“`html
The Prime Minister’s condemnation of Donald Trump’s remarks regarding the war in Afghanistan represents his most forceful public criticism of the President to date.
This rebuke follows a week in which Sir Keir Starmer found it necessary on three separate occasions to publicly challenge a leader with whom he has invested significant effort in cultivating a strong relationship.
Sources indicate that upon returning to Downing Street on Friday afternoon, Sir Keir deemed it essential to articulate his views with utmost clarity.
His tone and demeanor conveyed palpable anger, mirrored in his statement that President Trump’s comments were “insulting and frankly appalling.”
The President had asserted that the NATO defense alliance, of which the UK is a member, dispatched “some troops” to Afghanistan, but they “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.”
These remarks, factually inaccurate, have been widely perceived as insensitive and deeply offensive.
Four hundred and fifty-seven British service personnel lost their lives in the conflict, with many more sustaining life-altering injuries.
The Prime Minister’s team relays that Sir Keir views the defense of the armed forces as a primary duty of his office, given that both those currently serving and those who have perished in conflict cannot publicly advocate for themselves.
Notably, this is not the first instance in which the Prime Minister has felt compelled to defend the British military in response to remarks from the Trump administration.
In March of last year, Sir Keir made a pointed tribute to UK troops in the Commons following accusations that US Vice-President JD Vance had shown them disrespect.
However, on that occasion, he refrained from mentioning the Vice-President by name.
Sir Keir’s response to the President marks the third time in five days that he has had to swiftly determine how to publicly respond to perceived attacks on fundamental principles emanating from the White House.
The first instance arose on Monday morning, concerning the sanctity of Greenland’s sovereignty and advocating for “calm discussion.”
Within 24 hours, the President was issuing critical comments regarding the government’s handling of the Chagos Islands dispute.
Consequently, it is perhaps unsurprising that No. 10 approached Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday with a sense of the potential risks inherent in his planned statements.
His language and tone regarding the President’s ambitions for Greenland became more assertive, as he declared that the UK “will not yield” to pressure from Washington.
While the Prime Minister’s interventions on Monday and Wednesday were viewed by officials through the lens of diplomacy and potential repercussions, his remarks on Friday were approached with a different rationale.
The judgment, I’m told, was more straightforward: the Prime Minister concluded that it was unequivocally the right course of action, given the severity of the offense caused by the President.
If Sir Keir has an opportunity to reflect on the past week, he may well conclude that it represents a turning point in his relationship with President Trump.
He values and cherishes this relationship. Many have commended him for fostering it, while others have criticized him for aligning too closely with a deeply controversial President.
His rationale has consistently been that a close relationship serves the national interest.
The pressing question now is how commonplace weeks like the last one might become, should the President’s tendency toward what many perceive as outrage, insult, and provocation become entrenched.
Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
The legislation was due to be debated in Lords on Monday.
The meetings between the three countries comes as both Ukraine and Russia say no peace deal can be reached until territorial issues are resolved.
The BBC’s Washington Correspondent Daniel Bush looks at the countries who have joined and how the charter’s funding will be used.
Donald Trump is pushing hard for a peace deal – but major issues between Russia and Ukraine are still unresolved, writes Sarah Rainsford.
Organisers called on businesses to close for the day in protest at immigration enforcement activity.
“`