Was Keir Starmer really kept in the dark over Mandelson's failed security vetting?

It is beyond all credibility that the prime minister was not informed that Lord Mandelson had failed his security vetting prior to his appointment as ambassador to the United States. Keir Starmer says he wasn't told until Tuesday this week. It is both incredible and unbelievable. This is simply not the way Whitehall works. Number Ten is involved in everything to do with national security and intelligence. Either there has been a conspiracy against tfhe prime minister at the heart of the Foreign Office which supposedly kept Starmer in the dark about Mandelson's vetting failure or the leader of the government was so busy with world affairs issues that he failed to read or comprehend the document that lay before him on his desk in Number Ten that revealed the pieve of devastating news: that his chosen individual for the ambassador's job in Washington was considered a national security risk and, thus, shouldn't be appointed. There HAS to be a document spelling this out, and, incidentally, there would have been copies circulated, for example, to the Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service and to the director-general of MI5. and the head of the Foreign Office's Senior Appointments Committee etc etc. This document will be sitting in a lot of filing cabinets throughout Whitehall. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SYP THRILLER PAPERBACK. AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES.

US naval blockade is working

It has only been going for three days but so far the US naval blockade of Iranian ports in the Gulf waterway seems to be working pretty well. At least a dozen warships are involved and they are cluttering up the outgoing end of the Strait of Hormuz. Only friendly ships are getting through. If this continues, Iran's economy is going to tank very quickly. It's already stretched thin by sanctions and war. But a successful blockade could finish off the economy. Inflation will go mad, the cost of living will rocket and the poor Iranian people are going to suffer. But the crucial thing, will this massive economic pressure bring down the hateful Islamic regime or will it survive whatever the strain? So far there has been no real hint of a collapse in determination to hold off the US. The country is effectively being held topgether by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and it's very much in their interest that the keep the regime going against all the odds. So this means they will let the Iranian people suffer for as long as it takes to force the Trump administration to agree concessions. Donald Trump won't be looking at it this way. His objective is to destroy the Iranian economy beyond help and force the Tehran clerics and military leaders to give in to all of his demands. The next week or so will show whether Trump or the IRGC are going to win this war. It still could go either way, although the naval blockade could well prove to be the president's best trump card. BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER PAPERBACK. AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES.

Will Europe regret the anti-Trump line?

Until now the position adopted by most members of the European Union and European outsiders such as Britain has been slowly becoming more and more anti-Trump. Rachel Reeves, the UK Chancellor now in Washington, has described Trump's war with Iran as a "folly". That sure won't go down well when she meets with US officials. Trump won't see her, that's for sure. Keir Starmer began his relations with Trump by being over-flattering and then switched to distancing himself from everything Trump said and did. President Macron has gone down the same route, and previous supporters such as Georgia Meloni, the Italian prime minister, has attacked Trump for being rude about the Pope. As for the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sanchez, he is in a league of his own, coming out from the very beginning as anti-Trump once the war with Iran began. The German chancellor Friedrich Mertz has tried to be statesmanlike but has effectively denied Trump the support he was after over Iran. But will all these leaders come to regret their opposition? They have let the US and Israel take on one of the biggest threats facing world security, a nuclear-armed Iran. They may say it's Trump's war of choice but the fact is, Iran poses a threat to everyone and if the military action eventually gets the result Trump wants - a free and fair democratic Iran with no uranium-enrichment, no bomb and no state terrorism - then he will not be thanking Europe. He will be disdainful of Euorpe's lack of foresight. I know it is highly unlikely Trump will get everything he wants but if it turns out that Iran drops being a revolutionary pain in the neck and allows its people to enjoy a better future, the Trump will get all the kudos. New talks being planned for later this week suggest there may be a deal upcoming which just might end the war and bring peace for the Iranian people which they deserve. If that happens, Starmer and co are going to look pretty spiteful and humbled. It may not happen but if it does there are going to be a lot of humiliated faces in European capitals. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER IN PAPERBACK. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS.

Nuclear impasse between the US and Iran

It has come down to Iran's nuclear programme. All the other objectives declared by Donald Trump have either been sort of achieved or are in the process of being achieved. The US Epic Fury attacks, backed by Israel, have destroyed a good proportion of Iran's ballistic missile launchers and missiles, and missile-production plants, air defence systems, most of the navy and air force and command and control infrastructure. But the nukes question is unresolved, although of course the US and Israel together have set back the enriched-uranium programme by at least a year if not more after persistent strikes on the main nuclear sites at Isfahan, Fordow and Natanz. But the 440 kilos of 60-per-cent-enriched uranium is still in Tehran's hands, albeit buried under the targeted plants. Trump is still talking about sending in special operations troops to grab this near-bomb-grade material, but right now he is hoping Tehran will just hand it over. That seems highly unlikely. The talks in Islambad broke down because of this issue and because of US demands that all uranium-enrichment be suspended for 20 years. Iran has come back with "ok, but only for five years". Trump will mever agree to that. But I can see a situation in which a compromise is made and Iran agrees to suspend most of its enrichment for 15 years. If that happens, then it will be exacty the same deal reached by Obama in 2015 through diplomatic rather than military force means. Surely Trump could not go with that! PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER PAPERBACK. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS.

Trump gives the go ahead for a naval blockade of Iranian ports

Donald Trump has now announced he WILL launch a navl blockade of all Iranian ports in the Strait of Hormuz. Yesterday aAfter noting the suggestion of a blockade by two of his favourite military analysts, General Jack Keane, former vice chief of staff of the US Army, and Rebecca Grant of the Lexington Institute think-tank, Trump posted on Truth Social that it would “begin shortly”. Following the failure of the talks in Islamabad to find a solution to end the war, the notion of a blockade to outsmart the IRGC has already begun to take shape. On Saturday, two American guided-missile destroyers, USS Frank E Petersen and USS Michael Murphy, briefly entered the Strait of Hormuz from the Gulf of Oman to begin “setting conditions for clearing mines,” US Central Command said. The short, uninhibited excursion into the Gulf waterway was not a precursor to the imminent arrival of a blockading convoy of warships. But it underlined the threats that will confront the US Navy if Trump has given the go-ahead for such an operation. It’s not just mines, some of which, it is feared, have been dropped indiscriminately, but the IRGC’s surviving stocks of suicide airborne drones, anti-ship cruise missiles and sea drones packed with explosives, all of which could target oil tankers and other commercial ships as well as US Navy vessels protecting them. “Convoy operations will entail having active optical and electronic surveillance overhead, with an immediate response capability, covering potential mobile launcher firing points along at least 250 miles of Iranian coastline and its hinterland, from Abu Musa in the West to Jask in the East.,” said the Maritime Executive, the shipping industry’s leading information source. Such a challenge would require a heavy concentration of firepower in the Gulf waterway for months on end, a commitment which would have repercussions for Central Command’s main Epic Fury operation against Iran which, if Trump orders a second phase of bombing, could include the seizure of Kharg Island, location of 90 per cent of stored and exportable Iranian oil. Could the US mount a full naval blockade at the same time as relaunching Epic Fury? Both Jack Keane and Rebecca Grant indicated it was feasible and necessary. The current US naval presence consists of around 26 warships and submarines, including two aircraft carriers, USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Gerald R Ford, now returned after repairs in Croatia following a fire on board, and 16 guided-missile destroyers. A third carrier, USS George HW Bush, is on the way from jts home port in Norfolk, Virginia. However, there is a serious shortage of US minesweeping vessels in the region. Four left the Gulf before the war started. Two are currently in Malaysia for repair and modernisation. Will Trump call on his much-maligned Nato partners to provide mine-clearance capabilities and tanker escorts? During his recent trip to the Gulf region, Sir Keir Starmer emphasised the importance of reopening the Strait of Hormuz. But a US naval blockade would likely be defined by the prime minister’s lawyers as an act of war. He has made a point of pledging not to involve the UK in Trump’s war. President Macron of France has already said French warships would not escort vessels through the Strait of Hormuz while the war was on. Tne former top Pentagon official warned that the idea of a naval blockade was premature because of the continuing threat posed by IRGC coastal missiles and drones. “I think we are still several weeks away from degrading the Iranian capabilities sufficiently and bringing in our limited mine counter measure vessels,” said Eric Edelman who was the Pentagon’s defence policy chief for four years in President George W Bush’s administration. “The seizure of Kharg Island could be a part of efforts to clear the Strait since it would provide a chokehold on Iran's export capabilities and give the US a bargaining chip to trade with the Iranians,” he said. About 3,000 paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division and two marine expeditionary units, 4,400-strong, as well as hundreds of special operations troops are in the region, ready for a land-grab operation. “A separate matter would be to blockade and presumably seize Iranian ghost fleet tankers coming out of the Strait. That is something I think the US Navy could do but the administration would have to weigh the disruptions that might cause to the international oil market and the fact that much of that oil is headed to China where Trump is supposed to be meeting Xi Jinping in May,” Edelman said. This raises a potential challenging scenario. What if China were to send its own warships to protect oil tankers bound for Chinese ports? Would the US Navy be under orders to let them through the blockade? “The US Navy could have seized the handful of tankers that have left the Strait over the past few weeks but it appears the administration was not willing to do so then, perhaps they are willing now,” Edelman said. Naval blockades have a mixed history. Trump has leapt at the idea for the Gulf because of the perceived success of the operation against Venezuela. An armada of US warships blocked oil tankers from leaving Venezuelan ports, but the naval siege was not leak-proof., and there was no war underway. To guarantee safe passage for ships in the Strait of Hormuz and stop Iranian oil tankers from getting through, the US Navy will have an embittered enemy across the other side of the chokepoint. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS.

A US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz on the way

The US military under Donald Trump is certainly getting action, action, action. For a president who doesn't like wars, his second term has been almost nothing else. After the huge success of the Venezuela op in January and the bombing mission against three Iranian nuclear (bombmaking) plants in June last year, Epic Fury, the ultimate Tehran-bashing war, has now taken another turn. After the talks headed by Vice President JD Vance, failed to deliver anything worth mentioning in Islamabad (no surprise there), Trump has turned his attention to launching a naval blockade of the Gulf to prevent any Iranian oil tankers from heading down the waterway. It could involve dozens of ships and take months. Will this calm the oil market or make it go even wilder, upwards? And will Trump's so-called but no longer respected European allies offer to chip in with the odd warship to help protect the non-Iranian countries' tankers from using the Strait? It seems highly unlikely. The UK, for example, doesn't really have any available ships to join a convoy mission and even if the government did decide to deploy something, lawyers would point out that a naval blockade against shipping breaks international law which could make it tricky. Perhaps the naval blockade threat is just bluster to scare Tehran. But it has to be said, the clerics don't seem to have revealed the sort of fear they were supposed to have shown when the bombs started falling and their leaders kept dying. So, a blockade might not go the way Trump wants it to go. The ceasefire has another week and a few days to go. So, let's see what happens in that time. Perhaps Tehran will say, "hey let's have another talk". I expect that's what Trump is hoping because a naval blockade would be a mammoth and very expensive task. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps doesn't want peace with the US

Donald Trump's worst enemies in the Middle East are the leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and they denifitely don't want peace with the man they refer to as the Satan. They don't want any deal unless it favours their longevity, their ability to maintain dominance across the Middle East with terror, threats and arming of proxy militias and no doubt the continuing ability to develop a nuclear bomb, however long it takes. So, with that understanding, JD Vance and his two supporters, Steve Witkoff and the ever-present Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, have a thankless task ahead of them as the negotations, allegedly for peace, beginning today in Islamabad. Some in the Tehran regime might just want the war to come to an end properly and for good, so that they can remuster, get the people back on their side and, with the lifting of sanctions, get the economy sorted, and plan for a much stronger military-style regime. That would be good for the IRGC as well, but the mere thought of doing business with the US and coming to some sort of compromise arrangement will never satisfy them. They want the US and all its forces out of the Middle East, and they are not going to get that. So the IRGC will remain a hostile presence at the talks, reminding the clerics in Tehran that they are the ones who keep the Islamic revolution going, never mind who the supreme leader is. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. yOU'LL LOVE IT. AMAZON, WATERSTONES, ROWANVALE BOOKS