Burnham is jetting to Kyiv as Russians rage at UK drone raids
Andy Burnham, the UK Prime Minister, is travelling to Kyiv to mark Ukraine's independence day and reaffirm British support, in a trip that comes as tensions with Russia sharply escalate over the use of UK-supplied drones in strikes deep inside Russian territory. The Kremlin has warned of "consequences" for Britain's growing involvement and has recalled its ambassador, Andrey Kelin, after seven years in post, declaring relations "at an unprecedentedly low level" and accusing London of choosing "a path of confrontation."
During the visit, marking the 35th anniversary of Ukrainian independence, Burnham will accept an award recognising UK support and chair his first meeting of the "coalition of the willing", the UK-France-led group backing Ukraine. The government has also cleared defence firm MBDA to release classified details on UK components used in the French Scalp missile, a version of Storm Shadow, as Ukraine and France explore setting up local Scalp assembly lines. Russia has not named a replacement ambassador, and its interests in the UK will now be handled by chargé d'affaires Vasily Tsyganov, fuelling speculation Moscow may be downgrading diplomatic ties.
- Burnham visits Kyiv for independence day amid Russian anger over UK drones
- Russia recalls its UK ambassador, citing "unprecedentedly low" relations
- UK backs new Scalp missile tech-sharing and chairs "coalition of the willing"
New here? Start with this
Andy Burnham is the UK Prime Minister, and he is due to visit Kyiv around Ukraine's independence day to show continued British backing for Ukraine as it defends itself against Russia's invasion. The trip comes at a tense moment: Ukraine has been using drones supplied by the UK to strike targets deep inside Russia, and Moscow has reacted angrily, warning of unspecified "consequences" and pulling its long-serving ambassador out of London.
Britain has been one of Ukraine's most prominent backers since Russia's full-scale invasion began in 2022, supplying weapons, training and diplomatic support. It also co-leads, alongside France, a group of nations known as the "coalition of the willing" that coordinates support for Kyiv, and has supplied missile technology used in systems such as Storm Shadow and its French equivalent, Scalp.
The dispute over the ambassador matters because it signals how far relations between London and Moscow have deteriorated, with Russia describing ties as being at their lowest point in years. How the UK and its allies continue to support Ukraine, and how Russia responds, remains central to the wider war and to Western nations' relationships with Moscow.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of the government's approach argue that Ukraine, having been invaded, has every right to strike the military infrastructure enabling Russian attacks, and that Britain has a moral and strategic duty to help a democratic ally defend itself rather than accept a slow erosion of its sovereignty. They see Burnham's visit, the coalition of the willing, and the clearance for Scalp-related technical cooperation as proportionate, alliance-strengthening steps that signal resolve to Moscow and reassure Kyiv at a symbolically important moment. On this view, hesitating or softening support in the face of Kremlin threats would reward intimidation and weaken deterrence for the future.
The case against
Critics who share sympathy for Ukraine's plight can nonetheless argue that deepening UK involvement in long-range strikes and missile technology sharing risks drawing Britain further into direct confrontation with a nuclear-armed power, at a moment when the Kremlin is already signalling a serious diplomatic rupture by recalling its ambassador. They contend that prudent statecraft means weighing the value of solidarity against the danger of escalation spirals that neither side fully controls, and that ministers should be more transparent with the public about the risks and endgame of steadily expanding military commitments rather than allowing them to accumulate incrementally. On this view, robust support for Ukraine and caution about escalatory signalling are not mutually exclusive, and the balance currently being struck deserves closer scrutiny.