There are no ‘red lines’ in support of Ukraine, France’s foreign minister tells the BBC

There are no “red lines” when it comes to supporting Ukraine, the French Foreign Minister told the BBC.

Jean-Noël Barrot said Ukraine could fire France’s long-range missiles at Russia “as a defensive measure”, but he would not confirm whether French weapons had been used.

“The goal is set… our messages to President Zelensky were well received,” he said in an exclusive interview on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg.

French President Macron has indicated that France is willing to allow its missiles to be fired at Russia earlier this year. But Barrot’s comments are important, in the coming days after the US and UK’s long-range missiles they were used that way for the first time.

Barrot, who held talks with Foreign Secretary David Lammy in London on Friday, said Western allies should not limit their support for Ukraine against Russia, and “not set and reveal red lines”.

When asked if this would mean even French soldiers in the war, he said: “We are not rejecting any method.”

“We will support Ukraine deeply and for as long as necessary. Why? Because our security is at risk. Every time the Russian army advances in one square kilometer, the threat gets one square kilometer closer to Europe,” he said.

Barrot pointed out that Ukraine has been invited to join NATO, as President Zelensky has requested. “We are open to extending the invitation, so in our discussions with friends and allies, friends and allies of Ukraine, we are working to bring them closer to our positions,” said Barrot.

And he suggested that the West would have to increase the amount spent on defence, noting: “It is true that we will have to spend more if we want to do more, and I think we have to face these new challenges.”

Barrot’s comments come later week of significant increase in Ukraine – with UK and US long-range missiles fired at Russia for the first time, Russia fired at a new type of missile and Vladimir Putin suggesting the possibility of world war.

One UK government source describes this period as a “tough point” ahead of winter, and ahead of Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

But how should Ukraine’s allies respond to Putin’s threats and Ukraine’s increasingly dangerous position? I have been speaking to sources inside and outside the UK government to understand what the next steps might be.

Top of the list is keeping money and military support flowing. “I was going to come up with European money moving through Ukraine and go after Russian assets,” one source said. “We need to figure out what war chest Ukraine needs to get to fight through 2025 to 2026 — it’s hard to ask the US taxpayer to pay for it.”

Not surprisingly, there is a strong feeling in the defense world that increasing the defense budget is part of the answer. The head of the military, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, who visited President Zelensky this week, told us two days ago that spending should increase.

But with money tight, and the government reluctant to even set a date for reaching its goal of spending 2.5% of GDP on defense, a sudden injection of billions more is unlikely.

Government sources stress the long-term commitments the UK has already made, particularly supporting Ukraine with drones.

Intelligence we can reveal this weekend shows Ukraine used drones in mid-to-late September to attack four Russian ammunition depots, hundreds of miles from Ukraine. The attack is understood to have successfully destroyed the largest amount of ammunition supplied by Russia and North Korea during the conflict so far. It has not been confirmed whether these drones are supplied by the UK or others.

They also highlighted an agreement signed between the UK and Ukraine in July to help the country arm itself over time.

How about answering Putin’s rhetoric is increasingly threatening? The message from many sources is: don’t panic.

Another said: “All this way he is threatening us – we mustn’t let him get in our way”. What is different now, according to one former minister, is that Putin’s comments are designed to draw attention to the president-elect. “Russia wants to help Trump on the grounds of cutting off aid”. If it feels like the conflict is becoming unbearably dangerous, perhaps the next President will be more eager to end it.

When it comes to the next President, there is fear while Trump’s plan is still unclear. It hopes to put Ukraine in the best possible position for any negotiations, several sources said, and a government insider told me that could involve boosting Trump’s negotiating skills. “Getting it [Trump] in an attitude where it is good for Ukraine – so you look like someone who stopped the war and not who lost Ukraine.”

On the side there are also proposals to make Ukraine consider what would be an acceptable way out of the conflict. In public, the ministers will always say that Russia should not be rewarded for illegal attacks and that it is because of Ukraine, and Ukraine alone decides when to negotiate and to give any compromise.

But the source admits that in the government there is a realization that “all negotiations must include trade.”

“We have to think about what could be the quid pro quo in Ukraine,” said the former minister. “If [Zelensky] he had to agree, what do you get? Does he get NATO membership to ensure security in the long term? “

There is also the realization that the threat from Russia will remain – whether it is in Ukraine or trying to destroy our streets. “They are really allied with the North Koreans who are fighting now, and the Iranians are supplying them,” a government source said. “We can’t see them as anything other than a threat now.”

Perhaps the truth is a constant threat to Europe’s eastern fringes. Perhaps Russia’s aggression and dangerous alliances are a return to normality after a brief good spell in the mid-90s. “Get used to it,” said another source, “it’s the way we’ve lived forever.”