Fire and brimstone from Donald Trump

Donald Trump used his speech before the UN General Assembly to warn that he had it in mind to "annihilate" Iran. To achieve that, he will need a heck of a lot of bombs and missiles and in the process could kill a lot of civilians. So, it's just rhetoric. But if he isn't going to do it, why give such a warning at the UN which is supposed to be all about respecting countries' sovereighty and rights? Well, he did also say there could ne negotiations, and the president of Iran, who was present, was listening and soon after we heard that Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, had met up with the Iranian foreign minister in a room somewhere in the UN. Probably nothing will come of it. But there is always hope. Trump does not want to restart the war, not with the midterm elections just a few weeks away. He wants a deal above all else. Iran will be hoping to have enough leverage to ensure it gets a deal it likes. Trump won't care too much provided the Strait of Hormuz is opened and running smoothly and there is a clause which guarantees Iran will never seek to build a nuclear weapon. He will say that's a victory even though that was exactly the position before the US and Israel attacked Iran on February 28. What, in other words, was the war all about?

Andy Burnham to Saudi Arabia's rescue

Out of the blue, Andy Burnham has announced that he has approved the deployment of an RAF midair refuelling tanker to help Saudi Arabia in its fight against the Houthis in Yemen. When asked for help, Donald Trump said no, not wanting to get involved in yet another war. But a phone call to London, and suddenly the UK is happy to help out. I don't know how meaningful it is to send a tanker to the Saudis. But the timing is so obvious a three-year-old could work it out. Burnham has left for New York today for the United Nations General Assembly where he has fixed to have a special meeting with Trump. That's it, it's the real reason for the tanker. Burnham can boast to Trump that the UK is helping him in his Middle East war. Trump has been pretty pissed off with the UK government for failing to give full support for his war against Iran. Even though UK bases were used for some of the strikes on Iran, when Keir Starmer gave his aporoval, subsequently supported by Burnhan, the strikes were limited to defensive missions, ie when defending US and Gulf assets from attack. Although the line between offensive and defensive is pretty muddy, it was an attempt by the UK government to keep out of the war per se. Now, Burnham, having seen that Trumnp was reluctant to help out the Saudis against the Houthis, realised this was an opening for him. That may be a bit cynical but I can just imagine the arguments that must have gone on in Number Ten. Anyway, it's almost bound to achieve the result Burnham wanted which is a friendly session with Trump in New York.

Trump's triumphal arch with drone and sniper accessories

Donald Trump has come up with a brilliant idea. Instead of just building a 250ft-high Arc de Trump near the Arlington cemetery as part of his architectural legacy, he has decided to placate all his critics by announcing that in reality it's going to be a super stronghold for drones and snipers to protect Washington in particular and the whole country in general. He really does plan to stuff the golden arch with drones and men in boilersuits with fancy rifles. He did the same for his ballroom, after knocking down the whole east wing of the White House. It wasn't going to be just a place for dancing and banquets, no no no, it was going to house underneath a massive new security bunker for his safety and the safety of the nation. So a ballroom and an arch will be just a front for a military power base. The super bunker I can understand but an arch full of drones? For what purpose exactly? According to Trump, he was asked to include a storage place for drones by the Pentagon and so he obliged by offering his planned arch. Of course, it's all about politics. What Trump wants he gets, but to avoid criticism and prevent legal action, he can quote national security, the be-all-and-end-all excuse for getting something past any opposition, whether it be local residents or the courts. It's a smart move but almost laughable.

Donald Trump versus fake news

Ever since he became president the first time round, Donald Trump has raged against the media, claiming they pedal fake news. What he really means is that certain parts of the media don't like him and, therefore, write and report negative stories about him and his administration. There's a huge difference, but Trump sees all these stories as fake, ie made-up, deliberately aimed at harming his presidency and attacking him in person. There is no question that much of the media in Washington, newspapers and TV stations, are generally opposed to Trump and all his works. But then so is an increasing number of politicians and citizens in the US. His poll ratings are wildly unfavourable. Does that mmake opinion polls fake news, too? The latest organisations to be selected for Trump's anger are CNN, Politico and MS Now (a TV channel). Their journalists are all banned from entering the White House which means they can't attend any of his press briefings or other events. The reporting credentials have been axed. This is a sign of Trump's increasing determination to eliminate any stories which are critical of him. It won't work, of course. CNN will carry on doing what it does, whether it has reporters inside the White House or not. It's very easy to shout "Fake News" but I don't think his latest attempt to suppress freedom of speech, enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, will make a blind bit of difference, except make it a lot more challenging for the banned news organisations to do their job.

Trump gets his way in Greenland but only sort of

Well, there's a Greenland deal after months of negotiations, threats and warnings (the latter two by Donald Trump). No one has seen the small print yet and it won't be unveiled until next week at the UN General Assembly in New York. But it looks like it will grant carte blanche for the US to massively extend its military presence on the island, and a clause which stipulates that neither Russia nor China can ever ever put a foot on the place. So, there really isn't much more for the US than it had already under the 1951 treaty which granted the US the right to have a military base in the north of the island for missile-tracking. But Trump wants to develop his Golden Dome anti-missile shield over the US and if it ever goes ahead, Greenland will no doubt have a bigger role to play. So it makes sense both for the US and for American allies if there is a more substantial facility on Greeland. But it could probably have been done under the old treaty which allowed for the US to extend its facilties if it needed to. So all the hooha from Trump about wanting to take over the whole of Greenland - ie snatching its sovereignty from the islanders and extricating overall ownership fromn Denmark - was unnecessary, although Trump no doubt thinks that if he hadn't made such a fuss, neither Greenland nor Denmark would have signed up to the deal to be unveiled next week. Hohum.

Canada going all European is madness

Canada is part of the North American continent. Yet, under new ideas being pushed by the European Union, Canadians are being invited to join the EU as an associate member. It's all because of deteriorating relations betwen Canada and its neighbour, the United States, or more specifically, between Donald Trump and Mark Carney, the very elegant prime minister of Canada. Of course, there is nothing wrong with Canada becoming closer to Europe but this is all about snubbing Trump. And that's stupid. Canada and the US are neighbours, they share an immensely important strategic defence role together, and they trade together, although that is half the problem because of Trump's bitter tariff war. A breakaway from the North American partnership towards a somewhat geographically-stretched alliance with the EU may sound like a good dig at Trump but it rally doesn't make much sense. Trump and Carney need to make up and get on and do proper deals like adults.

Poor King Charles, the barbs keep coming

Every family has its moments of despair, trauma, rifts or just internicene arguments. But the Royal Family headed by King Charles has had more than its share of barbs thrown at it, from both within and without. Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, have caused more angst in the family than anyone in recent years, with Harry's outrageous book called Spare and Meghan's whingeing against the royals and their courtiers on the dreadful Opra Winfrey show way back when the couple first went off to live in California. Now they are back in the UK and still causing problems for Charles and his brother, Prince William. In addition, a new book coming out next week, written by Princess Diana's brother, Earl Spencer, is apparently full of nasty jibes at Charles, the most controversial of which is that he claims that soon after Diana died in the car crash in Paris, Charles (then Prince of Wales), told Charles Spencer that soon everyone would forget about the late Princess of Wales and seemed put out by the outpouring of grief for her death throughout the country. Officials speaking for the king have rejected the accusation and blamed Earl Spencer's recollections on poor memory coloured by grief.The book is being serialised in the Daily Mail and there are bound to be more hurtful passages to come. I would have thought the poor king has had just about enough of being targeted in this way with accusations that may or may not be false. The allegation that he cruelly dismissed Princess Diana as someone who would soon be forgotten (the mother of Charles's two sons for heaven's sake) can be resolved only one way. Either King Charles admits he said it and apologises to the nation or Earl Spencer admits he made it up or at least may have got it wrong and apologises to the nation, and the publisher recalls all the books and removes the alleged quote from the king. Then we can all get on with our lives.