Sir Keir Starmer has told the Ukrainian president that British missiles can be used for defensive strikes against targets inside Russia.

The announcement came as the new British prime minister met Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the NATO summit in Washington DC on Wednesday.

The decision over the Storm Shadow missiles, which has been welcomed by Ukraine, represents a hawkish shift in policy from the stance taken by the former Conservative government.

In a post on X after the meeting with Sir Keir, President Zelenskyy said: "This morning, I learned about the permission to use Storm Shadow miss­iles against military targets in Russian territory.

“Today we had the opportunity to discuss the practical implementation of this decision. I’m grateful to the UK for its unwavering support for Ukraine and our people.”

However, reacting to the news, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman said: “If this is so then, of course, this is another absolutely irresponsible step towards escalating tensions and seriously escalating the situation.”

Dimitry Peskov told Reuters: “We will be watching this very thoroughly and respond accordingly.”

  • @wholookshere
    link
    31 month ago

    What?

    That’s the entire point. They haven’t been allowed to hit valid Russian targets inside Russia. That’s what they’ve been given permission to do.

    You’re the one brining children hospitals into this.

    • Yes. I am bringing children’s hospitals in to this as an example for why additional scrutiny is required when attacking targets inside Russia.

      I’m not sure you read my comment fully.

      • @wholookshere
        link
        21 month ago

        I’m not sure you understood mine.

        When you invade another country, expect that country to attack you in your territory too.

        I said I don’t see why I valid target would be made invalid just because it’s inside Russia.

        Then you went on about children’s hospitals, which you know, are not valid targets.

        • Sorry if I misunderstood. I’ll reply on the basis of your latest comment.

          I said I don’t see why I valid target would be made invalid just because it’s inside Russia

          Is anybody saying a target would be made invalid just because it’s in Russia? My point was all targets inside Russia are open to increased scrutiny because of targeting inside Russia.

          The children’s hospital example is because Russia likely does not have children’s hospitals (or other non-military assets) inside Ukraine, and therefore Russian targets inside Ukraine are almost certainly going to be valid. On the other hand, when some high up revenge obsessed Ukrainian military personnel decide they want to target Russian children’s hospitals, it’s useful for their targets to have increased scrutiny to prevent an additional civilian massacre.

          Just to clarify, the children’s hospital example is being used to convey an obviously non military target which additional scrutiny can prevent from being attacked.

          I’m going to stop replying to this thread now as I’m not sure I can make my point much clearer. I might re-read through the context though just in case I misunderstood something somewhere. I do Lemmy on mobile so sometimes it’s difficult to track a conversation.

          • @wholookshere
            link
            11 month ago

            Re-reading your comment I see where I misread yours and instead of scrutiny for some reason I heard not allowed. But funnily enough, people arguing that have absolutely replied to me saying that Ukraine doesn’t want to start a full out war with Russia.