Ban on use of UK bases for Iran attack is staggering

We don't know exactly how the conversation went between Donald Trump and Keir Starmer earlier this week but the US president came away with a flea in his ear. He was told, according to the illustrious Times, that if he wanted to use RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean for planned bombing raids on Iran, he could forget it. The UK government, Starmer apparently said, was not going to authorise either base for attacks. In political, diplomatic, military, strategic terms, this is a staggering decision, one that will have angered Trump beyond words. If Trump does order more strikes on Iran, then the US will definitely want to use Fairford and Diego Garcia. Both these bases are specifically structured and adapted for American bombers, from B-2 strategic aircraft to F-22 ground-attack jets, and because both bases are around 2,500 miles from Iran, as opposed to 6,500 miles from the US to Iran, it makes a helluva difference in terms of combat bombing runs, logistics, wear and tear on aircraft and gas costs. The US military can still go ahead with the strikes on Iran without the two bases, but it won't be so easy, and to have an ally, such as Britain, refuse to allow key bases to be used is a massive slap in the face. Unless Starmer changes his mind, this is going to have a longlasting negative effect on relations with Washington while Trump is in the White House. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER, THE SECOND IN A PLANNED TRILOGY STARRING PART-TIME SPY REBECCA STRONG.

Britain in state of turmoil

The arrest and detention of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, former Prince Andrew, ex-Duke of York, younger brother of King Charles, still eighth in line to the throne, is the latest development in a series of ups and downs, mostly downs, which have hit this country like a hurricane and given the impression to the rest of the world that we are in turmoil. Actually, we are in turmoil. Andrew has been caught up in the Jeffery Epstein scandal because of his friendship with the paedophile and convicted sex offender. The former prince is currently sitting in a police cell! In addition, Donald Trump has turned on Keir Starmer over the Labour Government's bizarre and unnecessary handover of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius (costing us taxpayers £35 billion), the Starmer administration has now carried out 14 U-turns on major policy issues, the UK's former ambassador to the US, Peter Mandelson, is being investigated by the police over his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and an allegation that when Business Secretary in the Labour government of Gordon Brown, he passed confidential Cabinet data to Epstein; the roads througout the country are pitted with potholes and the size of the welfare state - with rising youth unemployment and more and more people off work for mental health reasons - is growing by the day. The local elections are due in May and all the signs are that Nigel Farage and his Reform party will win win win. Starmer will then be pushed out and we'll get Angela Rayner as our unelected new prime minister. Turmoil indeed. BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER, YOU WILL LOVE IT. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS.

No end in sight of the war in Ukraine

Whatever the Americans say about "meaningful progress" in the latest talks to stop the war in Ukraine, in reality Donald Trump's two main envoys, Steve Whitkoff and Jared Kushner, are no closer to a settlement than they were when negotiations began. The two envoys, neither of whom are trained diplomats, are basically Trump message-carriers, repeating endlessly the need to find a solution based on transfer of land. Poor Zelensky, the Ukrainian leader, must feel sick at heart that every time his negotiators sit down for talks with the Russians, they argue for hours about compromise but pretty much all on the Ukrainian side, not the Russians who of course started the war in the first place. Zelensky said it was "unfair" that the Americans didn't insist on the Russians compromising, too. The trouble is, Putin is not going to compromise, not on the question of the Donbas regio in eastern Ukraine. He wants all of it and for Ukrainian troops to withdraw from the bits they still control.That message from the Kremlin hasn't changed. So it's difficult to see what was "meaningful" in the latest talks in Geneva. I anticipate Putin will get even tougher with his territorial demands because he will hope that Trump will become distracted by Iran and the prospects of a wir within the next month or so. Putin isn't going to do Trump any favours by suddenly agreeing to compromise on the land issue. So, nothing of note is going to happen in the Geneva talks, just more arguing round and round in familiar circles. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER STARRING REBECCA STRONG. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS

The world cannot afford a nuclear-armed Iran

If there is any US president who is actually going to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, it is probably Donald Trump. All his predecessors vowed that Iran could never become a nuclear power but did nothing about it except try to use diplomacy and sanctions to restrain Tehran's ambitions. Obama went the furthest with his 2015 deal. But, actually, the small print still allowed Iran to restart its uranium-enrichment programme eventually. The hope was that Iran would change its ambitions altogether and with the lifting of sanctions give up the nukes idea and concentrate on developing a better, more flourishing country. But that was somewhat naive because we are talking here about the most extreme form of Islamic revolitionary politics, and successive Supreme Leaders said categorically it was the right of the Iranian nation to enrich uranium. So, even if Obama's deal had survived the arrival of Trump in the White House in 2016, it was still a risk that Iran would go nuclear in the distant future. Now, we are in a totally different situation, with Trump making it clear that, unlike his predecessors, he is ready to bomb Iran to bits to stop the country continuing to be a menace to global security. I am begininng to think that whatever Iran comes up with at the reopening of talks with the US, nothing will be good enough to stop the bombing. So in the next month or so, there will probably be a whole lot of bombing. Will it fnally end Tehran's ambition to be nuclear and a pain in the neck in the Middle East, or will it just lead to more war, and an even more determined Iran? PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER - AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES

Should the UK and France provide nuclear cover for Europe?

Both the UK and France have what is called a minimum nuclear deterrent. In other words, unlike the US and Russia which have several thousand nuclear warheads, the British and French arsenals have just enough to deter an enemy such as Russia (Uk, 225 and France, 290). But with the US under Donald Trump urging Europe to spend more and more on defence and not to rely on American to rush to their aid at every possible crisis moment, could and should the Brits and French restructure their nuke arsenals to provide a broad cover for Europe as a whole? It might sound relatively straightforward but of course it isn't. At what point, for example, would the UK and/or France decide it would be justified to threaten to fire nuclear missiles at Russia if Moscow invaded Poland or Latvia or Finland? At present the UK and France retain independent nuclear deterrents, ready to be used in the event of a possible crushing defeat in a conventional war. But the UK and France would not resort to the nuclear option unless the very existence of the two countries was at risk. It is, if you like, a selfish deterrent. It covers the sovereignty of the UK and France but not of the rest of Europe. The US, on the other hand, has committed its nuclear weapons to form a deterrent umbrella over the whole of the North American continent AND Europe. It's the ultimate protection. But now there has to be doubt about whether the Trump administration would launch anything nuclear if some part or all parts of Europe came under mass conventional or nuclear attack. Nuclear deterrence has a theology all of its own and it's changing fast. What we can't have is other members of Europe deciding to go nuclear, developing their own arsenals. That would lead to nuclear proliferation across the globe. For the UK and France to provide a European nuclear umbrella, both nations would need to double or triple their warhead arsenals. That would also lead to proliferation elsewhere and make the world an even more dangerous place. And the costs would be huge, albeit the rest of Europe would be expected to contribute financially. On the whole, it's not a good idea. Spend a lot more on conventional defence and create deterrence that way. BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER, SEE AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS.

Iran claims it's ready for compromise

Tehran, or at least the deputy foreign minister, is claiming that Iran is ready for compromise with the Americans to get a nuclear deal underway and agreed. In an interview with the BBC, Majid Takht-Ravanchi, says the ball is now in the US court. But actually, this is all playing games. The ball is very much in Iran's court. Donald Trump has stipulated, with Israel pushing hard in the background, that Iran must broaden the current round of talks by compromising not just on nukes but also on the other issues that stand in the way of an all-round settlement - a reduction in ballistic missiles and removing support for proxy militia forces in the Middle East. Takht-Ravanachi as good as ruled out any concessions on these issues. So a deal seems most unlikely. The interview with the BBC was just another example of Iran stretching it out for as long as possible, giving the impression that it's ready for a deal provided, of course, the quid pro quo is that the US lifts sanctions which have crippled the country's economy for years. He promised compromise but gives no clue what that means. It surely won't be enough to satisfy Trump and defnitely not enough to satisfy Benjamin Netanyahu. So, military action would now seem to be almost inevitable. Probably some time in the middle of March. Unless Tehran really does get frightened and offers a lot more. BUY AGENT REDRUTH, ANOTHER REBECCA STRONG SPY THRILLER, AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS

Marco Rubio brings back the smile on Europe's face

Marco Rubio isn't America's top diplomat for nothing. He came to the Munich security conference and made evryone breathe with a sigh of relief when he said that the US and Europe were, effectievly, the same family and would always be partners. So different from Vice President JD Vance's speech in Munich a year ago when he pretty much tore into Europe over its immigration policy and failure to safeguard free speech. He left a very nasty taste in the mouth. But Rubio is a gentler soul and he tried to reassure Europeans that the US was not cutting off from Europe but still valued the shared partnership and alliance. However, although the language was softer, the reality is that he, too, has underlined the White House message that Europe has to be stronger and better able to defend itself, a warning which most, if not all, European leaders are taking on board. I see Keir Starmer, in his Munich speech, said Europe (including the UK) must be ready to fight (Russia). As I have said in a previous blog, surely what needs to be said is that Europe as a whole should be arming itself with mnodern weapons of war in order to DETER Russia and other potential adversaries. Fighting a war would be disastrous for Europe and for the world. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. YOU WILL LOVE IT. SEE AMAZON, WATERSTONES OR ROWANVALE BOOKS