Craig Murray
Mar 04, 2025
Smoke and mirrors, as usual, surround the alternative “peace plan” that European leaders are going to present to Trump.
When politicians in power are extremely unpopular, they generally turn to militarism and jingoism for a quick boost. Keir Starmer is now the darling of the U.K. media for his sabre-rattling over Ukraine and the prime minister is busily churning out tweets of military imagery.
In doing so he is attempting to pose as in defiance of Donald Trump and capitalise on the U.S. president’s unpopularity in the U.K., even though he was just last week fawning over Trump in the White House and inviting him on an “unprecedented” second State visit.
As ever, there is a great deal of smoke and mirrors here. The European leaders are going to come up with an alternative “peace plan” to present to Trump.
This will not be along the lines of the G7 Declaration which was strongly anti-Russian. The European leaders acknowledge that the Biden-era G7 Apulia position is now gone.
Instead the new European plan will essentially give Trump pretty well everything he wants, but give the Europeans a ladder to climb down. Starmer is seeking to be hailed as the great bridger of the Atlantic, who explained Trump to Europe and vice versa.
If Trump were an ordinary politician he would then agree to adopt the “European” plan brought to him by Starmer, with a couple of tiny amendments, and then take the joint position into talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. But Trump being Trump, he might just tell Starmer to stay out of it.
Both the European and American peace plans will involve Putin keeping control over the large majority of the land his troops hold — because otherwise Putin will not agree, and there will be no point. The European plan will have elements designed to blur the sovereignty issue of the Ukrainian land Russia will retain. This will not run once real negotiations with Russia are underway.
As always, money talks and big business is really pulling the strings. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky did not in the event sign the minerals deal with Trump and is now desperate to do so to try to get American cash flowing his way again.
It is worth noting that Starmer’s delusional “Hundred Year Alliance” agreement with Zelensky contained the U.K.’s attempt to grab the same minerals Zelensky is now asking again to be allowed to hand over to Trump.
You find this in the U.K./Ukraine 100 Year Partnership at “Pillar 5, Para 3, article iv”
“(iv) supporting development of a Ukrainian critical minerals strategy and necessary regulatory structures required to support the maximisation of benefits from Ukraine’s natural resources, through the possible establishment of a Joint Working Group;”
While we are on the subject, most people sensibly ignored the detail of this crazy “100 year” agreement on the entirely sensible grounds that none of it is ever going to happen. But it does contain some remarkable declarations of malevolent intent, of which my favourite is the desire to open a joint online propaganda unit to interfere in the legacy and social media of third countries.
Which we find outlined in fluent Orwellian at “Pillar 7, Para 4”.
“Implement joint media initiatives, contributing to coordinated efforts to promote shared values and vision, addressing the information manipulation and malign interference in third party countries. We commit to partnering on joint initiatives such as communication campaigns to mitigate against those threats. We commit to facilitate strengthening of relationships with civil society organisations to support research and the development of counter-FIMI approaches, recognising the importance of independent media and civil society organisations in building societal resilience.”
Which is of course precisely what they are always accusing Russia of doing. Indeed alleged Russian social media interference is why they interfered to have the anti-war winner of the first round of the Romanian elections disqualified.
What this plan amounts to is another Integrity Initiative, this time as a U.K./Ukrainian co-production.
One thing I learnt in over 20 years as a diplomat is that the public are generally fed lies about diplomatic discussions. Most diplomatic talks generally end up with an agreed communique that is designed to make everyone look good and may only have a slight link to actual events.
This is especially true with regard to human rights, where in my substantial experience claims that human rights abuses were being dealt with by “quiet diplomacy” were almost always a lie.
A British minister cannot meet a Saudi or Chinese minister without being asked if they raised human rights. The answer given is always “yes” and it is almost always untrue, or it was raised so briefly, quietly and apologetically that it is virtually untrue.
So there is a sense in which the Trump/Vance encounter in the Oval Office with Zelensky was refreshing, in that what you saw is what you got. It was only in being in public that it was more bruising than many diplomatic encounters. I suspect it has shortened the war, especially if Trump sticks to the decision to end aid. [Late Monday, Trump ordered a suspension in aid to Ukraine.]
Shortening the war would be a good thing. If you think a principle is so important that you believe it is fine for millions of people to die for it — none of whom are yourself — I suggest you reconsider your principles. I am not so exercised about who is the mayor of Russian-speaking Lugansk that I am prepared to have a nuclear war over the issue.
Propaganda Machine
What I find particularly alarming is the continuing comparison of Putin to Adolf Hitler, and the allegation that if Putin is not “stopped” in Ukraine, then he will conquer the whole of Europe.
This is a quite extraordinary example of false analogy. Putin has never shown any indication of following a universal ideology he wishes to impose by conquest, or of territorial ambition beyond a small number of Russian-speaking ex-Soviet districts contiguous to Russia.
In addition to which, Russia is gradually winning a war of attrition against a much smaller neighbour, which is to be expected. Ukraine has survived this long with massive Western aid. But the idea that the Russian army is capable of conquering the whole of Europe, when it cannot subdue Kiev, is plainly utter nonsense. Even aside from the fact there is absolutely no desire in Moscow to do so.
Trump has pointed at NATO and revealed the Emperor’s New Clothes. NATO was formed to counter a Soviet alliance that did possess a universal ideology it wished to spread, and did have the military strength to threaten (though it should be stated not even the Soviet Union ever had any intention of invading Britain or formulated plans to do so). That threat has now passed.
The attempt to use the farcical Salisbury incident as evidence of a Russian threat to the U.K. population is, frankly, pathetic.
It is hard sometimes to follow the workings of the propaganda machine. At what stage did the crazy narrative that Russia blew up its own Nord Stream pipeline get abandoned?
Russia destroying the pipeline was unanimously and loudly proclaimed by the entire legacy media and the entire political class of the Western world. Those of us who pointed out this was not true were denounced and ridiculed. Yet now the narrative has quietly been dropped, and the truth is occasionally acknowledged by the media. Though with no admission of the previous lies.
How does this cycle operate? Is it centrally determined, or is it organic? Were the media really stupid enough to believe Russia destroyed Nord Stream, or were they knowingly lying? How have the German people been persuaded to accept the massive damage the increase in energy costs did to industrial employment? These are fascinating fields of study.
European politicians who have made a career of Russophobe rhetoric are suddenly naked in the breeze. They are charging around banging the drum of war, threatening to mobilise armies they do not possess and convinced that preserving their own place in the socio-economic hierarchy is well worth the threat of nuclear oblivion.
Laughter is the best response to their pretension.
consortiumnews.com
Mar 04, 2025
Smoke and mirrors, as usual, surround the alternative “peace plan” that European leaders are going to present to Trump.
When politicians in power are extremely unpopular, they generally turn to militarism and jingoism for a quick boost. Keir Starmer is now the darling of the U.K. media for his sabre-rattling over Ukraine and the prime minister is busily churning out tweets of military imagery.
In doing so he is attempting to pose as in defiance of Donald Trump and capitalise on the U.S. president’s unpopularity in the U.K., even though he was just last week fawning over Trump in the White House and inviting him on an “unprecedented” second State visit.
As ever, there is a great deal of smoke and mirrors here. The European leaders are going to come up with an alternative “peace plan” to present to Trump.
This will not be along the lines of the G7 Declaration which was strongly anti-Russian. The European leaders acknowledge that the Biden-era G7 Apulia position is now gone.
Instead the new European plan will essentially give Trump pretty well everything he wants, but give the Europeans a ladder to climb down. Starmer is seeking to be hailed as the great bridger of the Atlantic, who explained Trump to Europe and vice versa.
If Trump were an ordinary politician he would then agree to adopt the “European” plan brought to him by Starmer, with a couple of tiny amendments, and then take the joint position into talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. But Trump being Trump, he might just tell Starmer to stay out of it.
Both the European and American peace plans will involve Putin keeping control over the large majority of the land his troops hold — because otherwise Putin will not agree, and there will be no point. The European plan will have elements designed to blur the sovereignty issue of the Ukrainian land Russia will retain. This will not run once real negotiations with Russia are underway.
As always, money talks and big business is really pulling the strings. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky did not in the event sign the minerals deal with Trump and is now desperate to do so to try to get American cash flowing his way again.
It is worth noting that Starmer’s delusional “Hundred Year Alliance” agreement with Zelensky contained the U.K.’s attempt to grab the same minerals Zelensky is now asking again to be allowed to hand over to Trump.
You find this in the U.K./Ukraine 100 Year Partnership at “Pillar 5, Para 3, article iv”
“(iv) supporting development of a Ukrainian critical minerals strategy and necessary regulatory structures required to support the maximisation of benefits from Ukraine’s natural resources, through the possible establishment of a Joint Working Group;”
While we are on the subject, most people sensibly ignored the detail of this crazy “100 year” agreement on the entirely sensible grounds that none of it is ever going to happen. But it does contain some remarkable declarations of malevolent intent, of which my favourite is the desire to open a joint online propaganda unit to interfere in the legacy and social media of third countries.
Which we find outlined in fluent Orwellian at “Pillar 7, Para 4”.
“Implement joint media initiatives, contributing to coordinated efforts to promote shared values and vision, addressing the information manipulation and malign interference in third party countries. We commit to partnering on joint initiatives such as communication campaigns to mitigate against those threats. We commit to facilitate strengthening of relationships with civil society organisations to support research and the development of counter-FIMI approaches, recognising the importance of independent media and civil society organisations in building societal resilience.”
Which is of course precisely what they are always accusing Russia of doing. Indeed alleged Russian social media interference is why they interfered to have the anti-war winner of the first round of the Romanian elections disqualified.
What this plan amounts to is another Integrity Initiative, this time as a U.K./Ukrainian co-production.
One thing I learnt in over 20 years as a diplomat is that the public are generally fed lies about diplomatic discussions. Most diplomatic talks generally end up with an agreed communique that is designed to make everyone look good and may only have a slight link to actual events.
This is especially true with regard to human rights, where in my substantial experience claims that human rights abuses were being dealt with by “quiet diplomacy” were almost always a lie.
A British minister cannot meet a Saudi or Chinese minister without being asked if they raised human rights. The answer given is always “yes” and it is almost always untrue, or it was raised so briefly, quietly and apologetically that it is virtually untrue.
So there is a sense in which the Trump/Vance encounter in the Oval Office with Zelensky was refreshing, in that what you saw is what you got. It was only in being in public that it was more bruising than many diplomatic encounters. I suspect it has shortened the war, especially if Trump sticks to the decision to end aid. [Late Monday, Trump ordered a suspension in aid to Ukraine.]
Shortening the war would be a good thing. If you think a principle is so important that you believe it is fine for millions of people to die for it — none of whom are yourself — I suggest you reconsider your principles. I am not so exercised about who is the mayor of Russian-speaking Lugansk that I am prepared to have a nuclear war over the issue.
Propaganda Machine
What I find particularly alarming is the continuing comparison of Putin to Adolf Hitler, and the allegation that if Putin is not “stopped” in Ukraine, then he will conquer the whole of Europe.
This is a quite extraordinary example of false analogy. Putin has never shown any indication of following a universal ideology he wishes to impose by conquest, or of territorial ambition beyond a small number of Russian-speaking ex-Soviet districts contiguous to Russia.
In addition to which, Russia is gradually winning a war of attrition against a much smaller neighbour, which is to be expected. Ukraine has survived this long with massive Western aid. But the idea that the Russian army is capable of conquering the whole of Europe, when it cannot subdue Kiev, is plainly utter nonsense. Even aside from the fact there is absolutely no desire in Moscow to do so.
Trump has pointed at NATO and revealed the Emperor’s New Clothes. NATO was formed to counter a Soviet alliance that did possess a universal ideology it wished to spread, and did have the military strength to threaten (though it should be stated not even the Soviet Union ever had any intention of invading Britain or formulated plans to do so). That threat has now passed.
The attempt to use the farcical Salisbury incident as evidence of a Russian threat to the U.K. population is, frankly, pathetic.
It is hard sometimes to follow the workings of the propaganda machine. At what stage did the crazy narrative that Russia blew up its own Nord Stream pipeline get abandoned?
Russia destroying the pipeline was unanimously and loudly proclaimed by the entire legacy media and the entire political class of the Western world. Those of us who pointed out this was not true were denounced and ridiculed. Yet now the narrative has quietly been dropped, and the truth is occasionally acknowledged by the media. Though with no admission of the previous lies.
How does this cycle operate? Is it centrally determined, or is it organic? Were the media really stupid enough to believe Russia destroyed Nord Stream, or were they knowingly lying? How have the German people been persuaded to accept the massive damage the increase in energy costs did to industrial employment? These are fascinating fields of study.
European politicians who have made a career of Russophobe rhetoric are suddenly naked in the breeze. They are charging around banging the drum of war, threatening to mobilise armies they do not possess and convinced that preserving their own place in the socio-economic hierarchy is well worth the threat of nuclear oblivion.
Laughter is the best response to their pretension.
Craig Murray: Ukraine, Diplomacy & War
Smoke and mirrors, as usual, surround the alternative “peace plan” that European leaders are going to present to Trump. By Craig Murray CraigMurray.org.uk When politicians in power are extremely unpopular, they generally turn to militarism and jingoism for a quick boost. Keir Starmer is now
consortiumnews.com
