to signing ukraine's commitment to signing a minerals and security deal with the united states. meanwhile, jd vance is facing backlash after calling britain's military contributions to the ukraine war disrespectful. amid a growing row between the uk and the us over aid to ukraine, the us vice president appeared to dismiss sir keir starmer's offer to send uk troops to help the peace. british politicians are now demanding an apology, with the defence secretary calling vance's comments misjudged. >> if you want real security guarantees, if you want to actually ensure that vladimir putin does not invade ukraine again, the very best security guarantee is to give americans economic upside in the future of ukraine. that is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn't fought a war in 30 or 40 years. >> meanwhile, reform uk leader nigel farage, this very own show he has hit back at the us vice

president, saying he's wrong about britain's military role. >> jd vance is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. for 20 years in afghanistan, pro—rata our size against america's. we spent the same amount of money. we put the same amount of money. we put the same number of men and women in and we suffered the same losses. we stood by america all through those 20 years, putting in exactly the same contribution. and all right, they may be six times bigger, but we did our bit. so on this one jd is wrong. >> jd vance, though, has defended his comments, insisting he never mentioned the uk or france and has praised both countries for fighting bravely alongside the us. in other news tonight, the trial of triple killer karl clifford has heard he raped his ex—girlfriend in a violent sexual act of spite before murdering her and her family with a crossbow and knife. family with a crossbow and ane.the family with a crossbow and knife. the 26 year old admitted killing louise hunt, her mother carol and sister hannah at their hertfordshire home last july. but he denies rape. prosecutors say he carefully planned the attacks after miss hunt ended their relationship at. louise

described the relationship as sucking the life out of her before breaking up with kyle just weeks before the attack. the trial continues and the king has made a rare visit to a royal navy warship at sea, meeting sailors on hms prince of wales before its biggest mission yet. his majesty flew by helicopter to the aircraft carrier in the engush to the aircraft carrier in the english channel and thanked crew there for their extraordinarily valuable service, he said. the £3 billion ship will soon set sail for japan, £3 billion ship will soon set sail forjapan, leading £3 billion ship will soon set sail for japan, leading the £3 billion ship will soon set sail forjapan, leading the uk's strike group in a mission to boost defence partnerships. it's also the first time in nearly 40 years a reigning monarch has boarded a royal navy ship while at sea. >> i can only say that i take immense pride in you, the men and women who bring this vessel to life with such indomitable spirit for your vital service on behalf of us all. >> that's the news on gb news. i'll be back with you for a full

round up at 8:00. and, well, we heard from him during those headunes heard from him during those headlines there. let's hear from him live now. it's nigel farage. >> for the very latest gb news, direct your smartphone. sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code or go to gbnews.com/advent. >> michaela community school. >> michaela community school. >> good evening. well, boy, it's a fast moving and very important story. since i was last with you, we've had the meeting in the white house that erupted into a row. the american president and vice president, feeling that president zelenskyy was being ungrateful. but boy, did they snap back . somehow. did they snap back. somehow. i think that meeting that row was necessary. i think psychologically it was very difficult for the ukrainian president to go into a room to sign a document that begins a process that accepts losing crimea for good. and so i understand why zelenskyy, you

know, wasn't really very keen to do it. i then thought, well, it's only a matter of time before he comes back and signs this minerals agreement. but last night we saw with one of the news agencies, zelenskyy, saying that he thought the war could go on for a very, very long time. i have to say my heart sunk. and then of course, i woke to the news this morning, unsurprisingly, that trump said, that's it. no more. no more aid. it's all over. and then this afternoon, we get a long statement coming out from president zelenskyy. and it's very, very fulsome. he makes it very, very fulsome. he makes it very, very fulsome. he makes it very, very clear we are ready to work fast to end the war. he talks about prisoner releases. he talks about truces. he talks about reiterating ukraine's commitment to peace. he does, of course, make the point, quite sensibly, that any ceasefires would have to have russian support as well. and then he goes on to say, as regards the minerals agreement, ukraine is

ready to sign it at any time now. i think this is a good thing, not a bad thing. i think the minerals deal that the americans have put together is actually very, very clever. clever in the sense that it would mean many thousands of ukrainians of, of americans would be on ukrainian soil, plus tens of billions of dollars of american investment. it's also clever because if american technology is able to is able to extract the right quantities of rare earth metals, it will mean a lot of money, not just for america, but for ukraine as well. and this begins a conversation firstly about the ceasefire, which, as i say, has to include russia. but it also begins the conversation, the debate about whether or not the americans having that economic interest and human interest is enough of a security guarantee,

or if countries are going to need to send troops. and i think the real debate that people are going to be having over the next weeks, possibly months, and who knows, it could even be years, is should the uk send troops to ukraine? tweet please hashtag farage on gb news or email farage on gb news or email farage gb news. com i'm joined in the studio by rob clark, defence consultant and army veteran. plus i've got joe wardner, former conservative mp and minister, and joe phillips, journalist and former spin doctor rob. it's almost so fast moving that one's nervous to say anything, but i think , i think anything, but i think, i think this statement that we've seen from zelenskyy today, this is significant, isn't it? >> oh, there's no two ways about looking at it, nigel. it's hard to believe that evening the white house was 96 hours ago. events have moved so fastly and in particular today. i think it really it underlines this ukrainian perspective, almost of like a reset in relations with

washington, which for various reasons, i think is obviously important. i think first and foremost, a lot of people have asked me, whose fault was it last friday? was it president trump and jd vance? was it president zelenskyy? and honestly, i think a bit of both sides have to shoulder some of the burden in sort of how disastrous that meeting was. i think those of us who watched it have never seen anything like it. so this attempts a some sort of positive communication and reset to washington. >> maybe it was needed, maybe the funny sort of way it was needed. >> well, if it hasn't happened, i think we could see this deteriorating so fastly so quickly. and that would obviously, you know, the ramifications to european countries would then spiral out of control. so for good or for bad, i think it's happened. and i think now positive steps can be taken crucially going forwards. >> so this gets signed. i'm imagining within a week or so it will happen pretty quickly. i know it will. was zelenskyy bullied into this? >> i think to be honest, i think the realistic perspective was if he didn't sign it or if ukraine weren't prepared to come back to washington and renegotiate very quickly. i think he could have seen the us military aid

plummeting very, very fast. now, we've already seen that this morning or this afternoon here in london, the likelihood, the almost certainty that that's going to get paused, suspended temporarily for however long. but crucially, from a military perspective, i don't think that's going to make as much of an effort on the ground in ukraine on the front lines as some people suspect. so i think it's going to be interesting for the next few weeks, the next few months, how that's going to play out. but no, absolutely. i think it was in zelenskyy's personal and ukraine's interest for us to go forward. >> i think it really is a very common sense thing and it's the right thing, but it's just the beginning. so security guarantees that's going to be the next big debate. you know, i did 150