I spend most of my time focused on arts and culture. It is easy to stay there. To scroll past stories like this, to assume they sit somewhere else, far removed from daily life.

I am not an expert in geopolitics. But that distance is exactly the point.

Because from here, it can feel like something happening elsewhere. Until you stop and consider how far the consequences actually travel, and who is left to carry them.

This column comes from a place of privilege. The UK remains relatively stable, with democratic systems that continue to function, despite the circus performed within them.

I hadn’t expected my last column to feel so quickly justified. I thought I might have been jumping the gun. But in this climate, it is increasingly clear that the UK needs to be thinking more seriously about resilience, from energy contingencies to how we coordinate with neighbouring countries if things begin to shift.

These conversations are likely already happening. But there is little reassurance in how they are reflected publicly.

Both Russia and China have entered the conversation. For now, it remains diplomatic. But the more actors involved, the harder it becomes to assume stability.

I don’t enjoy thinking the worst in anyone. But these are big personalities, bigger politics, and even bigger consequences.

It’s difficult to reconcile the language of diplomacy with the reality of how these situations unfold. Countries speak of cooperation, stability, and equal footing, but when pressure builds, those ideals often give way to force.

That may sound obvious. It is. But what has changed is the scale.

The consequences are no longer contained, and the risks are no longer local. No country can afford escalation at this level, yet it continues regardless.

More to the point, what happens next.

If you’ve read this far, you’re probably asking the same questions. How this ends. What the next steps look like. How much damage can be avoided, if any at all.

From here, there are no clear answers. But that uncertainty doesn’t remove responsibility.

The UK is not at the centre of these decisions. But it is not separate from them either. Politically, economically, and historically, it remains tied to the outcomes.

Which raises a more uncomfortable question. Not just how this ends, but what responsibility looks like after it does.

We may be distant from the conflict, but that distance is not the same as detachment.

Given the history behind it, the UK is not separate from the structures and decisions that shape moments like this. That makes the consequences harder to ignore.

This is not about guilt, or a sense of helplessness. It is about responsibility.

Not just to acknowledge what happens after the fact, but to take international relationships seriously enough to prevent these situations from escalating in the first place.