Last Wednesday, the prime minister suffered the humiliating departure of Lord Geidt, the so-called “ethics” adviser. Johnson was facing a crucial meeting with northern lawmakers ahead of the upcoming Wakefield election. It was a whip of three lines: nowhere was his presence more vital to boost morale and find votes. However, shortly after Geidt’s statement, Johnson canceled his ticket to Yorkshire in favor of a ticket across Europe deep into Ukrainian territory. She clearly and desperately needed the hug and consoling conversation of Zelenskiy’s friend. Knitting from the batteries of Putin’s rockets is clearly not one of the weapons of a group of Tories. An investigation by the newspaper i revealed that these sudden clashes with Zelensky coincided exactly with the moments of Johnson’s most intense embarrassment. On June 6, Sir Graham Brady announced that Tory MPs were ready to vote for their party leadership. Within three hours, Johnson called Zelensky. One month earlier, on May 5, the day of the local elections with terrible results, Johnson sought solace from the same source. On April 30, there was devastating news of the resignation of MP Neil Parish. Johnson called in Kyiv. On April 23, it was reported that the Met was issuing fines for a bottle-locking party on Downing Street. Johnson called in Kyiv. On April 16, when the UN rejected Rwanda’s plan, Johnson telephoned Kyiv. On April 12, Johnson was fined by the Metropolitan Police for Partygate and called in Kyiv. Was it really to discuss strategy in Donbass? It was definitely just a celebrity shoulder to cry on and a good news headline. One wonders what the hell they are talking about. Does Johnson argue that Vladimir Putin should be a complete loser compared to his Kir Starmer? Are they discussing peace in our time or what did they have for tea? All we know is that in almost every circumstance, Johnson blows up another tranche of British taxpayer money to help Ukraine. It must be the most expensive psychotherapy session in history. Of course all these calls can be pure coincidence. All leaders need advice and comfort and often find them in strange places. Churchill had his Normanbrook, Thatcher had his Whitlaus, Blair had Madelson. As he prepared for the post, Johnson fired all reasonable sources of impartial advice, relying on the unreliable Dominic Cummings. Today he seems to be relying on an inexperienced wife and a Ukrainian comedian who has become a leader, who is supposed to have time to kill to alleviate Johnson’s domestic troubles in the face of the most pressing concerns of dealing with a bloodthirsty invader. Johnson has clearly yielded to the last resort of any troubled leader, whether authoritarian or democrat, who is to find a good war. The start of a war saved Thatcher’s predecessor, and the battle with a war made Churchill an idol. We should perhaps be thankful that Johnson did not start his own. Instead, he has grabbed someone else. Is it really the best he can do?
