Donald Trump raises the stakes over Greenland

Now Donald Trump is actually threatening European allies over Greenland, not with war but with his favourite tool, trade tariffs - up by 25 per cent by June. He is aiming his tariffs at the UK, Denmark and others who have shown support for keeping Greenland under Denmark's wing. If anyone thought Trump was bluffing about wanting the US to take over Greenland, they will no longer be in doubt. He has decided that the huge island in its strategic location on the cusp of the Antarctic must be owned by the US for it to be defended properly against any threats of an invasion by Russia or China. If Russia or China genuinely have their eyes on Greenland, then Trump has an argument at least. Denmark won't be able to defend Greenland from a sudden surprise attack, nor will the other Nato countries who have sent a handful of troops to the island to demonstrate that the alliance can keep enemies at bay.I doubt it's a play by the Europeans which will impress or deter Trump. So will the tariffs work and force Denmark to give in and hand over Greenland? It looks unlikely but Trump is in a mood, after the successful regime-change operation in Venezeula, to move fast with the next country on his dream list of 2026 acquisitions - Greenland. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. I PROMISE YOU, YOU WILL LOVE IT.

CIA director in Caracas

It's amazing how things can change so dramatically. One moment the brutal Nicolas Maduro is in power in Venezuela, the next he is standing in a dock in a New York courtroom charged with drug-trafficking after being snatched from his compound home in Caracas by US special forces, and then John Ratcliffe, the CIA director is in town (Caracas) talking with the Donald Trumo-approved replacement for Maduro, his vice president, Delcy Rodriguez. All in a matter of two weeks. Ratcliffe was there yesterday (Thurs) and the two of them spoke about what was expected of her to get the country back to economic stability. She has already agreed to let US investment in to restore the oil industry and has released about 80 political prisoners, including some Americans. Washington and Caracas are in political, oil and diplomatic collaboration, and as a result, Ratcliffe is happy to fly into Caracas for a session with the new interim leader. The role of the CIA director is unique in US administrations, always used for the most sensitive of missions on behalf of the president. Ratcliffe has taken on the same super-envoy role carried out with such effect by Bill Burns, his predecessor in the Joe Biden era. Ratcliffe will know all of Delcy Rodriguez's secrets, including whatever skeletons she has in the cupboard, so the conversation they had together must have been fascinating. BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. AMAZON, WATERSTONES AND ROWANVALE BOOKS

Nato off to Greenland

Iran has been sorted - or so Donald Trump says - so now it's back to Greenland and the president's desire/intention to grab it for the sake of America's national security interests. Unsurprisingly, in a mini-summit yesterday between Denmark, the mothership of Greenland, and two US envoys, Marco Rubio, secretary of state, and JD Vance, vice president, the Danish government representatives came away from the meeting saying there was a huge divide between the parties. JD Vance, in particular, seems very bullish about Greenland becoming US property and hasn't much time for Danes who say:"Leave off, it's ours and has been for centuries." But the most interesting development was the decision by Nato to send troops to Greenland to bolster the island's forces and act as a sort of deterrent to the US which already has around 100 military personnel based at its missile early warning facility in the northwest. What a few dozen, or is it a few hundred, Nato troops exercising on the island can do to stop the US from grabbing it by military force, I can't imagine. Especially when you discover that the British government has decided to get involved and has sent ONE officer to join the party. One person, that's it. No one is going to be impressed by that, least of all, Trump who loves boasting that the US has the finest military in the world. After Operation Absolute Resolve in Venezuela and the snatching of President Nicolas Maduro, I don't think there can be many on the planet who can disagree with Trump. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER - AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS AND WATERSTONES

Trump's options for Iran

President Trump is said to be less bullish about the prospect of a strike on Iran than he was during its summer war with Israel. Over the last few days, however, he has been briefed on the options available to make good on his promise to come to the aid of the protesters facing a bloody crackdown from the regime. "He means what he says," explained the White House spokeswoman, Anna Kelly. Sources suggest that Trump's inner circle, including Marco Rubio, JD Vance and intelligence officials are presenting the president with options "without preference". But with US forces withdrawing from bases in the Middle East, there is growing certainty that he will act. The decision to strike could come down to an effective "coin flip" between the options available, a source told The Washington Post on Wednesday. There is pressure at home to reckon with, too. Many of Trump's Maga supporters do not favour entanglement in a foreign conflict, least of all in the Middle East. "We don’t care about making Iran great again," said Trump's advisor Steve Bannon. More than half of US adults, meanwhile, believe Trump has “gone too far” in using the US military to intervene in other countries, according to an AP-NORC poll. The scenarios currently being considered include military action, but also cyberattacks on the Iranian government’s infrastructure. Trump has a number of options, then, to make good on his promise that "help is on its way" for Iranians. These are the most likely. MILITARY OPTION. As yet, there is no obvious sign of a switch of US military assets to focus on the new crisis. The Middle East region comes under US Central Command which has given no confirmation of new orders from the White House. However, one of the military options already confirmed by the White House is airstrikes on key targets in Iran. The US has multiple choices for carrying out such attacks, not least B-2 Spirit bombers located at Whiteman air force base in Missouri. The B-2’s long-range capability, with or without midair refuelling, provides Trump with the most devastating airborne conventional weapon system in the world. B-2s took part in the attacks on Iran’s main nuclear sites in June, dropping 14 GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs) on Fordo and Natanz uranium-enrichment facilities in Operation Midnight Hammer, without being detected by Iranian radars. While it’s unlikely the Pentagon would want to use up more of the limited supply of 30,000lb bunker-busting bombs, B-2s from Missouri, or potentially from RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire if they were to be transferred to the UK, could be armed with the highly effective JDAMs (Joint Direct Attack Munitions). The question needs to be asked: what would airstrikes achieve in terms of bringing the Iranian regime’s slaughter of protesters to an end; and what regional repercussions could follow? With Iran’s ability to detect incoming aircraft or missiles dramatically degraded by Israeli air attacks in 2024 that destroyed many of Tehran’s advanced Russian S-300 air defense systems, the most obvious targets would include the headquarters of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, based in Tehran, and the network of command bunkers and communication sites which coordinate the IRGC’s military action against the protesters. Trump has also hinted in the past that he might decide to target the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who normally resides in the so-called Leadership House in Tehran’s district 11, although reports have suggested he has moved for his safety to an underground bunker in the northeast of the city. During the US strikes in June, Trump said he knew where Khamenei was hiding but held off from targeting him, “at least for now”. Any choice of target for airstrikes is bound to provoke retaliation against the 2,500 US troops based in Iraq or the 10,000 military personnel at Al Udeid airbase in Qatar. Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, has warned that Iran is ready for war with the US. Iran launched missiles against the Qatar base in June following the US strikes on nuclear facilities. A former senior US defence official highlighted one other possible option. “Seizing oil tankers bound from Iran could trigger a collapse of Iran’s economy. But it would take time, perhaps months.” CYBER OPTION. In collaboration with Israel the US has demonstrated offensive cyber capability to target Iran. In 2009, for example, a computer worm codenamed Stuxnet was inserted into the country's gas centrifuge system, vital for enriching uranium for a nuclear weapon, causing extensive damage. However, in the context of the current wave of protests, cyber operations, run by US Cyber Command, could be used to target Iran’s propaganda communications networks and the state-run media. “Cyber operations could also be targeted at Iran’s critical infrastructure, such as electrical power, energy pipelines and transportation systems,” the former US defence official said. Iran has cut off phone services and the internet to disrupt the ability of protest leaders to coordinate demonstrations. Trump has been in discussions with Elon Musk to get him to replace the internet system with the help of his Starlink satellite system. ESPIONAGE OPTION. The CIA and Israel’s Mossad intelligence service have “smuggling routes” into Iran which have been used in the past, particularly by Israeli agents. But covert espionage missions would be the most dangerous option because of the risk of being exposed. Mossad has a history of successful targeted assassinations against Iranian nuclear scientists. The US, under Trump in his first term, tracked and killed Qassem Soleimani, commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force in a drone attack outside Baghdad airport in Iraq on January 3, 2020. It was a joint CIA and special operations mission. Covert missions inside Iran would take months to plan. The Mossad, however, has claimed in recent days that its agents are among the demonstrators on the streets, writing in Farsi on social media: “Go out together into the streets. The time has come. We are with you. Not only from a distance and verbally. We are with you in the field.” DIPLOMACY OPTION. The White House says Iranian officials have been in touch to try and start negotiations but then, on Tuesday, Trump said he would no longer be discussing the crisis with representatives of Tehran amid the growing violence. “Given where we are at this point, I don’t see diplomacy having any more value than it would have in 1956 during the Hungarian uprising [the rebellion against Soviet control which led to Moscow sending in tanks to crush the protests],” the former defence official said. With Iran, however, there is alway the nuclear card. There is evidence that the Iranian authorities are attempting to repair and rebuild the damaged uranium-enrichment plants hit by the US B-2 bombers. Using the potential leverage of future US strikes on the key facilities, Trump could put maximum pressure on the Tehran regime finally to give up its suspected clandestine nuclear weapons programme in return for a partial lifting of sanctions. This could help to revive the economy and bring an end to the murderous confrontation between protesters and security authorities across the country. Trump has already imposed 25 per cent tariffs on all countries trading with Iran. But even tighter sanctions, effectively destroying the economy, would run the risk of accelerating the toll of deaths. Unless, of course, Trump’s overarching plan is not just to stop the killings but to engineer regime-change in which case all the above options could be deployed. BUY MY NEW SPY THRILLER AGENT REDRUTH WHICH HAS A STRONG RUSSIAN THEME. AMAZON, WATERSTONES AND ROWANVALE BOOKS

Are US military strikes on Iran the best option?

US presidents turning to the military to resolve a crisis abroad has become a familiar pattern. Every US president in recent memory has done just this; even Barack Obama became an enthusiast for sending off armed drones to kill terrorists, and attacked Isis in Syria with a long bombing campaign; Bill Clinton was fond of the Tomahawk option; George W Bush....well, he invaded Iraq. Joe Biden approved the fatal drone attack on Osama bin Laden's successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri; Trump Part One authorised the killing by drone of Qasem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's Quds Force, the overseas-operating arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps; Trump Part Two has already taken military action in Venezuela, Syria, Somalia, Iran and threatened action elsewhere. Now Trump has to decide whether there is a real point in striking at Iran to stop the killings of protesters in the streets. The Iranian regime, symbolised by the US-hating Supreme Leader Ayatollah al-Khameini, looks like it is nearing the end of its time. Would a few US missile strikes help the regime on its way or give renewed determination to face up to the US, and fight back with retaliatory attacks on US forces in the Middle East, like they did many times in the past? Maybe the regime is doomed even without a push from the US. But for that to happen, the whole of the huge security apparatus in Iran would have to collapse. It's difficult to imagine that happening. So pressure from the US, military or otherwise, looks inevitable.

How can Trump stop the killings in Iran?

The killings in the streets of Iranian cities are continuing. More than 500 protesters shot dead by security forces aiming to kill. It's a shocking scene which we have witnessed many times over the years. This is dictatorship repression on an alarming scale. What can Donald Trump do to stop it? He has promised to intervene. But what would be the point of just bombing Iranian military sites? That would just kill more people, albeit not innocent civilians in the streets. What it would do is provoke Iran to retaliate by sending missiles against American troops in the Middle East. War, war, more war. Now the ayatollahs have offered to negotiate with Washington. I don't know what that means. How can you negotiate about killing people who are protesting about the loathsome regime which is ruining their lives? Certainly, there is nothing that Trump can give them in return for stopping the daily murders. That won't solve anything. It's a dilemma for Trump and his national security team. But right now, what happens next in Iran is more important than the future of Greenland, Cuba, Colombia, Venezuela etc. Perhaps the only solution is for the ayatollahs and Trump to get together and bash out a no-nukes guarantee and dismantling of all uranium-enrichment plants (what's left after last June's US and Israeli bombing) in return for a partial lifting of sanctions So then the economy of the country can improve, and thus stop the reason for the protests. That would be something worth negotiating. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. AMAZON, WATERSTONES ETC.

Could this be the end of the ayatollahs in Iran?

Mass nationwide protests in Iran will go one of two ways: total political upheaval in which the ayatollahs will be forced out or the protesors will be increasingly slaughtered by the security forces and the demonstrations will die in the blood-flowing streets. The latter is the more likely because of the Supreme Leader's determination to stay in power and his hatred for the United States whom he blames for stirring up the revolutionary display by the people. It's easy for Tehran to blame the US and particularly Donald Trump for what is going on across Iran. Blame the West. It's the instinctive accusation of the ayatollahs. But the truth is, Iran has been destroyed by the regime, just as Nicolas Maduro destroyed the Venezuelan economy. The population of Iran has had enough of falling living stndards, rising costs and regime repression. A significant proportion of Iran's population are young and they are disillusioned and have been for years. They want change, and right now they are dying in the streets for what they see as a fight for freedom.Trump has warned that the US will intervene if protestors are killed. No one knows what that means. But more than 60 people have died so far at the hands of armed security police and there is no sign of what Trump has in mind. At some point, the protests could well drive the regime's gun-toting security forces to even harsher retaliation, obligating Trump to take some form of action. But it is hard to see what even the mighty US can do to stop the killings. The people of Iran are really on their own and it is their bravery and sacrifice which might, just might bring down the regime that hate so much. PLEASE BUY AND READ AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. YOU WILL LOVE IT. (Amazon and Waterstones)