Why did Putin agree to a ceasefire in Kherson region?

The ceasefire agreed for the Russian-occupied city of Oleshky in the Kherson province of Ukraine has now spread outwards. What is going on and does it mean Putin is thinking of offering more ceasefires in other part of Ukraine? This is all about politics of course. Melania Trump, the First Lady, was personally involved in brokering the ceasefire for Oleshky after it emerged the residents of the city were so desperate for food they were eating weeds. There has been no electricity, gas or water in the city for the last three years. The involvement of Melania Trump gave Putin a vital piece of public relations positivity. It looks like the appeal of the US president's wife was a golden opportunity for Putin to look "humanitarian". That word was first used when Putin agreed to release a US citizen from a Russian jail. Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, praised Putin for being humanitarian. Now, Putin has supposedly given two examples of his humanity. This is a cynical business. But if the ceasefire in Kherson lasts for any length of time and it creates any form of momentum for other deals like this, it might build into something more than localised ceasefires. This is the hope. While it is difficult to be remotely optimistic about the war in Ukraine coming to an end soon, this development in Kherson might offer a slight opening of the door towards an overall settlement.

Will Netanyahu lose the election?

When someone has been around for so long, it's difficult to imagine them not being in charge anymore. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister for nearly twenty years, has been the voice and face of Israel through a multitude of wars. He is Mr Security, even though he blundered mightily when Hamas raiders smashed their way across the Gaza border into northern Israel on October 7, 2023, and committed atrocities which cast doubt on the country's ability to defend itself. For that reason, Netanyahu should take the blame and should be ousted as prime minister. But the chances are he will hang on because even anti-Netanyahu voters will worry about giving the immense responsibility of protecting Israel from its many enemies to anyone else. Netanyahu also has the personal backing of Donald Trump which just might be a deciding factor. Whoever wins the most seats in the Knesset, it will still have to be a coalition, because in Israel's history, no leader has won outright, winning at least 61 of the 120 seats. So it will be a coalition, and even if Netanyahu loses out to a rival, such as Gadi Eisenkot, the former army chief of staff, he could still manage to form a coalition which keeps him in power. It's going to be close and we may not know the final result for some time. Whoever wins power, it won't help the Palestinians. Their future will remain unresolved whether Netanyahu wins or not.

Has diplomacy got any hope of stopping renewed war in Iran?

As the threats of renewed war increase from Washington and Tel Aviv, there's a huge effort from regional leaders to find a diplomatic formula. Could it work? Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have all sent their top guys to Tehran to see if there is any hope of concessions from the Iranian regime to stop war breaking out again. War would be grievously damaging for the whole Gulf region because of Tehran's declaration that if the US and Israel attack, the response will be much worse than it was during the first round of bombings. The evidence of that is still being evaluated. But masses of US military sites and energy plants in Gulf states were targeted by Iranian drones and missiles. Saudi Arabia, in particular, had and is having the toughest of times, having been hit on numerous occasions and now also by the Houthis from Yemen. Can these diplomatic envoys make any difference? Well, one of the required concessions is for Iran to stop enriching uranium and to hand over the 60 per cent-enriched uranium buried underground under the Natanz and Isfahan nuke sites. The boss of Iran's supreme national security council, the hard-looking Mohsen Rezaei, has made it clear that not one ounce of that enriched uranium will ever leave the territory of Iran. So, no sign of concession there. It doesn't necessarily mean diplomacy is dead, but unless something is worked out soon, Trump and Netanyahu are going to go back to war with all the unpredictable consequences for the whole region and the world.

What if Trump and Netanyahu both lose their country's elections?

Both the US and Israel are talking up the prospects of a return to military strikes on Iran. But what if Donald Trump's Republican party loses control of the House of Representatives and the Senate in the midterm elections on November 3? And what if Benjamin Netanyahu loses the election next week and is ousted as prime minister? Will there still be a mood for war or could this lead to a dramatic change in the way the Iran crisis is dealt with? Will it lead to a diplomatic settlement, with no more bombing? The chances are that whatever happens, Trump will go ahead with his war plans, irrespective of wether the Democrats are in control of the Houses of Congress. And Netanyahu, if he were to lose, would have a short period of grace before he has to hand over the government and in that time he could launch an attack on Iran. From the polls in Israel it's almost impossible to predict with any accuracy whether Netanyahu will survive as prime minister, but are Israeli voters prepared to go for a new leader who doesn't have the same rapoort with Israel's most powerful ally, the United States, and, in particular, Trump? So he might squeeze through, provided he can form a coalition. Trump could also keep the Senate which would mean a Democratic-controlled House would be thwarted at every turn. Nothing is clear-cut in politics and right now the elections in the US and Israel could go either way.

Trump in mother-of-all threats

Saddam Hussein, when confronted by a US-led coalition to oust him in 2003, vowed a mother-of-all battles. But actually he and his revolutionary guards put up a pretty poor show. Now Donald Trump is promising to use a mother-of all bomb to force Iran to capitulate, and Iran is vowing a father-of-all bombs to attack US interests in the Middle East. It's all rhetoric right now but there is a building momentum which is always dangerous. Iran or the US could strike first, or not strike at all, and, instead, get round a negotiating table to bring this sorry mess to an end. Trump, I suspect, is a reluctant military-option enthusiast because he knows the huge damage Iran carried out in the Middle East in retaliation for the US and Israeli bombs. It will happen again. Whether or not Iran has developed a father-of-all bombs is neither here nor there. It won't win the war for them. Likewise, Trump's mother-of-all bombs is the Massive Ordnance Air-Blast bomb which won't win the war either. Partly because it's not a bunker-buster. As it implies, it detonates in the air and sends mignty shockwaves over a wide area, killing anyone who is cowering in a tunnel. But it won't reach the nuclear facilities buried under conrete and steel. So, for the moment, it's all tough words but will there be a second phase of bombing? US sources are saying there is intelligence that Iran is plotting a preemptive strike against US bases in the Middle East. This, of course, if it were to take place, would give the US every reason to launch a huge bombing campaign. Why would Tehran do this? It makes little sense. So, fingers crossed, this is all warlike talk without the intention to actually carry it out. The trouble is, Israel, especially its leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, seems determined to finish off the job, as the Israeli prime minister put it. So, the chances are Israel will launch attacks whether Trump joins in or not.

Were Netanyahu and Hegseth plotting war?

In an unannounced visit, Pete Hegseth, the US war secretary, flew to Israel to meet with Benjamin Netanyahu. The Pentagon claimed it was a routine trip but there is nothing routine about these two getting together when the Big Question is: do we bash Iran again once the US midterm and Israeli elections are over? I can't imagine the two talked of anything else, with both of them, I suspect, up for restarting military action against Iran to try and effect another regime change. Everyone knows, except perhaps these two, and Trump, that launching a second round of airstrikes, however mighty, is not going to bring the Tehran regime down and get replaced with nice, fun-loving, western-orientated, sweet democratic leaders. That is never going to happen. So what would be the point of bombing again, especially when we know Iran has plans to respond with attacks on oil refineries and other energy installations in the Gulf, making the world economy even worse than it is already? So, the meeting between Hegseth and Netanyahu, as well as Trump's wanring of a possible new bombing campaign are all part of an attempt to scare Tehran into a peace settlement of some sort. I doubt it will work but I hope it does. But, as for actually returning to bombing, that is an option which should seriously be abandoned.

It's Trump and Putin versus Zelensky and Europe

Donald Trump has clearly decided that he wants to do business with Putin, and Ukraine, like for Moscow, is in the way. It seemed likely from the start when Trump won a second term that this was the way it would end up. Trump, remember, said he would end the war in Ukraine on his first day back in the White House. What he had in mind was a quick phone call to Putin, agree the way forward and then tell Zelensky, "accept or you are on your own". It didn't happen that way for one reason or another. But now, here we are back in the same groove. Trump intends to do a deal with Putin, and Zelensky better watch out if he turns it down. There is no way Europe can fill the gap sufficiently if the US backs off totally. So, European leaders who have pledged eternal support for Kyiv will also have to back down. When this happens is not yet clear but the wheels are in motion. Trump will give Zelensky, or preferably a new leader if he can fix it, a security guarantee for the future provided the land Putin wants is handed over. This is effectively the deal Trump has been after from the beginning. He keeps on saying Zelensky could have had this deal years ago. So, in other words, it's all his (Zelensky's) fault. Will Ukraine ever agree to sign up to such a deal? Zelensky will never sign anything that gives territory to Putin on a plate. So, if Trump pushes ahead with his plan, Zelensky's days are numbered. Will the Ukrainian people, and more importantly, will the Ukrainian military who have lost so many lives on the battlefieled, be ready to sign up to this Trump deal? Everyone in Ukraine wants peace, but, surely not by surrendering to the leader whose army invaded their country.