Three ways Donald Trump just backed Keir Starmer into a corner over Ukraine – and left him with no good options

Keir Starmer’s recent positive meeting with Donald Trump may soon be forgotten as a diplomatic crisis unfolds. Donald Trump’s decision to pause military aid to Ukraine has left the country in a difficult position and put Starmer in a tough spot. On Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met with Trump at the White House, but the meeting ended badly.

Trump and U.S. Vice President JD Vance accused Zelensky of being ungrateful and warned that his actions could risk a larger war. Zelensky was then asked to leave without securing a minerals deal or any security guarantees.

Following this, world leaders held an emergency meeting with NATO on Sunday, hoping to convince Trump to continue supporting Ukraine. Instead, he officially paused military aid, cutting off a major source of weapons and financial support. Ukraine now faces an even tougher battle against Russia, and Starmer is under pressure to respond.

The UK has already committed £7 billion in military aid, with a recent £1.6 billion missile deal. However, this is much less than the U.S., which has provided over £53 billion to Ukraine since the war began. Without U.S. support, Starmer may face calls to increase UK military aid, but the defense budget is already stretched, and experts warn there is no extra money available.

If Starmer wants to send more aid, he may have to cut spending in other areas or raise taxes, which could be unpopular. His decision to reduce foreign aid from 0.5% to 0.3% by 2027 to boost defense spending has already drawn criticism from within his party and humanitarian organizations. Some politicians argue he should raise taxes instead of cutting aid, putting him in a difficult political position.

Trump’s decision also complicates Starmer’s efforts to maintain diplomatic relations between the UK, the U.S., and the EU. His recent meeting with Trump was seen as a diplomatic success, but now he must navigate a delicate situation.

Trump publicly criticized European leaders, including Starmer, saying they rely too much on the U.S. for Ukraine’s defense. Meanwhile, Starmer defended Ukraine in Parliament, stating that Russia is the aggressor and that leaders should support Zelensky instead of appeasing Putin.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance made matters worse by dismissing the idea of British and French troops in Ukraine, calling them forces from “random countries that haven’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years.” This growing tension could make it harder for Starmer to balance relations with both the U.S. and Europe.

With America stepping back, there is an expectation that the UK will take a bigger role in European security, raising questions about Britain’s position post-Brexit. Some pro-Brexit politicians want Britain to remain independent, while international experts argue that closer cooperation with the EU is necessary to counter shared geopolitical threats.

Strengthening ties with the EU could be politically risky for Starmer, as many UK voters remain skeptical of European institutions. However, if the UK does not step up, it could weaken the Western stance against Russia.

Nigel Farage has argued that Brexit has given the UK more foreign policy freedom, allowing Starmer to act independently on the world stage. The challenge is whether the British public will accept closer cooperation with the EU if it means a stronger stance against Russia. Starmer now faces difficult choices:

whether to increase aid to Ukraine, how to balance relations between the U.S. and the EU, and how to maintain Britain’s strategic independence while ensuring security in Europe. With Trump’s decision reshaping global politics, Starmer must navigate this crisis carefully, as any misstep could have serious consequences.