Donald Trump has done what other Western leaders, including lamentable Starmer, merely pontificate about: he’s holding nations accountable for fuelling Vladimir Putin’s barbaric war by buying Russian oil and gas.
As an American who grew up admiring Britain’s defiant resolve—Churchill’s stand against tyranny, Thatcher’s triumph in the Falklands — I’m both stirred by Trump’s audacity and appalled by Britain’s impotence under Starmer’s limp leadership.
With Ukraine’s agony stretching into its third year, it’s Washington, not Westminster, nor Brussels wielding the moral and economic clout to halt a European conflict.
For years, Britain’s chattering classes, from Islington salons to Fleet Street’s sanctimonious corners, dismissed Trump as a reckless dilettante, soft on Russia and driven by ego.
Yet, as Ukraine bleeds and Putin’s war chest swells with oil revenue, it’s Trump—not Starmer, not Brussels—who’s taken a sledgehammer to the Kremlin’s lifeline.
On August 6, he imposed a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods entering the US, targeting India’s soaring Russian oil imports, now exceeding two million barrels daily—a grotesque surge since Ukraine’s invasion.
Days later, he vowed another 25 per cent levy, a 50 per cent total that’s among the most punishing trade penalties America has ever unleashed.
This is no mere gesture. Trump’s executive order is crystal clear: India’s bargain-basement Russian oil—snapped up at a 15 per cent discount—bankrolls Putin’s aggression while British taxpayers and Western arms prop up Ukraine.
Trump just took a sledgehammer to the Kremlin and exposed Starmer's hand. This changes everything - Lee Cohen | Getty Images
The White House’s rationale cuts through the fog: “India’s importation of Russian Federation oil undermines U.S. efforts to counter Russia’s harmful activities.”
Trump wields trade not for votes but to draw a stark moral line, reasserting American dominance. While Europe dithers and Starmer prevaricates, it’s the US that acts with principle and resolve to end this deadly conflict.
India, predictably, is furious. PM Modi, once Trump’s diplomatic ally, cries foul, claiming the tariffs are “unjustified” and painting India as a victim of Western bullying.
But the truth is stark: India is profiting from discounted Russian crude while Britain and its allies bear the cost of Kyiv’s survival. Modi’s response—threats of retaliation, paused U.S. defence deals, and a sanctimonious PR blitz — highlights the hypocrisy.
He points fingers at Europe, which, shamefully, is estimated to still get around 15 per cent of its gas from Russia in mid-2025, down from 40 per cent pre-war. The EU’s response? Endless “roadmaps” and 2027 deadlines, funnelling billions to Moscow with every month of delay.
But it’s Britain’s disgraceful absence from this fight that truly rankles. A nation that once defined Western resolve, under Starmer, is a shadow of its former self.
Trump has handed Britain a golden ticket: US tariffs on British exports are just 10 per cent, compared to 15 per cent for the EU and 30 per cent for China, with non-compliant nations facing up to 56 per cent.
This isn’t mere favouritism; it’s a challenge to lead, to harness the Anglo-American alliance and drive global action against Russia’s energy stranglehold.
So where is Starmer? Mired in platitudes, offering no G7 energy initiative, no plan to replace India’s Russian oil with Western alternatives, not even a whisper of pressure on Europe to ditch Putin’s gas.
Starmer’s diplomatic chit-chat with Trump in July 2025 and vague promises of Ukraine peacekeeping are pitifully inadequate. This is not leadership; it’s capitulation.
Starmer’s silence shames Britain’s heritage. The days of Churchill’s defiance or Thatcher’s iron will feel distant when Labour’s leader can’t muster a spark of vision.
Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak at least grasped Britain’s role on the world stage. Starmer, by contrast, seems content to let Trump shoulder the burden while Britain skulks in the wings.
It’s an embarrassment—not just to those of us who cherish the special relationship but to every Briton who expects their nation to lead, not follow.
The EU, meanwhile, cloaks its inaction in moralising rhetoric. For all its lectures on “European values,” Brussels funds Putin’s war with every gas deal it delays.
Trump’s tariffs expose this cowardice, daring Europe to match American action. Britain, with its lighter tariffs and historic clout, has a unique chance to rally the West. Yet Starmer squanders it, too timid to seize the moment or challenge Europe’s inertia.
Let’s be blunt: every barrel of Russian oil powers another Russian missile over Ukrainian skies. Trump’s risking higher oil prices, strained U.S.-India ties, and domestic backlash to do what’s right. Britain, under Starmer, risks nothing but its own irrelevance.
Why no campaign to shame Europe into cutting Putin’s gas profits? Why no push to lead a G7 energy fund to replace Russian oil with Western supplies? The Anglo-American alliance, once a beacon of freedom, demands more than Labour’s spineless equivocation.
As an American who still believes in Britain’s greatness, I ask: when will Starmer find the courage to act? Trump’s shown leadership isn’t about consensus or caution—it’s about doing what’s right. Britain must rise, not just for Ukraine but for its own legacy.
If the free world can’t unite now, when Putin’s war thrives on our money, when will it ever? Starmer’s Britain risks ignominy in the history books.
More From GB News