DONALD Trump could give the go-ahead for Ukraine to hammer long-range missiles inside Russia, the former head of MI6 told The Sun.
Sir Richard Dearlove dismissed alarmist concerns following the Republican strongman’s epic election win and said he could crack down on Putin despite leaked plans suggesting a softer approach.
President-elect Donald Trump speaks with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin[/caption]
Donald Trump with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, September 2024[/caption]
The ex-Spook insisted Trump wouldn’t “risk his reputation as a strong president by selling Ukraine down the river”.
Sir Dearlove said: “An awful lot of people are throwing their toys out of the pram and being very alarmed at this point in time.
“But I think we need to be much more balanced, much more reserved and, you know, take stock.
“Obviously there’s going to be momentum generated by his administration for some sort of deal or settlement in Ukraine.”
Details of a possible Trump plan to end the war emerged after a call with Ukrainian President Zelensky following his victory.
His plan involves a demilitarised zone across the front line and a promise from Kyiv not to join NATO for 20 years, the Wall Street Journal reports.
In exchange, the US would continue to arm Ukraine to the teeth to prevent Putin from invading again.
But the US would not send troops to enforce the buffer zone nor finance the mission.
MISSILE PERMISSIONS
Ukraine has long pushed for a relaxing of permissions on its use of American and British weaponry – hoping to fire long-range rockets inside Putin’s territory.
Without air force cover to protect from enemy attacks, Kyiv’s forces argue the broader missile use would make all the difference in pushing back Russian forces.
Western allies have hesitated to green light their use for fear of escalation between Putin and Nato.
Sir Dearlove said: “I think that Trump is less risk averse than Biden was in terms of how American weapons might be used in Ukraine.
“So you could imagine a situation where he takes the restraints off Ukrainian use of longer range American missile capability which the Ukrainians will have.
“The military balance that could be changed very rapidly if the Ukrainians are given the green light to strike more deeply into Russia.
“They’re fighting at a disadvantage that we all know about.”
CRUNCH TALKS WITH PUTIN
Touching on Putin’s relationship with Trump, Sir Dearlove explained that the Russian dictator’s apparent respect for him could play well for the future of the war.
After Don’s impressive political comeback Trump, Russian tyrant Putin sent his congratulations.
He praised Trump’s “manly” response to his attempted assassination earlier in the year and said he is “ready” to speak with him.
Sir Dearlove thinks it’s “certainly possible” that Trump will be able to crack down on Putin and force negotiations on ending the brutal war by heading in to talks with a fierce approach.
He said: “I’ve always believed talking to ones enemies, if it’s possible, is probably better than having no lines of communication at all.
“The context of a talk between Putin and Trump is, in fact, Russian logistics in relation to the Ukrainian war, taking a bigger hammering.
“We all know that Trump is transactional. You go into transactional negotiations with an advantage so I don’t think he’s going to want to play a weak hand.
“And I just don’t see Trump in current circumstances selling Ukraine down the river, you know.”
Why does Ukraine need permission to fire long-range missiles?
BY Ellie Doughty, Foreign News Reporter
UKRAINE currently has access to British Storm Shadow and American ACATMS missiles – but are limited in use for fear of escalation.
There are concerns that Putin’s so far empty threats over nuclear revenge could be realised if Western weapons struck targets on his soil.
Kremlin hardliners could also push for attacks against missile strongholds in Nato countries – such as an airbase in Poland.
This would invoke Nato’s Article 5 mutual defence clause – triggering a wider war with Russia.
Kyiv argues that it needs to strike Russian air bases, ammunition depots and other key military targets to fend off Putin’s attacks.
It needs to be able to take out Russian bomber fleets which drop lethal “glide bombs” on Ukrainian targets.
And the move would force Russia to shift its air force further back for protection, using more fuel to get to the frontline and limit the number of feasible hits.
So far Ukraine has only been able to use Western long-range rockets against targets in occupied Crimea and some other regions annexed illegally by Russia.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Zelensky made a renewed call for the relaxing of missile policy ahead of a September summit in Washington DC between President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.
Politico reported at the time that the White House was finalising a plan to ease missile restrictions – but this has yet to materialise.
AID FOR UKRAINE
Trump’s comments on Ukraine have sparked concerns about aid – with the US being Kyiv’s largest donor in the almost three years since Vlad invaded.
He has questioned the amount being funnelled out of Washington – and hammered Nato partners in Europe for not meeting their pledges.
Sir Dearlove thinks Trump’s appointment may just push the UK and other Western allies to bolster support for Kyiv’s armies.
“If he’s insisting on European nations shouldering more of the defence burden and not looking to the United States to guarantee Europe’s security, in my book that’s a good thing. It’s long overdue,” he said.
“We all need to raise our game in terms of defense expenditure, and I’m rather appalled that this Government has put that, as it were, into a secondary position.
“We have relied a bit too heavily on the United States as suppliers of weapons and money to Ukraine.
“I think that the Europeans need to get their act together and hugely raise their spending.”
Sir Dearlove – who said he operated as a “shuttle” between No.10 and the White House during the Blair and Bush years – thinks Trump is likely a stronger choice for policy on Ukraine than Harris would have been.
He said: “The Biden Administration’s line on Ukraine, eventually it reached the right place, but it was very reluctant to, you know, so the build up was very slow.
“It could have been done much more quickly, maybe with Trump we would be in a more clear cut situation.
“As far as Harris is concerned, I think on foreign policy she was an unknown quantity.
“I don’t think we have any idea how things would have played out under her, and I mean, Trump does have one time experience under his belt.”
