Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Ukraine Border: Russian Forces

Tuesday 20 April 2021 · 5 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 1 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Chris Bryant asked about the UK's response to the Russian military build-up near Ukraine's border, emphasizing the Budapest Memorandum's assurances and questioning the UK's commitment to uphold them.
  • The Foreign Secretary stated that the UK is working closely with NATO allies to deter Russia, reassure Ukraine, and de-escalate the situation.
  • Lisa Nandy questioned the delay in implementing recommendations regarding Russian threats and highlighted the Conservative party's financial ties to Russian-linked sources.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Chris Bryant Lab Rhondda and Ogmore
Ukraine
Context

Russian forces have increased at the border with Ukraine, raising concerns about peace and security in the region.

Question

What recent assessment has been made of the effect of increases in numbers of Russian forces at the border with Ukraine on peace and security in that region?

Answer from Dominic Raab

We have significant concerns about the recent Russian military build-up of forces on Ukraine's border. We are working with our allies—I was at a NATO meeting of Foreign and Defence Ministers last week—and our objective is to deter Russia, reassure Ukraine and de-escalate the situation.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific assessment not provided

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Chris Bryant Lab Rhondda and Ogmore
Ukraine
Context

The UK, Russia, and USA signed a memorandum in 1994 which issued assurances that these countries would respect Ukraine's independence, sovereignty, and existing borders.

Question

In 1994, the UK, Russia, and the United States of America signed the Budapest Memorandum, issuing not guarantees but assurances. Kiev surrendered 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads in return for these assurances. Is it now incumbent on us to make clear that we will continue providing political, diplomatic, financial, scientific, and military support to Ukraine?

Answer from Dominic Raab

I thank the hon. Gentleman, who has long-standing experience of this issue; I agree with his level of concern. There are three things that we are doing right now that matter. The first is holding Russia to its international commitments, including not just the ones that he mentioned, but the OSCE principles of accountability for the build-up of troops. We will continue our robust approach to sanctions and provide diplomatic support; since 2015, through Operation Orbital, we have trained more than 20,000 Ukrainian armed forces personnel.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Thomas Tugendhat Con Tonbridge
Defence Foreign Affairs
Context

The withdrawal from Afghanistan and the reduction in British Army troops have raised concerns about NATO's commitment to security.

Question

I welcome the Foreign Secretary's words, but has his Department assessed how Russia perceives these military changes? What diplomatic actions can be taken given that some elements might seem weaker?

Answer from Dominic Raab

I thank the Chair of the Select Committee, but I am afraid that he is wrong. It is vital that we increase the defence and security budget in a groundbreaking way; it must be agile and fit for future challenges. In Brussels on 14 April, I spoke to US Defence Secretary and Secretary of State along with other NATO Ministers about condemning Russia's troop build-up, assuring Ukraine, and de-escalating the situation.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Diplomatic steps not detailed

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q4 Lisa Nandy Lab Wigan
Brexit Foreign Affairs
Context

The UK remains a safe haven for Russian-linked sources and oligarchs despite the Intelligence and Security Committee's Russia report.

Question

Russia has amassed 100,000 troops on Ukraine's border; Alexei Navalny lies deteriorating in prison. Yet the Conservative party has taken £1 million from Russian-linked sources since the Foreign Secretary received the Russia report. What accounts for the delay in implementing these recommendations?

Answer from Dominic Raab

I thank the hon. Lady, but I have to say that her attempt is a weak weave of partisan political considerations in a serious international issue. We have taken multiple actions against Russian threats; introduced new powers at UK ports for security checks; are introducing legislation for additional tools to tackle hostile state activity; and will introduce an extension of Magnitsky sanctions soon.

Not addressed: Questioner's political motives

How: Political Points

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q5 Lisa Nandy Lab Wigan
Immigration Foreign Affairs Standards & Ethics
Context

The Conservative party has received £1 million from Russian-linked sources since receiving the Intelligence and Security Committee's Russia report. There have been no actions on golden visas or powers to sanction corrupt officials.

Question

We have had no action on golden visas, no sanctions against corrupt officials; half of laundered money from Russia goes through UK. The Conservative party has received £5 million since David Cameron became leader from a former Russian arms dealer who is 'untouchable' due to his Kremlin links. When will the 23 recommendations be implemented in full?

Answer from Dominic Raab

In relation to agent registration, the Home Secretary has already announced and proposed it. She is talking over me because she does not like my response; I galvanised international reaction against Putin when this Prime Minister was Foreign Secretary.

Not addressed: Implementation timeline

How: Campaigning, Political Points

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)