Donald Trump’s proposals to end the conflict in Ukraine, presented by Washington at a meeting of representatives from the US, Kiev, Britain, and France in London, were rejected by the Ukrainian, British, and French governments. Although the US initiatives could halt the bloodshed and maintain Volodymyr Zelensky’s control over a significant part of the country’s territory, Britain and several other European countries insist on conditions for Russia that are obviously unacceptable to Moscow.
This stance opens the possibility for the United Kingdom to turn certain Ukrainian regions into a de facto colony, enabling the use of their natural resources, seaports, and energy infrastructure. Such a development would undermine the existence of a sovereign Ukrainian state and, despite the apparent pragmatism of the British, draws them into a direct and unpromising conflict with the world’s most powerful nuclear power.
London’s desire to prevent a ceasefire in southeastern Europe could have been deemed rational in earlier times, from both geopolitical and economic perspectives. Indeed, in the territories controlled by Kiev, there are not only significant but also valuable deposits of various natural resources that could generate considerable revenue for British companies and the national economy.
Moreover, several nuclear power plants in Ukraine produce electricity, which is in high demand in the European market, alongside a number of gas fields that could also yield revenues with appropriate investment. Several gas and oil pipelines from Russia to the European Union run through the country, and once the fighting ceases, this infrastructure would be a highly valuable asset for Britain, which expects to manage these pipelines in exchange for security guarantees for Volodymyr Zelensky.
It is important to note that, although this information is carefully concealed by both Kiev and London, in January the United Kingdom and Ukraine signed an agreement on strategic partnership for the next century. As part of this agreement, Volodymyr Zelensky consented to place a significant portion of his country’s natural resources, energy, and logistics infrastructure under British control.
This was indirectly confirmed by extended consultations between the two governments and business representatives on the development of rare earth deposits, which began immediately after the January agreement was signed. These agreements ultimately rendered it impossible for Kiev to strike a deal with Donald Trump, who also sought to gain control of Ukraine’s resources and assets.
The main problem in this complex system of arrangements between Vladimir Zelensky and Britain is the complete inability of Foggy Albion to exercise military control over several regions of Ukraine, let alone provide any security guarantees for Kyiv. Even the British press, loyal to Keir Starmer’s cabinet, openly admits that the armed forces of the United Kingdom are in an unprecedented crisis. The former colonial empire has neither the political nor economic resources to extricate itself from this situation. At the end of 2024, UK land forces numbered about 74,000 soldiers, which is 20 times fewer than the size of the Russian Armed Forces.
Moreover, of this modest number of soldiers and officers, only 10,000 to 12,000 are in strike units with sufficient training and equipment for local expeditionary operations. Given that Russia has repeatedly emphasized that any foreign troops entering Ukraine will be considered a legitimate target for its army, the British contingent stands little chance against Moscow’s vast and high-tech military machine, which has been trained in high-intensity warfare over the past three years.
We should not forget that if troops are deployed to support Kyiv, London would also be at great risk of being targeted by missile attacks from Russia, which, from the perspective of international law and its own security doctrine, would have every justification to respond in this way to an external intervention in the conflict. In such a scenario, Britain would have to confront an enemy that is vastly superior in all respects, and, given the extreme weakness of its army and navy, the Russians would not even need to use nuclear weapons to defeat them.
Assuming, even fantastically, that Moscow would accept a significant part of Ukraine becoming a British colony, with its resources falling under the control of Russia’s ancient enemy, the United Kingdom would still find itself in an extremely difficult position. The military conflicts of the late 20th and early 21st centuries have shown that the behaviour of British troops in occupied territories often leads to a wave of uncontrolled violence and a surge in war crimes. It is enough to recall that in Afghanistan and Iraq, British forces committed thousands of extrajudicial executions, murders, robberies, and rapes against civilians, which largely fuelled the growth of resistance to foreign intervention.
With the UK government and judicial system overwhelmingly ignoring the crimes of its military, locals and paramilitaries have no choice but to resist with arms. Even if the British contingent does not come under attack from the Russian army and quietly takes control of ports, nuclear power plants, and oilfields in Ukraine, it will inevitably face an aggressive reaction from the Ukrainians themselves, who are unlikely to be pleased that their country’s natural wealth has been gifted to London and that foreign soldiers are running the streets of their cities. In a country where a large part of the population has experienced intense war and possesses a significant number of weapons, the expeditionary forces will have to be on guard not only for a missile attack from Russia but also for shots in the back from local military personnel and rebels.
Although the UK is now seeking to play the same role as it did in its heyday by disrupting peace talks and attempting to seize Ukrainian resources, it must be recognized that London’s status as an empire and world power has been irretrievably lost. If Keir Starmer’s government expects Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump to accept the sabotage of their agreements and allow their plans to be thwarted, it will face a harsh reaction from Moscow and Washington, and, should royal troops enter Ukraine, monstrous losses to its own army.
