Keir Starmer targets Russia at UN Security Council

The Prime Minister said Moscow's war on Ukraine was the “greatest violation of the UN charter in a generation”.

That Keir Starmer would continue the Conservatives’ full-throated support for Ukraine was never in question. But, at the UN Security Council yesterday, it became clear that his reason for doing so is slightly different from the Tories. He delivered a bullish, impassioned condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Flanked by David Lammy and the UK’s ambassador to the UN, Barbara Woodward, he called it “illegal” and the “greatest violation of the UN charter in a generation”.

It’s worth quoting the Prime Minister in full:

“I wonder how Russia can show its face in this building – 600,000 Russian soldiers have been killed and wounded in this war. And for what? The UN Charter, which they sit here to uphold, speaks of human dignity, not treating your own citizens as bits of meat to fling into the grinder.”

Beforehand, Starmer called for a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. “There is no military solution here,” he insisted. But his language was much more guarded; his primary focus was clearly uttering the strongest possible condemnation of Putin’s war in Ukraine and, more importantly, ensuring “accountability for those violating the UN charter”.

Remember that in opposition Starmer made restoring Britain’s reputation on human rights and international law a central promise. His voice would ring with genuine emotion when condemning the Tories for their insouciant approach to international constraints. His Security Council speech was the clearest example yet that Starmer intends to deliver on that promise.

Boris Johnson was strident in his support for Ukraine, no doubt. But Starmer’s framing is different: he is condemning Russia because they have violated international law and the UN charter itself. Johnson was motivated by a Churchillian fight against a tyrannical aggressor but his government was happy to admit to their own breaking of international law, as they did with regards to trade in Northern Ireland, for instance.

Starmer speaks in similar moral terms, sure. But the former human rights lawyer is more comfortable reasoning through laws. The Prime Minister’s speech, therefore, should be seen as affirmation that this new government will stand behind the international law and the system it underpins.