The dreaded knock on the door

The early morning banging on the door is the classic precursor to something frightening, scary, ominous or in some cases, fatal. Throughout the Nazi era, it meant stormtroopers had arrived at a Jewish family's house to take them away. They probably didn't always knock. Now in the 21st century the knock on the door routine has been deployed again with equal foreboding and implied threat. This time it's in Turkey where the leader, President Erdogan, is fast becoming the monster bogeyman of the Middle East. Well, to put it more correctly, another monster bogeyman of the Middle East. He doesn't like rivals, especially politicians prepared to stand against him. One such is or was Abdullah Gul who was president of Turkey from 2007 to 2014. According to a story in The Times he was about to declare his decision to stand in opposition to Erdogan in upcoming June elections. But then came the knock on the door. Mr Gul's visitors were none other than the chief of the armed forces, General Hulusi Akar, and Erdogan's personal spokesman, Ibrahim Kalin. You can imagine the conversation that followed once Gul had let them in. It won't have been pleasant. It probably didn't need to be threatening. They didn't arrive with thumb screws. But I expect the name Erdogan popped up quite a lot until Gul got whatever the message was and must have said to his visitors that he would have a think and let them know. He duly did. Two days later he announced that he wouldn't after all be standing in opposition to Erdogan. No one except for these three people knows exactly what was said but it doesn't take the brain of Albert Einstein to figure out that the visit had sinister motives. This is Turkey today, where the word "ottoman" has nothing to do with bedroom furniture but everything to do with reviving an empire. Erodogan has sacked so many officials, military and police since the "coup" attempt in 2016 that it's a wonder he has anyone left to carry out his paperwork, deal with crime in the streets or patrol Turkey's borders. Abdullah Gul thought it was time to make a stand against this creeping authoritarianism, until that knock on his door.

Plant a tree for a nuclear- free North Korea

So much has been agreed and/or announced by North and South Korea following the summit between Kim Jong-un and President Moon Jae-in that there may be not be a lot left for Donald Trump to do when it gets round to his turn to shake the "Little Rocket Man's" hand. Even Jim Mattis, the ultra cautious US Defence Secretary, is sounding optimistic about the future of the Korean Peninsula. Now North Korea wants to hold a closing-down ceremony to eliminate the nuclear test site at Punggye-ri, buried in the mountains. Well, they would have had to close it down anyway because a lot of it collapsed the last (and I mean last) time they carried out a nuclear test. The vibrations and blast and explosions in September created an earthquake that not only caused a partial collapse of the whole structure but sent alarming reverberations across the border into the nearest Chinese villages. Nevertheless the closing-down ceremony will be a highly symbolic moment for Kim as he tries to present to the rest of the world his intention to become a non-nuclear power. The least he and Trump can do is visit the closed-down site at some point and to plant a sapling of peace in the earth. Mind you, the sapling that Trump and Macron planted in the White House lawn only last week has already disappeared. Trump and Macron were photographed doing what leaders like to do which is to shovel fertilised soil around the roots of a fresh tree as a sign of friendship. Perhaps there wasn't enough fertiliser or maybe too much fertiliser. Spreading fertiliser is a tricky business. One explanation is that it was too early to plant this particular type of tree and it has been taken away by Trump gardeners to replant in the autumn. It means that the Trump/Macron love-in might be on shakey ground until the tree is returned to its spot on the lawn. If a tree is planted by Trump and Kim it will have to stay put for ever, otherwise conspiracy lovers will have a heyday. I anticipate that a lot more is going to be announced by Kim or Moon over the next few weeks so that by the time Trump climbs out of Air Force One in......for his summit with the North Korean leader, the future of the Korean Peninsula will be a fait accompli, or as they say in Pyongyang, "Geolaeleul machyeossda". Dear old Trump is still saying he's prepared to walk out if his meeting doesn't go well (ie NO NUKES, Mr Kim). But after the Kim and Moon show any Trump stomping off will look very bad manners and terrible diplomacy. Trump really is in a bind. Kim has told Moon he wants the Peninsula to be denuclearised but Trump wants a timetable for getting rid of every single North Korean nuclear weapon....NOW. I wonder who will get blamed if Trump storms out!!

Can a ruthless killer be trusted?

In all the euphoria over peace breaking out between North and South Korea it is worth recalling that in his seven years as Dear Leader in Pyongyang he has executed a whole bunch of people, some of them his closest relatives. Firing squads, death by poisoning, every kind of butchery. He may not know this but in the West, including of course the United States, leaders don't go around bumping off people they don't like. Donald Trump has got rid of lots of advisers, but he just sacked them. They are all still alive and well. Kim's enemies are dead, very dead. So all the hugging and kissing over the South/North Korea border yesterday was all fine and dandy in the name of peaceful relations and a better future on the Peninsula, but Dear Leader Kim has blood on his hands. So can he be trusted, or even should he be trusted? Trump I'm sure plans to grasp Kim into an embrace when they meet for their summit this month or next month and there will be smiles for the whole world. But you can bet there will be officials and relatives of Kim in the backgrounod or back at home who wlll be very very nervous about Kim's apparent change in mood. Is Kim all smiley just as dangerous as Kim with fury on his face? Kim Jong Nam, his half brother, died from VX nerve agent being smothered onto his face at Malaysia's international airport and Jang Song Thaek, KIm's uncle, was executed five years ago, just two of the most high-profile killings. So don't underestimate this gentleman, Mr President of the United States. He ain't no gentleman and he has killer eyes. Just like Vladimir Putin. Good luck with that.

What about US nuke cover for South Korea?

In all the euphoria about South and North Korea agreeing to denuclearise the peninsula, what is Kim Jong-un's approach going to be towards America's nuclear weapons? There haven't been any US tactical nukes in South Korea since they were all removed in 1991. But the US provides a nuclear umbrella for South Korea, principally with its airborne and submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles. Under the longstanding security pact btween Washington and Seoul, were South Korea to be targeted with nuclear weapons from Pyongyang, the president of the United States would press the button and launch similar type nukes aganst North Korea. That's what nuclear umbrella means. Japan and Europe enjoy the same nuclear insurance policy. It's not quite the same as having nuclear weapons actualy sitting on South Korean soil but the deterrent value of the umbrella is as effective. Kim knows this and he will want some quid pro quo if he really is contemplating getting rid of his nukes. Like, "remove the nuclear unbrella, Mr President." This is just not going to happen. Well, not in anywhere near the forseeable future. As I have written before, Kim will want to sit down with Trump as equals in the nuclear weapons business. Why would he scrap his huge nuclear weapons infrastructure in return for some promise that the Americans would no longer maintain a nuclear umbrella over South Korea. Bizarrely, it might have been an easier negotiation if the US DID still have tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea. Then Trump could say, "You remove yours and I'll remove mine". Just like John F Kennedy did when Nikita Krushchev finally backed down and removed the Soviet nukes from Cuba in 1961. Kennedy agreed to withdraw US nukes from Turkey. Trump has no such easy bargaining chip. He will have to offer Kim something in return but it's going to have to be pretty substantial to persuade Kim to get rid of ALL of his nukes, unless the North Korean leader has really had a Damascene moment and no longer thinks nuclear weapons have any purpose at all. As far as I know, Kim has never been on the road to Damascus, so....

Trump blasts off to Fox

If you haven't heard Trump shouting down the line to Fox News today, you should. It's an eye-opener. Well, more like an ear-opener. He literally bellows with anger at the Justice Department for the "witchhunt" against him over the Russia collusion allegations. He sounds truly out of his pram, as the British saying goes. At one point he said "it's a horrible thing", perhaps plaguarising a Harry Potter remark. I don't know what the horrible thing is he was referring to but it sounds like he meant everything to do with the Justice Department, headed of course by his personal appointee Jeff Sessions, the attorney general. I hope poor old battered Sessions hasn't heard about it because it might ruin his day. Trump is clearly p....ed off by the whole saga and is even more p....ed off that no one in the country seems to be congratulating him on all his achievements. In true Trumpian style, he claimed he had accomplished more in his first year in office than any other president in the history of the United States of America. That's always a dangerous thing to say because Washington is awash with "fact-checkers" - the Washington Post has a regular column doing that very thing - and you can be sure that George Washington or Harry S Truman or Franklyn D Roosevelt or Lyndon B Johnson or John F Kennedy achieved more than Trump in the same period. I'm sure as hell Trump didn't check before he made that statement on Fox News. But Trump's point was, "Why is everyone focusing on what the ****** Justice Department is doing when he, the president of the United States, is achieving miracles almost every day?" He sounded really really angry. It is quite extraordinary for a president of the United States to resort to shouting down the line at a TV station because he woke up in a terrible mood. But this is the Trump era for you. Yesterday he was all charmy charmy with Macron, hoding hands with the French leader and smiling like he had won the Lottery, and today it's black mood time and a call to Fox News. At least he knew they would take the call.

Carry On Doctor!

Donald Trump has made some quixotic appointments in his 15 months in office, not least his decision to nominate his personal White House physician as the next Secretary of the huge Veterans Affairs (VA) department, an organisation with a staff of 350,000 and an annual budget of $186 billion. No disrespect, Dr Ronny Jackson, but it's a bit like appointing your personal chauffeur to run the Department of Transportation or your electrician to take charge of the Department of Energy or the whacky kid next door with a reputation for being a super hacker to be responsible for Cyber Command. Looking after the medical needs of 58 hyper-stressed staff in the White House is no mean feat but taking over the VA which is already overwhelmed with bureaucratic nightmares and historic inefficiency is like the difference between taking your first step as a toddler with your mummy and daddy watching and landing on the moon and taking a giant step for mankind. The VA with its awesome responsibility for the hundreds of thousands of veterans who have served their country needs a master administrator, a visionary and a budget wizzard, not a guy who has to check the president's toe nails every now and again. Dr Ronny might be a terrific bloke, he certainly has a winning smile, and he is a Navy chap, so he knows all about command. But not on a super carrier or anything dramatic like that althougb he did serve in Iraq. Did Trump ever think that his personal physician might possibly be slightly out of his depth? Now there are all kinds of whisperings about his past somewhat aggressive leadershp style. It's all part of the Washington nomination-killing process that will end up with poor Ronny opting out and settling for a quieter life. The Senate has already suspended confirmation hearings. He can't survive. But if he does, then Trump will have to answer for any disastrous mistakes Dr Ron might make.

Iran gets the Trump treatment

I expect Trump hopes that if he sounds as belligerent and dangerous towards Iran as he was towards Kim Jong-un, it's all going to end happily with a make-up summit somewhere nice and neutral and all will be well. That would be wildly optmistic. First, there's a long way to go with North Korea and nothing is certain, and second, Iran is a different beast. It has a serious heart of darkness that is not going to be softened by a bellicose Trump. More likely to be the opposite. Iran is embedded in malovolent activities all over the Middle East and is fast building up military strength inside Syria to threaten Israel. If Trump refuses to sign the next certification of the nuclear deal he hates and starts reimposing radical sanctions against Tehran and its regime of mischief-makers, I can see a rapid escalation of trouble ahead, with Iran throwing away the Obama deal and going headlong for a nuclear weapon. Iran signed the deal for two very good reasons - good for them that is. It opened the gates for a lifting of economic sanctions and it provided a pretty limited timetable for the agreement. Iran's uranium-enrichment programme was put on hold for only 15 years. Then what? Oh yes, Tehran was pretty pleased with that. This is why Trump hates it, and why Mike Pompeo, the soon-to-be secretary of state, also hates it. But why should Iran cooperate if Trump declares he wants the whole deal thrown around and added to and changed? Trump wants the enrichment programme suspended indefinitely. Iran is not going to play ball. They signed what they signed. As I've said before in previous blogs, I think Trump is right, the 15-year deal is ridiculously short-lived but it's going to be a helluva fight to get Iran to agree to extend the deal for eternity. And if Iran refuses, what is the world going to face? Is Trump going to use the same language he deployed against Kim Jong-un, threatening to annihilate Iran? Poor Jim Mattis, he's going to be asked for military options perhaps, when he knows and we all know that you can't start bombing Iran. The consequences would be infinitely more dangerous than if Trump had bombed North Korea. The Iranian baddies, as Trump said today, are everywhere and could inflict untold misery. Perhaps Emmanuel Macron will persuade Trump to hold fire. But my gut feeling is Trump is going to persist. He and Pompeo will do their best to develop a Nuclear Deal Part Two, with heavy restrictions on Iran's Revolutionary Guard Quds Force operations, as well as an extension to the uranium-enrichment timetable. But I fear he will get little support from his allies.

So Sergey Lavrov it was all bluster then?

The Russians were full of warnings about dire consequences if the US launched strikes on Syria. Sergey Lavrov, the foreign minister, was playing high stakes, voicing all kinds of retaliation. Alexander Zasypkin, Russian ambassador to Lebanon, said incoming missiles would be shot down. Then when the strikes went ahead, the Russians did nothing. Now obviously that's a good thing. But the intriguing question is: why did the Kremlin, whether in the shape of Lavrov or this bloke Zasypkin whom no one had heard of before, make such a fuss and then disappear after it was all over and pretend nothing had happened. Has anyone heard Ambassador Zasypkin voicing his opinions since the 105 US/British/French missiles landed on three Syrian regime targets? No, he has gone back to consular stuff in Beirut and secret meetings with Iranians and Hezbollah or whatever Russian ambassadors in that part of the world get up to. In other words, he had his 15 minutes of fame and will now never be heard of again. We'll still have to put up with old Lavrov of course because he's the foreign minister. But he has lost a lot of face. The Russians came out of the whole drama as paper tigers. And, bizarrely, they didn't so much as sniff when the first lot of American fighter aircraft arrived in Syrian airspace to hit a couple of Isis targets the very day after the 105-missile mission. All was sweetness and light between the American air commanders in Qatar and the Russian representatives in the Moscow defence ministry when they spoke on the deconfliction channel about the day's anti-Isis bombing proposals. "Hello, Boris, all clear for our strikes today? We'll be operating NW/NE/300". (or whatever terminology they use). "Yes of course, Chuck, all fine with us, have a good day." As for Damascus, Moscow told Assad to leave well alone. The anti-Isis strikes must be allowed to go ahead as usual because it was good news for everyone, except for Isis of course. Assad probably didn't bat an eyelid. Anyway, Assad really wouldn't have wanted to take on the Americans in their anti-Isis role. Their attempt at defending themselves against the American missiles with their so-called super air defences had turned out to be a serious embarrassment. Their defences were totally ineffective. Just like Saddam Hussein in 2003, Assad ordered his air defence teams to shoot at anything that moved, but the Syrian units were so useless they just fired blindly. Saddam did the same, his air defence units fired anti-aircraft artilley shells into the sky even if a pigeon flew over Baghdad but they hadn't a clue what they were doing. So, Mr Scary Lavrov, you came out smelling of bad potatoes. And as for Ambassador Whatshisname in Beirut, don't imagine that anyone is going to take you seriously ever again.

Hey Mr President, it's Stallone here

An every day scene in the White House. "Mr President, it's Theresa May on the line." "Tell her I'm in a meeting." "But, Mr President...." "She'll ring back, she always does." A few minutes go by. "Mr President, Chancellor Merkel wants a word." "Find out what the word is and tell her to ring me tomorrow." "Mr President, is that a joke?" "If the word is Macron, tell her forget it." A few more minutes go by. "Mr President, are you free for me to pop in?" "No, whoever you are." "It's John Kelly, Mr President." "What's John Kelly?" "It's me, I'm John Kelly." "Why didn't you say?" "So can I pop in?" "No, I'm busy." Half an hour goes by. "Mr President, The First Lady would like a word." "What's all this word business about? Tell her I'll see her next week when we go to Florida." "She was a little insistent, Mr President." "Aren't all women?" Three minutes later. "Mr President..." "What now?! Do you have to bother me every few seconds?" "Sorry, Mr President, it's someone claiming to be Sylvester Stallone." "Hey, put him on." "Mr President, how are you?" "Hey, Big Boy, how the hell are you? How's it falling? Where you at? Haven't spoken for a long time, great to hear you. Nothing going down this morning, so you rang at the best time. What's up?" "Good to talk to you, Mr President, er...Donald, I just wondered if you might consider giving a full pardon to this boxer guy who got arrested for crossing a state line with a white woman. He's black, right?" "Hey, man, what the hell. What he do, rob a bank, like Bonnie and Clyde?" "No, er...Donald, he just crossed a state line with this white woman." "You kidding, right? I crossed a state line with a white woman many times hahaha. No one dared arrest me." "Er, no, Mr President, Donald, this was way back in 1913, when this was a crime?" "What, walking across a state line with a white woman was a crime in those days? I'll talk to General Kelly, he knows about this sort of stuff." "Well, no, President Donald, there's a bit more to it. This guy called Jack Johnson, he was the world heavyweight champion, he crossed the state line for what the FBI said was immoral purposes." "You mean he wanted sex but couldn't have it in one state, so he crossed over to have sex in another state?" "Er yes, that's it. And don't forget the woman was white and he was black, and like that was a crime. Something called the Mann Act." "Man Act Woman Act, it all sounds dodgy to me. Never trust the FBI. D'you see what they're trying to do to me?" "Yeah, Mr President, I'm with you if you need me, but what about Johnson? Any chance you could pardon him?" "Sure, buddy, anything for you. I've got all this boring stuff on Kim Jong-un to read but I could skip that and look into your man. I'll Google him and give you an answer in due course. And, hey, come over for dinner. The food's crap but we could have a good chow." "Thanks Mr President, good talking to you, and thanks again."

What's Kim's game?

Normally when two leaders are preparing for a summit that might change the whole world, or at least part of it, neither gives an inch by way of concessions beforehand. It’s the basic rules of the game. Yet Kim Jong-un has given away two of his biggest bargaining chips before he and Trump have even arrived in one of the seven or so summit locations currently being examined by Washington and Pyongyang. Kim has already made it clear he does not expect Trump to pull out all of the 23,5000 US troops from South Korea, and he has declared his nuclear tests and ballistic-missile testings are over. So it’s a win win for Trump already. Does this mean that Kim is so inexperienced and naive that he has given away too much before the bargaining has begun and from now on it’s going to be easy for the Grand Negotiator? That’s supposed to be Trump. Hell no. In my view Kim has been brilliant. What he has done is to bring the whole of the rest of the world to his side. Everyone thinks he’s terrific. Well done that man. We love you. The world is a safer place thanks to Kim Jong-un. Even Trump has fallen for it, tweeting his delight at the moves and saying how wonderful it all is. But actually there are now huge dangers for Trump. He has said the summit has to be about North Korea denuclearising, in other words, getting rid of all those nuclear warheads and long-range ballistic missiles. Is Kim going to do that? No, he isn’t. What he will say to Trump is, “Look, President Trump, we’re both leaders, we both run countries that are acknowledged nuclear powers, let’s treat each with respect and all will be fine.” Trump has said he will walk out if the summit doesn’t go the way he wants it to go. But think how that will look around the world, especially in China? Kim wins because he has already given away so much!! What has the US offered in return? It’s going to be tricky for Trump. I predict that the North Korea/South Korea summit will go exceptionally well. The two leaders, Kim and Moon, will end up being the best of friends. But Kim’s real power play is with Trump. He wants Trump to look him in the eye and acknowledge he has met his match. He wants respect and equality, and to get that Kim is not going to give away any of his nuclear warheads and long-range ballistic missiles. He will say to Trump, “You’ve got your nukes and I’ve got mine, so what’s the big deal?” Trump basically wants Kim to surrender all of his nukes and turn all his attention to farming. But Kim sees his nukes as an insurance policy. And having now said there will be no more testing and no more seriously provocative missile testing over the Sea of Japan, his nukes can stay all tucked up in their storage sites, not harming anyone! Not bad for a Little Rocket Man or “a crazy fat kid”, as Senator John McCain once called him. John Bolton, Trump’s Cold War warrior national security adviser, will have seen through all this and probably made the same conclusions. But Trump smells a big big success story coming up. If he’s not careful Kim will run rings around him and come out smelling of roses or whatever they grow in North Korea.

Is Trump another David Copperfield?

Politics has always been about smoke and mirrors. One says one thing and another says another thing and in between there is a tiny splodge of truth mixed in a mish-mash of generalities and vague assertions. When a politician says, "The fact of the matter is," or "I want to make it perfectly clear", you need to be on your guard! That's when the smoke and mirrors come in. Trump is a great one for hurling great big statements out on social media and then within a short period he starts back-tracking, and claiming he said the opposite. So how are we simple souls supposed to make up our minds? It's a bit like magic. Take David Copperfield for example. He has built a huge reputation for being the most dramatic magician on stage. If anyone can make a herd of elephants disappear, he can. It's always a great spectacle. But now he has been found out. Someone involved in one of his most famous tricks, fell over in the process of "disappearing" and hurt himself and is suing Copperfield. As part of his case he had to explain how he "disappeared" and why he injured himself in the process. The magic turned out to be more about logistics than wizardry. A bunch of people get on stage, a curtain comes down and before you can say Whizz Bang Wallop, the same people are standing at the back of the theatre. Everyone applauds and turns to each other and says: "How on earth did he do that?" Well, what he did was get one of his flunkies to herd all the people on the stage quickly down some backstage passageways, round the theatre and through the front and, voila, there they are at the back of the auditorium looking somewhat out of breath. Simples really. No magic involved except in the eye of the deceived. This is what Trump is good at. Like, for instance, his claim way back on Inauguration Day, that many more people came to see him on that day than at Obama's Inauguration Day. The photo images proved it! Well, they didn't. In fact they proved the opposite when they were examined closely by nasty truth-seeking journalists. Perhaps all the crowds were the other side of the Capitol and they had all been "magicked" there by President Copperfield.

World War III came and went!

After a week of total drama, with the US, Britain and France all set for a war with Syria, Russia, Iran - World War III perhaps round the corner - it's remarkable how the news business has now settled down so quickly. Russia blinked and let Trump get on with his bombing. The chemical weapons people will go to Douma and might find something that smells of clorine or sarin but they can't say where it came from. Same situation as the Novichok poisoning in Salisbury. No forensic conclusions, just total belief in most intelligent people's minds that Syria did the chemical bombing and Russia did the Novichok poisoning. But "belief" is not good enough in a court of law. So, as a result, the attacks on Syria are already so yesterday! Now it's about the mood music for the upcoming summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un, a former US Navy jet fghter pilot - also a woman which makes it even better (sorry for that but it just happens to be true) saves a passenger plane from a disastrous crash by some cool flying, Cuba has had its last Castro in charge and the King of Swaziland has renamed his country eSwatini. I've been to Swaziland, it's a great country with fabulous people, amazing mountains, and welcoming grass-skirted dance troupes like you've never seen before (bettered only by the extraordnary leaping up, staying up and eventually coming down tall skinny red-coloured Masai warriors of Kenya). So if the King of Swaziland, one Mswati III, wants to change the name of his nation it's fine by me, although a little disappointing, since Swaziland sounds a helluva lot better than eSwatini. But each to his own. The world really is a bizarre place right now. Terrible things can happen and then everyone suspected of being involved lies about it till normally sane people start to wonder what the truth is. This is why lying is so clever. If lies are repeated over and over again, it almost doesn't matter what the truth is because everyone gets totally bored and moves on to other stories, like renaming countries. Trump even now is probably wondering whether the constitution will allow him to rename the United States of America, eDonald.

Pompeo has the right credentials for a North Korea deal

I have been highly sceptical in the past about the prospect of any real meaningful deal between the US and North Korea. I couldn't see Kim Jong-un ever giving up his nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. I still don't. But I believe there's a hint of a potential breakthrough. Sending the director of the CIA, one of the most powerful and influential intelligence services in the world, to Pyongyang to meet the North Korean leader was a smart move, whoever it happens to be. The director of the CIA has always had a globe-trotting role. He doesn't just sit in his office at Langley and brief the president. He's a secret envoy for the most secret goings-on. That has always been the case. But the current (not for long) director of the CIA is Mike Pompeo and he has been nominated by Trump to the next secretary of state. So Pompeo had a lot of authority sitting on his shoulders when he met with Kim over the Easter weekend. If Rex Tillerson had still been secretary of state and was the man chosen for the first meeting with Kim, I somehow doubt the North Korean leader would have been so impressed with his American visitor. Tillerson has no intelligence background and the briefest of diplomatic experience. But the heavy-duty CIA boss arriving at his palatial home in the North Korean capital. Now that would have impressed Kim I think. Kim knows that Pompeo knows everything there is to know about him. AND he's about to become secretary of state. So Pompeo will play a crucial role in the forging of new relations with Pyongyang. Provided, of course, his nomination is confirmed. The Democrats in the Senate are all apparently determined to oppose his appointment, and it will only take a few Republicans to support them, and then suddenly Trump is in trouble. It's absolutely obvious that the only reason the White House leaked to the Washington Post that Pompeo had been on a "secret" (ho ho ho) trip to see Kim was to encourage the naughty Senate to play ball and confirm Pompeo's appointment to the State Department. I believe the ruse will work. Pompeo and Kim got on very well - or so Trump claimed in a tweet - and no senator surely is going to be so unpatriotic as to vote against Pompeo's new appointment at a time when he could help broker one of the biggest diplomatic coups in a generation. But it's important not to be carried away. Kim Jong-un is surprisingly astute for someone who hardly ever leaves his inner sanctum - apart from his brief train ride to Beijing recently. He is going to demand all kinds of things in return for removing even one of his nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, and his aim is obviously to see the back of all US troops stationed in South Korea and to reunite with the South. The first part is NOT going to happen, not for many year anyway. But the Pompeo/Kim meeting is the first step. There is presumably now a wish list on the table, on both sides, and negotiations can begin. If Kim "likes" Pompeo, that's probably a good sign. So, members of the Senate, whatever your political persuasion, do your job and let Pompeo do his as America's next secretary of state.

Comey piles on the dirt

Nine months ago I wrote a comment piece for The Times which in its wisdom it did not publish, about sacked FBI director James Comey and his plan to write a blockbuster memoir about his relationship with Trump. I reckon it stands the test of time pretty well. Even now there are pieces appearing in eminent newspapers such as The New York Times suggesting that his hard-hitting personal accusations against Trump in his book published today might damage his previously well-cultivated image as a public servant. Here is what I wrote last summer: "SO James Comey, respected but fired FBI director, is going to write his memoirs and tell all about his confrontation with Trump over the Russia collusion affair. Remove "respected" and just leave "fired". Comey is not going to do his reputation as a maltreated FBI man any good by writing a blockbuster, leaking everything to the world about his relationship with the president. It is decidedly unseemly for the man who was at the centre of the Russia/Trump allegations to be seeking to make tons of cash out of his experience. Publishers are beating his door down to grab his memoirs. Soon Hollywood will be knocking, Jon Hamm will be lined up to play Comey, perhaps it will be turned into a musical a la La La Land. Ok, Comey is out on his luck, he feels aggrieved and is desperate to get his version of events into the public eye. But hasn't he done that already? He leaked his conversations with Trump to the media, we know what he thinks he said and what he thinks Trump said. Is he going to reveal a mass of confidential stuff that should remain, well, confidential? It all appears pretty tawdry and stands up Trump's accusation that the former FBI director was/is a grandstander, one of those top officials who cannot resist the chance to burst into print to make a pile of money. Of course, every past president, or many of them, former secretaries of state, ex-defence secretaries, have written their memoirs. But that's expected. They are historical documents, and few of them stir up much trouble. Bob Gates wrote his memoirs as a former CIA director and Defence Secretary perhaps a little prematurely because he was writing about people still in office. But Comey is a major player in the current investigation into whether Russia and the Trump campaign colluded to destroy Hillary Clinton. He should sink into the background with grace and leave well alone. Instead, he's going to have his publishers and literary agent egging him on to stir up as much dirt as possible because the more dirt, the better the sales. Comey will come across as a bitter, vengeful man, interested only in trying to come out on top and shoving Trump into the dung. This says much about the state of politics right now in the United States. Far from salvaging Comey's reputation, a blockbuster shockbuster, serialised no doubt in the New York Times or Washington Post, will turn people against him. Not just Trump and co, but ordinary, respectable citizens who feel that a former director of the FBI should behave with dignity and get on with his life without spewing more dirt into an already highly polluted Washington environment."

Russia's new Mr Niet

We have all got to know Sergey Lavrov better than ever in recent weeks. He is the face and voice of Moscow for the Skripal poisoning and the Syrian chemical attacks. But principally he is the new Mr Niet, like one of his illustrious predecessors at the Russian foreign ministry, Andrei Gromyko of Cold War legend. Old Gromyko had a few quips when he wanted to be jolly, just like Sergey Lavrov, but for the serious stuff he was always Niet Niet Niet. Thus, Lavrov who has been the Russian foreign minister for an unbelievable 14 years, has been in the forefront of the Moscow counter-arguments to the rest of the world's accusations that Moscow poisoned Sergei and Yulia Skripal by smearing Novichok nerve agent on the door knob of his house in Salisbury, and that Russia either looked the other way or actually approved/helped/ordered/enabled President Assad's military henchmen to bomb civilians in Douma with a mixture of chlorine and sarin. Lavrov has dismissed both these accusations, using President Trump's favourite phrase - "fake news". He said it was the Brits who put the Novichok on the Skripal's front door and, amazingly, it was the Brits also who in league with the White Helmets, the volunteer civil defence and rescue force operating in rebel-held parts of Syria, who staged the chemical attack in Douma to cast a slur on Russia. But then he rather ruined his argument by saying Ruskie experts had been to Douma and had found no traces of chemicals. So which is it, Mr Foreign Minister, a British plot or a made-up story? Come on Lavrov, do you take us for total idiots? You may be a longstanding foreign minister, you may be a pretty good diplomat and, often, quite a chatty soul, but these sort of arguments would be an insult to a human being with only one brain cell. Perhaps when all this nasty stuff between Moscow and the rest of us in the West is over and we're back as "friends" and talking intelligently to each other once again, he might come out and joke about those bad old days when he had to make those stupid, laughable accusations to stir the waters. "Don't vurry, my friends, it wasn't personal, it was just beesinees." Unfortunately we're a long way away from that confession from the Russian foreign minister. Meanwhile, it's Mr Niet on the news every day and no quips from his lugubrious lips. Putin must be proud of him, especially since Lavrov, unlike his boss, was never schooled in the KGB art of lies and deceipt.

Thank God for Jim Mattis

I think while Jim Mattis remains as defence secretary in the Trump administration, sanity will prevail. There were a number of options placed before the president to punish Syria for the Douma chemical weapons attack, including a far more extensive range of targets, such as hitting Syrian regime military bases. But the more limited option highlighted and preferred by Mattis and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Joseph Dunford, was the one Trump eventually signed off on. It's normal practice for the president of the United States to be given a range of options prior to a planned military attack, and one of them will be the biggest stick, the all-embracing raid, like for example, the airstrikes on Serbia to force President Slobodan Milosevic to back down in Kosovo. This was a Nato decision but the US is the leading nation of the alliance. The decision surprised everyone, especially Milosevic. Bombs started falling all over Belgrade. He soon gave up! So Trump could have ordered widespread attacks on Damascus if he wantd to. But Mattis and Dunford had a number of arguments against this option. First, there was a huge danger that mass raids would bring the US into direct conflict with Russia. Then what? Second, the purpose of the strikes was to smack Assad, not eliminate him. That meant a pretty hefty strike on selected targets so that they were reduced to rubble, with a warning label attached which said, there's more to come if you so much as dare to use chemical weapons ever again. That warning went to Russia as well as to Damascus. Assad is a cocky sort of bloke and he may just think to himself that he'll wait a few more months and then have another go with chemical munitions to wipe out the last rebel positions. But if he does, then even Mattis and Dunford will not try and restrain Trump. Mosocw must know this. Putin, despite all his bravado, clearly made a decision not to interfere in the event of an American strike on Assad targets. The Russian air defences in Syria were switched on but never attempted to shoot down the Tomahawks and other missiles flying into Syrian air space. Putin didn't want a war with the US. So all that rhetoric about how Russia would shoot down US missiles if they came anywhere near Russian troops sounded dramatic but didn't amount to much. But Putin is no fool. He will have calculated that the US didn't want a war with Russia either, so any American strikes would therefore be strictly focused on Syrian targets where Russians were NOT based. And that's exactly what happened. So a pretty powerful message to Assad and Putin but no wider war, no casualties, just lots of bricks and mortar and, of course, chlorine and sarin nerve agent stocks. Trump is pleased because it was all shiny and clean and impeccably carried out using seriously impressive military high-tech, and Putin is probably smiling quietly because he can put it about through his propaganda machine that Trump was too afraid to take him on big-style. Provided Assad doesn't do anything stupid over the next few months, the civil war in Syria will settle back into its usual horrific daily artillery shelling, barrel bombs and human rights abuses.

Trump/May/Macron action was justified

Well we didn't have to wait long. Overnight it has happened. The airstrikes and Tomahawk cruise missile attacks were pretty proportionate and very precisely targeted. I can see Jim Mattis's hand in the targeting list. No airbases, no aircraft, nowhere where there might be civilians nearby. Just three chemical weapons sights/facilities, presumably destroyed to rubble. So a big message to Assad and to Putin. It won't end the civil war and it won't bring down Assad but it will tell Assad and Putin that if they ever drop chemicals/nerve agents on anyone ever again they will get an even bigger response. Mattis said this was a one-shot but Trump made it clear that the US would be back for more strikes if Assad didn't stop filling munitions with chemicals. I agree with this tough message. I think it's right, justified and proper. I think Trump should be supported, not just by the UK and France but by the whole international community. This won't happen because that's the way the world is, but no one should be happy when one country on this planet is resorting to such weapons. No weapons are nice and every attack that kills civilians is wrong and illegal and terrible. But there is something about the use of chemical and biological weapons in a civil war which horrifies one more than ordinary bombs. Both kill but it's the idea of a leader of a country actually thinking it would be a good idea to make men women and children suffer with dangerous chemicals that puts what Assad has one into a different category of war. It still seems extraordinarily shameful that the West did nothing to punish Saddam Hussein when he used mustard gas and sarin nerve agent to kill 5,000 Kurds in the Kurdish city of Halabja on March 16 1988. But times have moved on and we are in a more dangerous world. Saddam got his comeuppance in 2003 - a long time to wait for his punishment - but the US, Britain and France thought, quite rightly, that if Assad was allowed to get away with resorting to chemical weapons attacks against civilians, this sort of horror would become the norm, not just in Syria but elsewhere in other war zones. Moscow has threatened that there will be consequences. But Putin has played one reckless card too many. He has supported Assad whatever the Syrian tyrant has done and now the world community needs to condemn the Russian leader and isolate him. The Russians are a great people but their leader is destroying the image of their motherland and if he decides to carry out some retaliatory strike against the US, Britain or France, he will be treated as a pariah on the world stage. Russia was supposed to be the guarantor of Syria's elimination of ALL of its chemical weapons stocks in 2016. Clearly not only did Russia fail as the framework nation to fulfill its promise to the world but Moscow has lied and lied again about Syria's continuing use of the chemical weapons that were secretly stored away for future use. Assad and Putin have now both got what they deserved.

When is it going to happen?

The good thing is that Trump has at last introduced an element of doubt in the big question of the week: when will the US and others attack Syria for the appalling chemical strike on civilians in Douma. Everyone expected an instant Tomahawk/air strike thunderclap within hours of Trump promising that the missiles were coming. The Syrians scampered like frightened bunnies and removed everything they could lay their hands on at the potentially vulnerable bases and put them under the safe-keeping of the Russians at their base in Latakia province. But then all the doubts began to rage, and Trump, far from pressing the button for immediate action, started rowing back and talked of sometime-maybe-just-wait-and-see etc. At least now the Syrians and Russians don't know what to expect or when. So the element of surprise, or sort-of surprise has been returned to the war scenario. Surprise, as every general will tell you, is key to success in battle. However, in some respects it would have been better for Trump to have done what he did the last time he got angry over a chemical attack in Syria - a year ago. Then he just pressed the button almost straightaway, and 59 Tomahawks were winging their way to a Syrian airbase before you could say "Hey, wait a minute" It was all over so quickly there was no talk of a third world war. The Russians cancelled the agreement under which the Pentagon and Russian ministry of defence talked to each to avoid any conflict between them while flying jet fighters in Syrian airspace every day. But it wasn't long before the hotline was reopened and all was well again. This time there has been such a hoohah and such increasingly belligerent rhetoric from both the White House and the Kremlin that the potential consequences of a real fight in Syria - a big powers fight - are beginning to look on the cards. There WILL be an attack of some sort. Jim Mattis, the US defence secretary, effectively said so when he stated that the chemical raid HAD to be punished for the sake of the future of the world. But if only it had already happened.

Presidential tweets are a nightmare

We're now so used to President Trump's tweeting and yet almost every day there's a surprise. Sometimes that works out fine but more often than not it's a disaster. For example, Trump's announcement that a decision on what to do about Syria's chemical weapons attack was going to be made in 24-48 hours was more than 48 hours ago and there is still no decision. This doesn't look good in the eyes of both Trump supporters and Trump non-supporters wherever they are in the world. In fact, rather than making a decision, the White House now seems to be in a rowing-back mood. "The missiles are coming", Trump said in another tweet. But then suddenly officials were talking about "all options are on the table" , one of the easiest cliches to come up with, implying that options other than military action might be on the cards. The lack of a decision has given the rest of the world time to line up for or against and open the door for a longer, more drawn-out decision-making progress, along the classic lines of "Shall we or shan't we?" or "Can we or can't we" or "What could Russia do if we did?" Well, all these questions are valid for a democracy-loving country such as the United States of America, and it does no harm to think through all the consequences and potential consequences of hitting Syria. But Trump tweeted what he tweeted and the world expected instant action, whether it was right or wrong. Cleary there is no one in the White House with the authority or ability to stop Trump from tweeting wild statements which then fall by the wayside. But for the sake of the US military which is waiting in the wings to be told whether to put their lives in harm's way or not, a few less tweets and more serious behind-doors discussions over the next few days the better for all of them.

How dangerous is this confrontation with Moscow?

If the US, plus Britain and France, launch airstrikes/Tomahawks at Syrian airbases known to have chemical stocks, is this going to lead to a serious, and therefore potentially extremely dangerous confrontation with Russia? Donald Trump is playing the Big Stick Game and warning Moscow that missiles, very smart ones, will soon be on the way. I can't recall an American president saying anything like that before. His tough stance is supposed to put Russia on notice that the US, with or without anyone else's support, WILL attack Syria. The last time he pressed the button for a Tomahawk missile strike against a Syrian airbase - last year - Moscow grumbled and muttered but did nothing. This time, Moscow is warnig that it will shoot down any US missiles aimed in Syria's direction. So this time it's different. The Russians are saying they will attack American missiles. This puts the whole situation into a different stratosphere. And therefore potentially putting us all into a graver place. Syria clearly used chemical munitions to hit Douma. I can't imagine there is anyone - especially not Moscow - who disbelieves that. Russian troops operate alongside Syrian forces. They know what's going on. They must have approved the chemical airstrike, unless Bashar Assad, for once, failed to liase with them. So Trump is right. Assad has to be punished. But the problem is we have two big egos here, Trump's and Putin's. Neither wants to back down and both want to prove that their respective military capabilities are the best. IF Russia succeeds in shooting down any of the US missiles, or much worse, if Russian/Syrian forces shoot down US aircraft flying over Syria, I believe the US will not take this calmly. They will send in aircraft to destroy Syrian air defences which, of course, are Russian-made. That's where it could get very dangerous very quickly unless Moscow blinks and backs down. In my gut I think Trump feels that for all his bravado Putin will do just that, back down. If Putin takes on the US in Syria in a big way, he will definitely lose. Can Putin afford to be seen to lose against the US? I doubt it, but before we get to that point, there are going to be a few days of scary escalation. The end result? Assad will still be in power, Putin will still be his main backer. But Trump will have set a new marker. The US is not going to go away from this one, despite what Trump said only a week or so ago about pulling out US troops. Assad will never again, I hope, feel safe from Trump's big stick.

Mueller's for the chop!

Trump by all accounts is incandescent. The FBI raid - approved by the Justice Department - of the office of the president's personal lawyer, Michael D Cohen, will, I predict, finally bring to a head the White House's consuming hatred towards Robert Mueller, special counsel for "Russia collusion in the 2016 election". I put that last bit in quotes just as a reminder that this was what Mueller was supposed to be focusing on, but he has got so excited by other stuff, such as big-breasted porn stars having relations with Donald Trump 12 years ago, that he has widened his investigation to cover Trump and anything remotely connected to the 45th president that he, Mueller, doesn't like the sound or smell of. Mueller is going to get fired, sacked, ousted, put on trial, charged with treachery, espionage, Trump is that angry. It must be pretty galling for the president of the United States to have one of his closest friends raided at 3 o'clock in the morning. Or, as Trump put, it was like an attack on the country itself. Mueller took a helluva risk applying for a warrant for the raid, and the "senior" guy in the Justice Department who must have approved of the warrant application will also be for the high jump. Perhaps Jeff Sessions himself. Trump has been itching to get rid of Sessions. So the heads of Mueller and Sessions are now on the chopping block. And this is all happening while Trump is deliberating over whether just to bomb a couple of Syrian airfields as punishment for the chemical warfare attack on Douma or go all the way and target the Russians too. Jim Mattis who never looks out of sorts must be sleeping very little at the moment. He knows his commander-in-chief is in a rage over both that "animal" Bashar Assad, and now also over that *******Mueller bloke. Trump has serious bombing in mind. Mattis will advise against any targeting of Russians of any kind in Syria, but if there's heavy bombing there could easily be Russian collateral damage. Trump won't care. Nor will John Bolton, his new national security adviser. But Mattis will have the world on his shoulders as he tries to devise a way of punishing the Syrian regime and its backers, Moscow and Tehran, without actually killing or injuring anyone from those two countries. Good luck General Mattis, all your Marine Corps training will be needed for this one.

Is the Douma chemical attack another red line for Trump?

On the face of it, there can be very little doubt that Douma in eastern Ghouta in Syria suffered a chemical attack on Saturday night. The proof is in the photographs sent around the world. I personally received an email with Arabic writing, showing a batch of photos of young children with foam coming from their mouths, within an hour or so of the attack. My first reaction - and this was well before the story actualy broke - was that it was propaganda, another social media fake news story. Such is the impact of fake news stories and pictures today that it is easy to become cynical. My doubts were removed when the story started breaking on BBC and elsewhere a few hours later. But it still made me think, could this be real or faked? It's this sort of questioning which Damsascus and Moscow and Tehran are able to exploit so cleverly. Today both Syria and Russia have proclaimed that the chemical attack never happened and that it had all been made up. Moscow said Russian experts and aid agencies had visited Douma and found no evidence of a chemical attack. That's when I knew for sure that this was genuinely an horrific chemical attack which killed dozens of men, women and children. Russia's credibility is now so low after a deluge of lies over the Skripal poisoning and other issues that almost everything they now say should be treated as the opposite of the truth. Trump will still need absolute proof, preferably from an international body that can go in and take samples. But the problem with that is that Douma is surrounded by Syrian regime forces and they are not going to allow UN specialists or some other expert organisation to enter the area to look for chemical traces. So if there is total obstruction by Assad forces, Trump and Macron and perhaps Theresa May will have to lean heavily on their intelligence agencies to provide the proof before deciding what to do next. Provided they come up with the evidence - and I think they will - Trump and his macho hawkish new national security adviser John Bolton will want to go for the whole works and start bombing Syrian airfields. Israel preempted everyone by launching an air raid yesterday on a Syrian airbase, perhaps as a way of encouraging Trump to do likewise. That would be very Netanyahu!

Assad's latest stupidity

The outright stupidity of some world leaders beggars belief. First, we have Donald Trump announcing to the world five days ago that he wanted to pull out all American troops from Syria as soon as possible. Never mind that there are still pockets of resilient, reengaging Isis militants trying to establish themselves as an insurgency force and launching asymetric attacks. Giving notice of withdrawal to the enemy is like saying, "Help yourself, you can do what you like now." Obama learnt that lesson when he announced his troop surge to Afghanistan but then told the Taliban that they would only stay there for a limited period and would then all be told to get out. So the Taliban smiled and waited. In the Trump/Syria case, the response was almost immediate, not from Isis but from Bashar Assad. Overnight he launched a chemical weapons attack on Douma, the last rebel-held district of eastern Ghouta in the surburbs of Damascus, killing 70 men, women and children. The coincidence of the timing is overwhlemingly obvious. Of course he saw Trump's tweet about pulling troops out of Syria, probably rang Putin to say "Whoopee", and then ordered his air force to put chemical munitions onto their aircraft and poison anyone around in Douma. Assad's decision was not just stupid, it was outrageous, murderous and prosecutable in any court brave enough to put him on trial. I've said it before, decisions/announcements/tweets (in Trump's case) have consequences. Social media declarations are not a game when they are being used by the president of the United States to project his views and ideas. People actually notice and take them on board. Assad clearly did. He must have thought he could get away with this latest atrocity because Trump was no longer interested. Now of course Trump is outraged and talking of "big penalties" for Syria. But if Trump orders another round of Tomahawk cruise missiles to hit Syrian airbases, it will bring the smile to his face but will achieve precisely nothing, unless he makes it clear that the US troops doing a brilliant job in Syria will stay for as long as they are needed and that the US will from now insist on participating in the decision-making over Syria's future. The Mafia-godfather-style meetings between the former KGB colonel, Vladimir Putin, the odious President Erdogan of Turkey, the not-to-be-underestimated cleric, President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, and the chemical weapons enthusiast Bashar Assad of Syria are supposed to be bringing peace to the region!! They represent probably the nastiest club of leaders created in modern times. The fact that the US is not in any kind of power-brokering role is staggering. But then Trump wants to get out of Syria. Presumably he doesn't care that Assad, backed by Russia and Hezbollah, is going to rule for life. So, unless the US gets more involved in Syria rather than just killing off the last remnants of Isis, I predict more chemical attacks and more devastating suffering for the Syrian people.

Macron versus the railways

President Macron is doing what other French leaders have tried but failed to do in the past, get hold of the whole workforce, shake it up and make it enter the 21st century. Bit like what Maggie Thatcher did to the unions in general and the miners in particular way back in the UK. His predecessors sounded tough but surrendered after months of national strikes, no trains and combine harvesters blocking the motorways. The French worker has always known how to bring a government to its knees. The French air traffic controllers, for example, just choose the busiest holiday period and storm out, leaving every airport and every travelling family in misery. By my recollection the only leader of a country who ever took on the air traffic controllers was Ronald Reagan. He just sacked the lot and brought in retrained management people to keep the planes flying. It was risky but brilliant and it worked. Macron now has to confront the railway workers who hate his labour reforms and are taking strike action for the next few months. If he turns out to be another Francois Hollande he will back down and say, "ok ok, you can have all your special privileges, I can't fight you". This time, the French president has to stand firm whatever the consequences. These train guys, once they are recruited, are guaranteed a job for life. The railways, psrtly as a result of this extraordinary gift, are running at a huge loss which has to be paid for by the French taxpayers. Any sensible person with even basic maths knows that a business, whether public or private. cannot go on doing that, not in this day and age. They need to get real. Everyone has heard of the British working malaise, but the French are much much worse. I happen to know of one major company owned by the French in the UK running a key transport organisation, some of whose employees do very little all day and whenever anyone suggests good ways to make the whole place more efficient he or she gets told to shut up. So Macron has his work cut out. Us holidaymakers who have planned to go to France by Eurostar this summer will have to grin and bear it. But if Macron wins then it will be good news for everyone, not just for France. Bon chance, M Macron.

Russia playing a PR blinder

The way people get off crimes, if there's no absolute in-your-face evidence, like DNA, CCTV footage etc, is to deny deny deny and claim innocence innocence innonence and get angry if no one believes you. Thus, in the Novichok poisoning case, the accused - Russia - is doing all of those things and doing it spectacularly well. Even sending well wishes to the victims of the poisoning and asking to see the Skripal daughter for consular counselling. The PR machine in Moscow is working at full stretch. The next big hurdle for the British case against Moscow is the expected statement from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons which has been examining and analysing the nerve agent traces given to them by Porton Down. I seriously doubt that the OPCW experts will conclude that the material definitely came from a certain laboratory in a certain town in Russia and had all the hallmarks of Dr Boris *******, the well known Russian Novichok expert. If Porton Down, probably the best laboratory of its kind in the world, couldn't put its finger on the source of the Novichok, then it's highy unlikely the OPCW is going to be confident enough to say to the world: "J'accuse...." So Russia will survive once again and Moscow will turn whatever statement the organisation makes into a "We told you so, we're innocent" declaration and launch into another denunciation of the British government. Moscow has already warned that Britain is "playing with fire", a phrase filled with malice which is actually quite scary. If both Porton Down and the OPCW cannot be sure about the source of the nerve agent, the Russian PR machine will be opening the best Georgian champagne. It will be a dangerous moment for Theresa May. I hope she is ready with a counter argument. She has to remind the world of three vital points: One, a former RUSSIAN spy and double agent who betrayed his country to work for MI6, plus his daughter, were poisoned with a nerve agent only ever made by a state-owned laboratory. Two, Russia is the only known state which developed Novichok, whatever the Russian ambassador in London has said. Three, why would anyone else in the universe, even if they were able to get hold of some Novichok from somewhere - is there a black market in this stuff? - try and assassinate a former RUSSIAN spy and double agent who betrayed his country to work for MI6. This is a mixture of fact and circumstantial evidence but it sounds pretty valid to me. But unless there is other evidence, really good evidence emanating from the police investigation, no one, not even Boris Johnson, can categorically say, "We know it was the Russians because...." So it's down to basic police work. They HAVE to trace the journey the Novichok made before it got to the front door handle of the Skripal house in Salisbury. They HAVE to pinpoint who brought it in. They HAVE to discover who smeared or sprayed it on to the handle and when this occurred. They need a face or faces, they need a name or names, and they need the copper bottom link to the Kremlin. Good luck with that.

Trump wants troops home

Trump's logic about bringing home the 2,000 US troops currently in Syria doesn't really hold water. The special operations troops and Marines serving with the Syrian Democratic Forces against the last pockets of Isis are doing what they are trained to do. Without them and the constant bombing by mostly US aircraft, the SDF would never have been able to retake Raqqa, the Isis caiiphate stronghold, nor defeat the militants across eastern Syria. Their value there is totally underestimated by the president who seems to want to save money and let others get on with trying to stabilise Syria. Ok, the role of the US military is not to reconstruct Syria and bring peace. But having helped to defeat, or largely defeat, Isis, it would be shameful for the American special operations troops to come home and abandon their SDF comrades. They still have a vital role to play and if, by their presence, they help to keep Turkey at bay and force Russia and Iran to include the US in forging a peace settlement, all the better. Trump, like his predecesors, is scared of mission creep. Afghanistan was a classic example. US forces helped to overthrow the Taliban in 2001 and here we are 17 years later with thousands of US military still embedded in the country. Trump, perhaps wisely, does not want an American occupying force in Syria for the next 15 years. But right now Syria has reached a crucial turning point. Syria, Turkey, Iran and Russia think they can exclude the US and carve out a settlement that will suit each of them. But after years of military involvement in Syria - albeit not aimed at overthrowing Bashar Assad - the US has to play a part in the country's future, if only to ensure that Isis will never again be able to set up a caliphate and seize back the territory it lost. Trump seems more interested in using the military to guard the border with Mexico. Although both Obama and George W Bush sent the National Guard to boost manpower at the border at one point, Trump might keep troops there until he gets his wall built, if he ever does. The Pentagon, understandably, doesn't want such vital resources used in a role where there is no enemy. Mexico is a partner nation. The military might put off a few illegal immigrants, maybe even the odd drug trafficker, but the soldiers can't be everywhere. Trump should leave the 2,000 troops in Syria to finish the job properly, and think of other ways of ensuring security on America's borders. Perhaps he can persuade the omni-present Saudi Crown Prince to cough up the money for his wall. It looks like the Saudis are going to reach into their pockets to help reconstruct Syria. So a few extra billions for a wall, just between friends? What would Mexico say to that I wonder.

Putin seizes on Porton Down confession

All politicians know there are ways of telling the truth. Sometimes there have to be certain omissions but generally it's all about the choice of words. Unfortunately no one told Gary Aitkenhead, chief executive of Porton Down's defence science and technology establishment. Downing Street had approved his appearance on Sky News but clearly no clever official advised him or warned him that a particular question might come up which he should take care to reply to. Sure enough, as expected, Sky asked him whether Porton Down had proved that the nerve agent Novichok used in the biological warfare assassination plot in Salisbury against Sergei Skripal and his daughter could be sourced to Russia. He replied, "No". Then rather pompously added that it wasn't Porton Down's job to pinpoint where the nerve agent had come from. All he did say was that it was a military-grade material and therefore it was most likely to have eminated from a State-run laboratory. But it was too late. At a stroke the Porton Down frontman had undermined Theresa May's whole case that Russia was behind the poisoning. She sold her argument to the US and Europe and they backed her by expelling Russian diplomats from all of their capitals. In what The Times this morning called a damage-limitation exercise, Mrs May explained that Porton Down wasn't the only fish in the sea. She had also relied on the assessment of the intelligence services who were obviously less cautious about naming their top culprit. Moscow came from all their lips. Poor Gary Aitkenhead, he really should get out more and perhaps read the odd newspaper to see what's going on in the world. Then he might have given the following reply to the Sky reporter. "Well, once we had proven beyond doubt that the nerve agent used in Salisbury was of the Novichok family we drew on all our experience from trying to develop defences against the most deadly biological and chemical warfare substances in the world and, knowing that Russia had developed Novichok between 1971 and 1993, we put Russia at the top of the list of likely candidates. Of course the nerve agent traces we were examining did not come with a Russian label attached, that would be too easy, but we began to research the characteristics of the substance to try and trace the precise source. We are still engaged in this effort." By now the Sky reporter would have been either asleep or very irritated. But such a reply would have been far more acceptable to the UK government than "No". And, Mr Aitkenhead, it would still have been the truth. Anyway, the damage is done. Putin leapt at the remarks and told the world he was as innocent as a new-born lamb, and Porton Down had just proved it. The Order of Lenin for Mr Aitkenhead perhaps.

Red carpet for Putin?

The Trump world is so hard to decipher. First of all he wanted to be friends with Putin, then, after even he had to agree that the Russians had interfered in the US 2016 election, he went along with all the new sanctions put in his in-tray to punish individual Russians and organisations, then he took a tough stand against the Salisbury poisoning and kicked out 60 Ruskie diplomats/FSB/GRU spies from Washington; and then rang Putin and invited him to the White House! Red carpet stuff, dinner, bands playing perhaps. It makes so little sense. I expect Putin was quite surprised too. "Hey, Sergey," he probably shouted to Lavrov, his lapdog foreign minister, "You won't believe this but Trump has just invited me to Washington. How about that? I said yes. So get it sorted." If the Brits are clever, they'll serve a summons on him to be questioned by the Wiltshire police in connection with the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter as he comes out of the White House! The thought of Putin being gladhanded by Trump on a visit to the White House really does stick in the throat. But anything is possible with Trump. This is the political world we live in now. Protocol has gone out of the window. Everything now is done according to instinct. The leader of the free world, as the president of the United States used to be described, does what the hell he wants. It's great news for Putin. He'll get on with Trump like a house on fire, and will then go back to Moscow and carry on as before, plotting and planning and cyber-attacking and denying any knowledge of anything so nefarious as launching a nerve agent attack on British territory.

Sergey Lavrov should feel embarrassed

For outrageous brazenness, Sergey Lavrov takes the top prize, an Emmy or Bafta or even Oscar. It would be funny if it wasn't funny. The Russian foreign minister whose cheeks seem to get lower and lower as he speaks, makes the accusation that it was in Theresa May's interests to poison the Russian double agent Sergei Skripal because of her troubles over Brexit. Or perhaps the Americans did it, he says. Did he write the script or was it dictated by his boss? Can Lavrov seriously hold up his head ever again as Russia's top diplomat if he's going to continue spouting such rubbish? So Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned/murdered by David Cameron?! Come on, Lavrov, this sort of brazeness is so breathtaking it will only help to convince everyone else, probably including Russian citizens, that the Kremlin was behind both the Skripal and Litvinenko poisonings. So how does your logic work, Mr Foreign Minister? The British government tried to kill the man who worked for MI6 because it would help Mrs May overcome her Brexit nightmare by showing she was tough? Is that the thinking? Well, despite his dealings with the West for so many years, Lavrov is deliberately ignoring the fact that Number 10 Downing Street is not like the Kremlin. Michael Portillo when defence secretary in 1995 boasted at the Conservative Party annual conference that he could call on the SAS to deal with problems. It was a stupid remark and not appreciated by the Hereford-based regiment. But he was being jocular. Rather like when Hugh Grant playing the prime minister in the film Love Actually offered to call the SAS to deal with his secretary's nasty boyfriend. The SAS is not an assassination squad at the prime minister's beck and call to bump people off. Nor does MI6, the Secret Intelligence Service, have a "wet" unit ready at a moment's notice to execute the country's enemies. Many of the intelligence officers now do have a licence to carry arms but only to protect themselves on the most hostile assignments. But this is a totally different situation. This has nothing to do with Lavrov's extraordinary implied suggestion that Mrs May made a phone call to Hereford or to Vauxhall Cross and ordered: "I want Skripal targeted and use that Novichok stuff we have down at Porton Down." It's so ridiculous it's laughable. And yet the Russian foreign minister's claims are being given headline news around the world. Well that's what the Kremlin wanted and it has, unfortunately, succeeded.

The two dominating leaders in the world

The key word in the headline is "in". I'm referring to Trump and Putin. They are the dominating leaders in the world right now but not the dominating leaders OF the world. I think Xi Zinping will eventually don that description because he has so many years ahead of him as China's president, bar ill health, that he can plan Chinese domination for the next two decades. But the Terrible Twins in leadership terms are currently Trump and Putin. If it's not Trump in the headlines it's Putin. They are perhaps trying to outdo each other. Maybe Trump is right, they should be friends because at least then they might take into account each other's personal relations before doing something stupid. Putin is the real danger man of the two because he has a "couldn't care less" attititude towards the rest of the world. No one knows what he really wants other than to show off Russia's increasing military power. For example, there are lots of reports about how about Russian submarines keep lurking near the fibre optic cables on the ocean bed through which flows everything we rely on today, such as phone calls, emails and texts. Is Putin actually signalling that he is prepared to cut the cables if "the West" does anything to anger him? Is Putin that maniacal? Let's hope not. Perhaps it's all just bluster to keep us guessing. Cutting the fibre optic cables would be an act of war. Putin must know that. So let's say the submarine-lurking operation is Putin having some blackmailing fun. Trump meanwhile is now getting into his stride. He had 12 months of getting used to being in charge of the world's only real superpower, he has shaken up his cabinet, sacked so many people he has lost count and has made it abundantly clear that he doesn't really need advisers. He is the Boss. He will do what his instincts tell him to do. That could be good or very very bad. At least it might keep Putin on his toes but for the rest of us mortals we are entering a new era of quite frightening uncertainty.