s Gold” report and the Russia report? We
would support the legislation to strengthen his credibility, so
let us get on with it.
The Prime Minister
I do not think that is fair. The Government have been absolutely
ruthless in applying Magnitsky sanctions, which the right hon.
Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber () helped to promote. My right
hon. Friend the Lord Chancellor produced them and they are a
great thing. We have targeted people involved in the poisoning of
Alexei Navalny and we will use direct targeted sanctions now
against the Putin regime.
(Kensington) (Con)
Ukraine has very strong historical and cultural links to my
constituency, with the Ukrainian embassy, the Ukrainian Cultural
Centre and the Ukrainian Institute all based in Holland Park. Can
the Prime Minister assure me that we will do everything to
support the people of Ukraine in their desire to live in
peace?
The Prime Minister
Yes, indeed. I am familiar with the statue of St Volodymyr in my
hon. Friend’s constituency and I know the amazing contribution of
the Ukrainian community to our great capital. I hope that she
will pass on the message that we stand four-square with them.
Ms Anum Qaisar (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP)
A percentage of our natural gas comes from Russia and Putin has
already said that he will turn off the taps if he deems Moscow to
be unfairly sanctioned by the west. My constituents are already
struggling with rising fuel costs, which is why I voted for the
SNP motion in our cost of living increases debate yesterday. Does
the Prime Minister accept that he must bring in a package of
domestic policies to help families to pay for bills so that the
international issue does not compound the problem?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Lady is right to draw attention to the price spike in
energy around the world. Actually, Russian gas comprises only 3%
of the UK’s gas supplies, but we have to mitigate the impact of
the cost of energy on families with the cold weather payments and
everything that we are doing to increase the living wage—all the
support that we are giving families throughout the winter and
beyond.
(North West Cambridgeshire)
(Con)
May I commend the Prime Minister on his tough statement? The
point has already been made about the disinformation that is
coming from the Kremlin, but he will appreciate that much of that
is targeted at NATO. Will he use this opportunity to make it
absolutely clear that NATO is a defensive organisation and that
it should not in any way be construed as being offensive or
threatening?
The Prime Minister
Yes, my hon. Friend is so right, because that is the
misconception, whether witting or otherwise. Russia persists in
the fiction that NATO is somehow an aggressive alliance and a
threat to Russia. NATO is not an aggressive alliance; Russia is
not encircled by threats. It is absolutely vital that we convey
that to Vladimir Putin. If he can understand that, that is the
route to progress and that is the diplomatic path that we have to
follow.
(West
Dunbartonshire) (SNP)
The Prime Minister will get every support from the SNP Benches
for defending national self-determination within Europe. Does he
not agree that it is time that the UK Government sign a robust
security and defence agreement with the European Union to replace
that in the Lisbon treaty—most critically, article 42.7 of that
treaty?
The Prime Minister
If we look at what is happening, the conversation I had last
night was with European partners comprising the vast bulk of
defence spending in the west; we work very closely with our
European partners, as we do with all our NATO partners. NATO
remains the primary vehicle for our defence. NATO is a very
valuable interlocutor with Russia. The NATO-Russia Council has
proved its worth in the last few months.
(Kettering) (Con)
Is this the wake-up call that NATO needs so that all its members
finally meet their obligations to spend at least 2% of their GDP
on defence?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is completely right. As so many colleagues have
said, this is not just about Ukraine. This is about the ambition
of the Kremlin to seize this moment to try to reimpose a new
order and a new security architecture in the European continent,
one that we absolutely reject. We stand for the rights of free
peoples everywhere to determine their own fate. That was the
fantastic achievement of the end of the cold war, the fall of the
Berlin wall, and that high moment in 1990 when we had a Europe
whole and free. That is what we are trying to protect.
(Rutherglen and Hamilton
West) (Ind)
There are reports of some Ukrainians beginning to stock up on
non-perishable goods. Can the Prime Minister confirm that the
Government have plans in place to support provision of
necessities to ordinary Ukrainian people if necessary?
The Prime Minister
Of course we will do what we can to provide economic support in
the event of a disaster, but the most important thing we can do
now is to try to prevent that disaster from occurring by unifying
the west in the way I have been describing this afternoon.
|
