Lindsey Graham blows the trumpet for Ukraine

Sanator Lindsey Graham is a canny politician and knows what's what. So when he came back from another trip to Kyiv and claimed the Ukrainian counter-offensive, the one that has been imminent for weeks, is going to deliver a soccer punch to the Russians, you know he has had a good session with Zelensky and co and what he has been told sounds pretty impressive. The Russians have been waiting for the big blow to land and have been building defences like they were in World War One or Two. Which means the Ukrainians will need American-style obsstruction-busting bombs and heavy armoured vehicles. Do they have what they need? They seem confident that they do, judging by Graham's hints and indications. Let's hope so, because if this war is ever going to end or at least stop with some sort of reasonable arrangement, then the anticipated big blow will have to be so effective that the Russian defences will crumble. I'm not sure even with all the weapons provided by the West that Ukraine has sufficient firepower on land and in the air to overwhelm the Russian positions in the east and south. They don't have the F-16s yet so in the air they will have to continue to rely on old Soviet aircraft which are good but not superior to what the Russians have, and the Russians hav a helluva lot more combat aircraft available, about 1,000. Good luck to the Ukrainians but I don't think the Russians are done yet.

China man on the moon soon

China wants to have a man or men on the moon before 2030. And the US plans to have astronauts walking the surface of the moon in 2025. Heyho, it's the space race all over again. Back in the day it was the Soviets and the Americans trying to outdo each other, with the Soviets taking first bite with their Sputnik satellite that took everyone by surprise. Now it's all US versus China. There are people, like Elan Musk and Richard Branson, who have a fervent belief that one day the moon will become an alternative planet for the human race. And then later, on Mars. But I just don't see it. Giving up one's Victorian semi with roses round the front door for a glorified tent on the freezing moon somehow doesn't appeal. It would be like buying a holiday home in South Georgia. But when you are a superpower you have to think big and big means space. Space is already the new war domain and I guess it's not inconceivable that another planet could be colonised one of these days. But they won't get the average human desperate to join the queue. It's not as if life on the moon or Mars would be war-free. With the Americans and Chinese battling for the same territory up there, there is almost bound to be a war at some point. Better to stay down here and tend your roses.

Western leaders are talking more about defeating Russia

Within the Nato alliance there seems to be a growing view that the only way to end the war in Ukraine is for Russia to be defeated. If the world was a simple place where right and wrong were easily distinguishable and everyone played fair, then, yes, it would solve a lot of problems if Russia were defeated, Putin was humiliated, and we could all get back to our nice lives and not to have to continue sending billions of dollars of weapons to Kyiv. But the world is not like that. The world is cruel and power-mad, so if the ultimate goal in the West and in Kyiv is for total defeat of Russia, I fear the consequences. I'm not saying it's wrong, it's not wrong, it's the right thing to do, but it has to be thought through. What would Putin do if he faced overwhelming defeat? Fortunately I don't think we need to spell out whether he will go mad and go nuclear out of revenge. I think what will happen if Ukraine makes huge strides in its imminent territory-grabbing-back counter-offensive is that China will step in big time and bring all the parties together for a peace-deal summit. It's not in Beijing's interest for Russia/Putin to be defeated. Xi Zinping may not have come out in public support of Putin's invasion but he wants a strong and anti-West partner and he won't let Putin be crushed into defeat. And when China steps in, the West, including the US, will be secretly happy, or even openly happy, because the worst scenario is a for-ever war. There has to be a deal at some stage. General Mark Milley, US chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said so a long time ago and he was right. It's the political leaders, not the military, who talk about victory and defeat. If the Ukrainian counter-offensive achieves big results, Zelensky can come to the table with a strong hand. That's the most realistic scenario.

Another reason why Donald Trump will win the Republican nomination

Donald Trump will end up with plenty of rivals for the Republican presidential nomination. So it will be a really tough fight? Well actually not at all and the reason is simple. None of the other candidates, whether it be Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Mike Pence or Tom Scott or whoever is going to dare to come out and attack the former president with everything they have got. Because if they do, they will alienate the very people whom they will be trying their best to win over. In other words, the only way they are going to beat Trump is by being nice about him but at the same time try to offer an alternative way forward to make Trump loyalists begin to have doubts about a man who is not only 76 but also one of the most controversial politicians in US history. This is called trying to square the circle. An outright attack on Trump will put so many Republican voters off that it will be like committing political suicide. One way for the Trump challengers to make their case might be to ignore Trump altogether, not mention him, just focus on their own agenda and hope it's enough for the millions of supporters of The Donald to switch. But that would be like being in a room with the largest elephant on the planet and pretending it's not there. Another option might be to praise Trump for everything he has done and stands for but suggest that it would be a good idea to have a younger nominee to take on the octogenarian Joe Biden. But a lot of Republican voters with Trump as their favourite might think that's disrespectful. So every which way, the challenge for the Trump rivals is going to be very very difficult. Put a foot wrong, say the wrong thing, even hint that Trump is past it and the voters will wither away. For all these reasons, I repeat what I said before, Trump is going to win the nomination, way ahead of his rivals, and will probably beat Biden.

Salute to Henry Kissinger, 100 today

Henry Kissinger is possibly the most famous person on the planet. Never mind all the pop stars and rock stars, the popes and presidents and others on the so-called A List of celebrities. Kissinger has been around for 100 years and has more wisdom and knowledge in his head than most of the world's population put together. I met him twice, each time in a relatively intimate setting with a dozen or so other journalists sitting round a table in a special dining room in the posh part of London, and just listened to him answering our questions. He was a formidable presence and each occasion was unforgettable. There will be many commentators who will try to gainsay his reputation by pointing to his involvement in the decision to launch a massive bombing campaign against Cambodia in 1969/70 when 110,000 tons of bombs were dropped, causing mass casualties. But as a statesman and diplomat and supreme intellect he probably had more influence on the world than any other comparable figure in modern history. His opinions are sought still to this day by presidents and prime ministers. He is a unique figure and has an esteeemed place in history. May he have many more birthdays.

DeSantis says he might pardon the convicted January 6 riot participants

When a politician announces he or she is going to run for the White House they get all power-thoughtful and start making lists of what they might do on day one of being voted in as president. Ron DeSantis, literally only a day or so into his campaign after his somewhat twitchy Twitter performance and he is already musing at the prospect of pardoning the January 6 Capitol rioters. He can only do that of course if, first, he beats Donald Trump to the Republican nomination and, second, defeats Joe Biden. So it's all a bit premature but what is interesting is that even at this early stage he is thinking about pardoning people involved in one of the most climactic events in Washington since the British burnt down the White House and Congress on August 24, 1814. The pardoning would of course include Donald Trump who hasn't been convicted of anything related to the January 6 assault but is still being investigated. So on day one DeSantis marches into the White House, gets out his fountain pen and signs pardons for the lot. I wonder how that will play with voters when they try to make up their minds who they want to be the 47th president. I guess all those weird-looking guys with horns and tattoos will vote for him. For me, it's a bad move even to hint at pardoning people who tried to overturn democracy. But perhaps I'm old-fashioned.

How can the destruction of Bakhmut be seen as a victory for Moscow?

After pounding by artillery, rockets, cruise missiles, air-launched bombs and everything else in the Russian armoury, Bakhmut looks like Dresden after it was firebombed by the Allies in the Second World War. There is nothing left in Bakhmut for it to justify being called a city. Like Mariupol on the northern coast of the Sea of Azov which received similar treatment by the Russians last year, Bakhmut is a place of death and rubble. It will take billions and billions of dollars for both cities to be restored to their former glory. Who is going to do it? The Russians? No, not a hope in hell. They will remain, probably for years, as the legacy of Vladimir Putin's war. It almost doesn't matter that the Russian army is now supposedly taking over control of Bakhmut from the notoriously murderous Wagner Group of Russian convicts. There is nothing for them to control, the devastation is so great. My own experience of walking through a city destroyed by war was in the 1990s in Bosnia. The city of Mostar, or at least the eastern section of it where the Muslim population lived. After the artillery barrages launched by the Croatian forces there wasn't a building left which had not either been reduced to rubble or made structurally, dangerously unsound. When a city is destroyed like that, what's left is an eery silence. I shall never forget it. So the Russian troops will be walking around the ruins of Bakhmut and, hopefully, wondering what the point of it all had been. Putin thinks it was a victory. It was never that.

Despite everything Donald Trump could still be president again in 20 months' time

Ron DeSantis is now in the race for the White House. The Florida governor is tweeting his way into a presidential campaign alongside Twitter king Elon Musk. All very jazzy and new-style. Almost at the same time as DeSantis launches his bid for the 2024 Republican nomination, Donald Trump gets the news that he is to face trial in March next year during the primary season, charged with business fraud over the hush money paid to Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress who claimed she had an affair with the president before he was president. In the normal world, this should have been excellent news for DeSantis and very bad news for Trump. But there is nothing normal about politics in the US when Donald Trump is around which is why I believe the date for Trump's trial just eight months before the election will be irrelevant. In fact it might well help his cause because it will give him even more publicity than he gets every day already and it will no doubt boost his claim that the Biden administration is out to get him and it's all fake news.The donations will keep rolling in. So, despite the upcoming trial, despite other possible legal confrontations over his retention of classified documents and his claimed role behind the January 6 2021 attack on the Capitol, despite the arrival of a serious candidate in DeSantis for the Republican nomination and despite a million other things, I still think there is every chance that Donald Trump will win the nomination, will beat Joe Biden and will be president once again. That's the way it is in America. A helluva lot of voters love him and will vote for him whatever he does or did in the past.

Putin and his nuclear card

The destruction and overwhelmingly high casualty toll suffered during the long battle for the city of Bakhmut has underlined for President Putin that however this particular battle ends he will never be able to declare victory. Bakhmut will always be remembered as the city which proved Putin's so-called special military operation was bound to fail in its objectives. First because the Russian leader underestimated the commitment of the Ukrainian military forces to defend their country; and second because of the West's united support for the Kyiv government. Under such circumstances, is the nuclear option still the single most devastating card Putin has to play? Or would the launching of tactical nuclear weapons be the final acknowledgement by the Kremlin that the war to take control of Ukraine has irrevocably failed? *Why would Putin resort to nuclear weapons? After 15 months of war and the prospect of a never-ending conflict ahead of him, Putin who has sole command of Russia's large stockpile of tactical nuclear bombs and missiles, could come to the conclusion that only a mighty blow using the most deadly weapon at his disposal would save his nation, and his regime, from humiliation and ignominy. Putin and Sergey Lavrov, the foreign minister, have stated that Moscow would have the right to turn to nuclear weapons if the very existence of the Russian motherland faced extinction. Putin's definition of an existential threat to Russia may have changed. He may see a prolonged war with accelerating Russian casualties and the harm it is doing to the country's economic well-being as justification for going nuclear. Avril Haines, director of US National intelligence, the organisation which heads up all 18 of America's intelligence agencies, is still convinced that it is "unlikely" Putin will use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. But the most difficult question facing the West's intelligence services is trying to guess or second-guess what is in Putin's mind. Looking at the nuclear issue from a western standpoint, the answer seems clear. Strategically and tactically it would make little sense. Tactical nuclear weapons, with their more limited range and potency, would be devastating but would not guarantee either an end to the war or an instant "victory" for Putin. However, in Putin's mind, using nuclear weapons could be his way of throwing the gauntlet down to the West, his message being: "by continuing to arm Kyiv with increasingly advanced weaponry to hurt Russian forces I had no other choice." *What is stopping Putin from launching tactical nuclear weapons? There are two principal reasons. First is China. President Xi Zinping has publicly stated and, no doubt privately warned Putin in person, that nuclear weapons should never be used. China is Russia's strategic partner. The alliance between the two nations has grown exponentially since the war in Ukraine began. The Chinese leader has never condemned his Russian friend for invading Ukraine but, so far, he has not offered military help. Furthermore, he is trying to position himself as a peacemaker, attempting to forge a settlement that would bring a diplomatic end to the war and boost his own reputation and power on the global stage. Putin will know that if he orders a nuclear strike, however limited, his partnership with China would be put at grave risk if not destroyed. The second reason is the likely response from US and NATO. Putin may argue the case in his mind that the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine would not lead to a nuclear or conventional counterstrike by the West because Kyiv is not a member of the western alliance and is therefore not covered by Article Five of the organisation's founding treaty. This guarantees that an attack on an individual member of the alliance is equivalent to an attack on Nato as a whole. However, the US has made it clear that the use of nuclear weapons by Putin in Ukraine would have "catastrophic consequences" for Russia. What these consequences would be have not been spelled out. But could it lead to a direct confrontation between Nato and Russia? Could President Biden be persuaded to send an armoured division or more into Ukraine to fight alongside Ukrainian troops? Putin has to take these possible scenarios into account before gambling on his nuclear options. *Has anything changed which makes it more or less likely that Putin will use nuclear weapons? It could be argued that out of desperation because of the way his war has backfired, Putin will risk going nuclear. However, this picture of a leader pressing the nuclear button like a man with nowhere else to turn is not realistic. Putin has shown that he is prepared to battle on, irrespective of the appalling losses his troops have suffered. He will grab what he can, and if the destroyed Bakhmut eventually falls into his hands, it will convince him to continue pursuing his war aims, even though the capture of the city would not advance his strategic objectives. What has changed, however, is the scale and quality of the weaponry provided by the US-led coalition of 50 countries. Now that the US has finally agreed for American-built F-16 fighter jets to be supplied to Ukraine, the battle for air superiority will pose a new and potentially crucial phase in the war. Russia has failed to win air superiority largely due to effective Ukrainian defences - and now especially with US Patriot missile systems in operation. Once the Ukrainian air force has F-16s, Kyiv will have a better chance to dominate the battleground below. Moscow has warned of "enormous risks" if the West goes ahead with sending these fighter aircraft to Ukraine. When he used these words was Alexander Grushko, Russia's deputy foreign minister, hinting that the arrival of F-16s could lead to a nuclear response? Moscow has been warning of the nuclear option since the war began. It has been interpreted by Western governments as a propaganda tool, a way of scaring the West into backing off with its supplies of weapons to Kyiv, not as a serious ultimatum. Grushko's warning has been viewed in the same light. But can the West still be confident it can prevent what President Biden always said he wanted to avoid: a dramatic and dangerous escalation in the war. Could the supply of F-16s be Putin's red line? Or could it be some other weapon system provided in the future which makes the Russian leader begin to think seriously about the tactical nuclear option? Putin has already gone one step further with his nuclear card when he announced in March he would be sending tactical nuclear weapons to be based in Belarus. It was Putin's most pronounced nuclear signal to the West since Russian troops invaded Ukraine in February last year. Putin said the construction of a storage facility in Belarus would be completed by July 1. Whenever asked, the Biden administration has stated that there have been no signs that Russia is preparing to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. "We have not seen any reason to adjust our own strategic nuclear posture," has been the stock response. However, if tactical nuclear bombs are moved to Belarus which shares borders with three Nato countries, Poland, Lithuania and Latvia, it may force a reassessment of Putin's likely options if the war in Ukraine fails to give him the strategic trophies he thought would fall into his hands months ago.

Bashar Assad comes out smelling of roses

The reinstatement of Bashar al-Asssad in the eyes of the Arab world is another cynical exercise in realpolitik Middle Eastern diplomacy. Here is a man whose regime has slaughtered tens if not hundreds of thousands of its own citizens in a brutal civil war, used chemical weapons against his enemies and saved his own life and his position of power by abusing every known moral, legal and ethical standard. Yet now he is being embraced, literally, by his fellow Arab leaders who seem to think it's the right time to bring the leader of Syria back into the family fold. Assad has been seen in Jeddah being welcomed by participants in the Arab League summit. He received a strong bearhug welcome from the Saudi crown prince and de facto ruler, Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Now there are two gentle folk of the Arab world sticking together! When asked whether this would mean the United States reviewing its policy towards Assad, Antony Blinken, US secretary of state, shook his head and said no. Nevertheless, Assad must be delighted that his fellow Arab leaders have now, it seems, recognised that he is still the legitimate leader of Syria and that he has largely got his country back under his control, give or take the odd slice of territory in the east and northeast where the remnants of the Islamic State are still battling it out against anyone who opposes them, including anti-Assad Arabs and Kurds and around 900 US troops. Assad will have returned to Damascus with a big smile on his face. Killing your own citizens on a grand scale, it seems, is ok when it comes to ensuring Arab unity.

Biden faces unity overseas but division back home

It is now a familiar routine in American politics for the United States to be on the precipice of a massively damaging debt default position only to be saved at the last second by a deal which pleases noone.There were several such instances in previous administrations but this time the drama and potential negative consequences are so much greater. Thanks to the enormous sums of money paid out of federal funds to keep America afloat during the Covid pandemic as well as the extra financial burdens created by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the US is today more than $30 trillion in debt - a staggering and unsustainable figure. Biden wants to lift the debt ceiling to help pay for the multiple domestic programmes he has introduced to cover all aspects of America's social and economic future and to create new industries and technologies which will help the save the planet from rapidly-changing climate conditions. The Republicans led by Kevin McCarthy, the House Speaker, have basically said "enough is enough, the country can no longer afford to maintain such a huge debt, let alone increase it and it's time to get the nation's finances back in shape". Their arguments are pretty sound and common sense but for Biden his whole legacy is at stake because the money-spending legislation he introduced was supposed to equip the US for a safer and more prosperous future. Biden is so upset at the Republicans' oposition that before leaving the G7 summit in Tokyo today he actually accused them of deliberately blocking his debt-ceiling request in order to stop him from winning another four years in the White House. As Robert Gates, the eminently wise and experienced former US defence secretary, said on US TV today, the country would be a darned sight better place if politicians in Washington learned to be civil to each other again. In other words, put country before partisan politics. There seems to be little hope of that, and so Biden will arrive back in Washington for more frantic negotiations and eventually just as the clock strikes, a deal will be done. It probably won't be a good deal for Biden and for his future prospects for the 2024 election.

What is Moscow threatening over the F-16 issue?

Moscow has issued so many dire warnings over the West's support for the Kyiv government that it is difficult to take the latest one seriously. Russia's deputy foreign minister Alexander Grushko has said there will be "enormous risks" if the West goes ahead and supplies Ukraine with F-16 fighter jets. Well, Zelensky has now been promised the jets, so what will Putin do? I think, and I hope I am right, that Putin has actually run out of options because pretty well everything has gone wrong for him with his "special military operation" in Ukraine. He can't stop the F-16s arriving and when the Ukrainian air force pilots have mastered how to fly them, they will begin to make a big difference in the skies over the battlefields. Putin can try and shoot them down of course but judging by Russia's total failure to win air superiority over Ukraine, it's likely that he will have little success in countering the new threat to his ambitions. Whenever Moscow threatens dire consequences, it always seems to imply that Putin will turn to unconventional weapons. But he knows, because he has received enough warnings from Nato on the subject, that if he resorts to nuclear weapons, there will be much graver consequences for Russia. Putin would face worldwide condemnation and a military response from Nato. I doubt he will take that risk. So what Mr Grushko had in his head when he issued the warning was probably more bluster than a genuine threat.

Zelensky to get F-16s after all

If ever there was an inevitable announcement it was Joe Biden telling Zelensky that he could have some F-16 fighter aircraft after all. Biden had been very reluctant to send F-16s for fear that they would escalate the war to something even more dangerous than it is at the moment. Even now he is not saying the US will send F-16s but he will not stand in the way if other Nato countries with F-16s send them, and he is willing for US pilots to provide training. Just like the sending of Abrams M1A1 tanks and longer-range attack missiles, the US has come round to it eventually. So probably by the end of this year the Ukrainian air force will be flying F-16s and taking on the Russian equivalents in midair combat. Will that escalate the war and raise the prospect of a wider conflict involving Nato? I seriously doubt it. Putin has had so many setbacks in his war with Ukraine that he knows for sure that if he takes on Nato as a whole he will be heavily defeated. So the sending of F-16s is belated but probably the right thing to do. Zelensky has been going on about it for so long that I guess Biden and co have just got worn down. They had to give in but took their time in doing so.

Now Ron DeSantis to enter the race

The Republican Florida governor is all set it seems to put his papers in for joining the 2024 presidential election campaign sometime next week. So then the Donald Trump/Ron DeSantis bashing will really begin. The prospect of a mighty battle between the two men, one considerably older than the other, does not exactly bode well for sensible, grown-up politics. Trump has already starting the bashing by calling the governor DeSanctimonious. It's a theme I'm sure we will hear a lot about in the next few months. Hopefully in between all the vitriol and insults, there will be intelligent debates about what these two men stand for. But I fear the vitriol will win the day. I doubt DeSantis will be able to stand up to the volume of criticism and personal attacks he will get from Trump. I always thought DeSantis, if he ever had a chance of becoming president, should have waited until 2028 but the pressure to stand this time round has been so overwhelming that if he were to announce that he is not going to be Trump's main rival for the Republican nomination, he would have lost face. So American voters are stuck with the Trump/DeSantis show whether they like it or not. It's probably good news for Joe Biden because while these two hammer away at each other, he can carry on quietly campaigning and reminding the electorate that he is the boss in the White House with all the experience of dealing with foreign and domestic crises. As I have written before, Ukraine is going to be a huge issue between now and November 2024, not because the voters themselves have the war in Ukraine at the top of their priorities - of course they don't - but because America's indirect involvement in the conflict and its leadership of the alliance supporting Kyiv with billions of dollars of weapons are testing Washington's status as the standard bearer of democracy against an increasingly authoritarian world. I don't see either Trump or DeSantis willing to take on that mantle. So it's down to Biden to prove to the American voter that this isssue is vital for the future of world security and that he is the man to shoulder the awesome burden. .

Poles living and working in the UK are being called up for military service back home

Brexit or no Brexit, there are still large numbers of Poles living and working in the United Kingdom. But now they are getting demand letters from back home to return to Poland. The reason says everything about the state of nervousness across the countries of eastern Europe who fear that Putin has his eye on them after he has finished destroyng Ukraine. The Poles are being called up for military service and are leaving in their droves as part of Warsaw's conscription programme. Poland is a frontline country and is more anxious than most about Putin's longer term ambitions. The reality of course is that if Putin were to dare to invade Poland or indulge in airstrikes or whatever, he would instantly be facing a war with the whole of Nato under the alliance's Article 5 pledge for every member nation. Moreover. can Putin really be plotting to take over Poland, Hungary, Romania and the three Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to try and reinstate the old Soviet Union? After his experience in Ukraine where his troops have been battered since they first entered the country on February 24, 2022, I can't imagine the Russian president has any dreams left to expand his territorial ambitions. And, despite all the early warnings from knowledgeable commentators that the whole of eastern Europe was at risk of being overrun by Russian troops, I doubt even Putin would ever have believed that was either realistic or prudent. He doesn't want a war with Nato for the simple reason that he knows Russia would lose if it remained a conventional war. And if it turned to a nuclear war then Putin and the planet would lose. So, despite the departure of conscript-age Poles from the UK to prepare to fight the Russians, I think it's over-egging the apocalypse scenario.

How Russian mercenaries got slaughtered by a band of US special ops troops

Faced by ten Russian T-72 tanks and 500 troops mostly from Russia's Wagner Group of mercenaries, the leader of 50 US special operations troops spoke into his mic:"We're going to stay and fight." Despite the overwhelming odds, there followed the biggest land battle between American and Russian-led forces anyone could remember and it ended with 350 enemy dead, nine destroyed tanks - and no US casualties. For the first time three members of the US special operations unit involved have spoken out about the four-hour confrontation with the Russian mercenaries which took place in eastern Syria on February 7, 2018. Ever since the US military had deployed to Syria in September, 2014, to fight the Islamic State (Isis), there had always been fears that at some point there could be direct conflict with Russian forces who were backing the Syrian regime. The battle in February, 2018, was the deadliest confrontation of all. The US special operations commandos who spoke to The War Horse, a US military news organisation, admitted it was an experience they had never imagined after being deployed to Syria. "It looked like New York City on New Year's Eve," a sergeant identified only as Chauncey, said. He led a quick reaction force of Green Berets and Marines to a burnt-out Conoco natural gas refinery which the Russian-led group was threatening to overrun. When the shoot-out began, officials in Washington rang Moscow to call off the fight. But Moscow denied there were Russians involved. Equipped only with armoured trucks and heavy machineguns, the quick reaction force took on the Russian tanks as they slowly approached to within a mile of their position and began firing 125mm shells. "This is what we get paid for," Chauncey said. "Let's open up and let 'em know we're here," he told his comrades. The Russian tank crews were thankfully inaccurate. The shells missed their targets. But Chauncey saw his unit's machinegun rounds "sparking" off the tanks. "The Russians were not hitting anything," Josh, another commando, said. One of the truck-mounted machineguns ran out of ammunition at a crucial moment. Josh had to climb out onto the roof to reload two belts of ammunition as artillery and tank shells burst around him. The shockwave hit him in the chest. The US troops had been appealing for airstrikes but it wasn't until all the Russian tanks were lined up within range that suddenly two pairs of Apache attack helicopters arrived overhead and blasted nine of the tanks. "They just destroyed everything," Chauncey said. The Russians were forced to withdraw. An intercepted Wagner Group radio message summed it up. "To make it short we had our arses kicked."

More missiles more war more killing in Ukraine

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that continuing to arm Ukraine to fight off Russia is the right and moral thing to do. But when I see Zelensky doing his rounds to drum up pledges for more and more missiles and tanks and ammunition and artillery, the nagging feeling is that the mass of weapons provided by the West will still not actually force Putin to withdraw his invasion troops. In fact the more Ukraine is armed the more likely Putin will stay the course because to withdraw now would be to accept utter humiliation in the eyes of the world. For a leader like Putin who is relentless in his pursuit of a revived Soviet Union, giving up is not part of his make-up. So the war will go on and on and the Russians will suffer defeats and the casualty toll will rise and rise but there will be no orders from the Kremlin to pull back. Under Putin's doctrine, however many setbacks there may be, the goal has to stay the same. The troops will remain until the job is done. If not the original job as imagined by Putin but enough of a job for the Russian leader to claim Mission Accomplished (he should have a chat with George W Bush about that!). So Zelensky has done well on his latest round-European-capitals trip with promises of a whole bunch of warfghting stuff to keep the battle going. But the more Zelensky fights back, the more Putin will reply with destruction and death. That is guaranteed.

Zelensky is a great diplomat

Since becoming Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky has grown a reputation as a great war leader, almost of Churchillian quality. He certainly knows how to make an eloquent, inspirational speech to stir his compatriots to fight the Russians with courage and determination and belief in their cause. But Zelensky has also become one of the world's great diplomats. He wants to see everyone and everyone wants to see him. Just in a few days he has been to see the Italian prime minister Georgia Meloni and the Pope, the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and then Emmanuel Macron, the French president. It's whistlestop diplomacy to get more arms and other help from Europe for his aim to defeat the Russian invasion force. He is so effective that no one says no to him. Scholz promised 2.7 billion euros in arms. He is without doubt one of the most effective politicians and diplomats on the planet right now. And he does it all with humility. It still seems extraordinary how far he has come since being elected president with very little experience and no knowledge of fighting a major war. He deserves to achieve the goal he is after: the end of the war with all Russian troops driven back to their garrisons in Russia.

Biden can't win the migration crisis

Tens of thousands of would-be American citizen migrants are queuing up at the Mexican/US border at El Paso, hoping to be allowed in following the end of the Covid keep-out rules. This is a crisis from which Joe Biden is not going to come out well. He can't win. No president can win this one. Trump would probably just spend billions more building his wall but that wouldn't do the trick either. These are people who have already walked or been driven hundreds/thousands of miles from their countries of origin to seek a better life in America. They are not going to give up. And they obviously think the best way is to queue up legitimately at the El Paso gates because Biden has legislation in play which bans their entry if they try to enter illegally. Like climbing the wall in the dead of night. The photos of migrants neck-deep in the river to reach the other side where they face armed border patrol officers behind barbed wire fencing underline the challenge confronting the Biden administration. What can Biden do to make it look as if the United States is still a humanitarian country willing to help those in need but without having an endless stream of people demanding entry between now and the 2024 election. They will all want to get into the US before the election in case Trump wins and slams the door in their faces. This was supposed to be a crisis to be solved by Kamala Harris, the vice president. But she found, like everyone before her, that there wasn't an easy solution. If the migrants are let in to be processed they have to stay in detention centres which then get full to bursting and diseases start to spread and appalling tales of physical abuse emerge. Just like the migrant crisis the UK is facing there is no answer that will satisfy everyone. And one thing we know for sure is that this sort of crisis is going to get worse and worse as more disasters, man-made and natural, occur around the world.

Could Storm Shadow be used to break up the bridge to Crimea?

Now that the British 155-mile-range Storm Shadow cruise missile has been delivered to Ukraine, the longest-range missile supplied by the West so far, what will Zelensky do with it? There is supposedly a deal between Kyiv and London that the missile won't be fired against targets inside Russia. But that doesn't preclude Crimea being in Zelensky's plans for attacking big Russian targets previously immune from strikes. So I think Zelensky will have the Kerch Strait bridge in his sights. The Russian troops stationed in Crimea since the peninsula was annexed by Putin in 2014 depend on the bridge for everything from ammunition supplies to food. It's a prime target that has been hit before but the damage was not fatal. With Storm Shadow at his disposal, Zelensky could put the bridge out of action for months. It would be equivalent to a blockade and would be a massive blow to Putin who is determined to hang onto Crimea. The problem for the Ukrainians will be how to deliver the missile to the target. The missile was developed to be carried by a fighter aircraft. Once launched, it can fly on its own for 155 miles which reduces the threat faced by the weapon-carrying aircraft but there will still be a risk posed by the Russian air defence systems. The Storm Shadow weighs around 2,900 pounds which effectively rules out using the MiG-29 Fulcrum and Sukhoi Su-25 Grach which normally carry bombs weighing no more than 1,100 pounds. The larger Su-27 Flanker and Su-24 Fencer are the most likely aircraft to be fitted with Storm Shadow as they are used to carrying much heavier bomb payloads. Nothing in the missile deal between the UK and Ukraine stipulates that Kyiv is banned from attacking Russian targets in Crimea, as far as I am aware, because it was illegally seized by Noscow. So the Kerch Bridge and Russian troop positions in Crimea are likely to be the prime targets for the new longer-range missile.

Trump's brazen performance on CNN should scare the whole Republican party

Even if the sexual harrassment finding against Donald Trump didn't scare off the majority of senior Republicans, the former president's extraordinarily in-your-face, brazen answers to questions posed by CNN's top interviewer should frighten the life out of them. Can they really continue to support a man who treats every critical question as a joke and then turns it around to berate the journalist for so much as daring to question the accuracy of his bold and oh so familiar claims about the fake election result in 2020. At one point he just dismissed the CNN lady, Kaitlan Collins, as a "nasty person". Trump bullied his way through the interview. It wasn't pleasant. Any Republican watching it must surely have cringed. Could this be a turning point in support for Trump? Could he have overdone it and could he now start losing that support? We can only hope.

Proven sexual abuse accusation won't stop Teflon Don

I can only go on what the jury decided in the civil court case brought against Donald Trump. They decided the former president was liable for what was claimed to have taken place in the changing room of a clothing shop many years ago. It wasn't like a criminal case where he had been convicted and faced a prison sentence but the woman in the case, E Jean Carroll, described what Trump did to her in the changing room and the jury beieved her. Trump said he had never heard of or met Jean Carroll. But, again, the jury backed her, not Trump. But is any of this going to make any difference to Trump's campaign for the White House. Amazingly, cynically, bizarrely, unbelievably it seems it will not make a ha'p'orth of difference. In fact Trump will use what he says is a false accusation to promote his vote-winning slogan that he is the victim of a witchhunt and a fake news campaign to undermine his right to return to the White House as president. Any other politician in the United States of America and it would have been a very different picture. But for Trump every setback is a plus in his view. So he will charge on, building his MAGA following until it swamps everyone. Mitt Romney, one of the few Republicans to speak out and dare say that Trump is not fit to be president has no such following. He is regarded as an outsider in the Republican party. Marco Rubio for heaven's sake, the senator from Miami who has been critical of Trump in the past, has come out in his support. Has he decided Trump is going to beat Biden and therefore, if he wants a job in the Trump administration, he has to go all Trump lovey-dovey? I fear so. Donald Trump is truly Teflon Don.

Putin has nothing to celebrate

Vladimir Putin has a habit these days of looking miserable. He could hardly raise a smile during his very short address in Red Square for the "celebratory" annual May 9 anniversary of the defeat of Fascism in the Second World War. Instead of the vast display of Russian military hardware that normally rolls through the square to demonstrate Russia's superpower status, the Kremlin organisers could only muster a few old bits of armour, headed by a T-34 tank from the Soviet days. Ok, it represented what the Soviets used to help defeat Nazi Germany but it was also a reminder to the rest of the world that huge numbers of more modern Russian tanks have either been destroyed in the war in Ukraine or are stuck in defensive positions in eastern Ukraine waiting for what Kyiv promises will be a major counter-offensive. The parade of Russian firepower in Red Square looked more like the remains of a long-forgotten empire. No wonder Putin lookd so glum. Of course he tried to claim that the war in Ukraine was all the West's fault but surely the majority of Russian people must now be aware that it was Putin's paranoia which led him to authorise the invasion of Ukraine. The T-34 tank may have represented times gone by, but its presence in Red Square also symbolised the state of the Russian army today. Most of the army is in Ukraine but instead of giving Putin the victory which he had hoped to celebrate in Red Square today, they have presented him with the opposite of a resounding triumph - defeat, humiliation and disaster. But I'm sure the Russian president won't see it that way which is why the war will just go on and on.

Ukraine's counter-offensive has to succeed

It's a cliche to say it but this year is Ukraine's make-or-break year. The long-awaited counter-offensive in the east HAS to succeed. Kyiv's troops must retake large chunks of the Donbas region to make a difference. Such a difference that Putin starts suing for a settlement before he loses everything. But if the counter-offensive just retakes a few bits here and there, Putin will stick it out and keep his forces in position for ever. He is not going to cede the territory his invasion force has occupied unless the Ukrainians give him no choice. But then again if Ukraine gets to the point where Putin has no choice but to give in, he will probably start using non-conventional weapons, justifying it on the grounds, as he would put it, that Russian land (Russian illegally seized and occupied land) was under existential threat. So, as has been the case ever since Russia invaded Ukraine, there is no easy or obvious end to this war. The counter-offensivem successful or not, will be the key yardstick for what happens in the second half of this year. Everyone is now waiting for the Ukrainian counter-offensive to begin to see which way the war is going to go. No one at this point knows the answer. Not in Kyiv, not in Washington, not in Moscow and not in Beijing. My prediction? With western tanks in play for the first time, I think Ukraine WILL make some headway but not enough to force Putin to change his strategy. Putin believes he has the luxury of time and he is convinced that neither Ukraine nor its western backers have time on their side. It's up to Ukraine to prove him wrong.

Joe Biden says he is an honourable man. Most would agree.

Joe Biden has only been US president for two years and four months. But apart from the withdrawal from Afghanistan debacle which wasn't totally his fault, I think he has proved he is a pretty competent and effective leader of the free world, and a decent guy to boot. So his claim in a TV interview that he is experienced and honourable, and ready for a second term never mind the fixation about his age and doubts about his vice president, Kamala Harris, has some justified weight behind it. No one can point to the president and claim he is power-crazy or corrupt or weak or cowardly or in any way a failure. He may not be the most inspiring president or the most active. But above all else, he is an ok guy and I would have thought most of his fellow leaders in the western world and elsewhere enjoy, not fear, his company, respect, not belittle, his leadership, and welcome his straightforward, honest approach to policymaking. All of which is a total contrast to the way people felt about Donald Trump, with the exception of course of the millions of American citizens who thought Trump was some kind of messiah. Decency, honour, competence and tons of experience are surely vital characteristics for the president of the United States. So whatever the concerns about Biden's age - 86 by the time he would end his second term - please, American voters, go for the decent bloke and not the scary former president when you come to make your choice.

How the Patriot missile will change the face of the war in Ukraine

The arrival and deployment of the US Patriot air-defence anti-missile system in Ukraine marks a crucial moment in the war. At last the Ukrainian military have a weapon which can shoot down Russian fighter aircraft, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and hypersonic missiles. Ukraine claims to have used a Patriot to shoot down a Russian Kinzhal hypersonic missile capable of travelling at up to ten times the speed of sound. That's a helluva achievement and should make Putin worry that his most deadly missile now looks to be vulnerable. The problem for the Ukrainians is that they simply don't have enough Patriots to protect every city and town. They have two batteries of launchers. That may be two or possiby more actual Patriot systems and then a limited supply of the missiles. To deter Putin from ordering all his fighter aircraft over the border to attack high-value targets, the Patriot is going to have to be lined up against them en masse. I can see the Pentagon coming under huge pressure over the next few weeks to send more and more Patriots because they will make a massive difference to the whole battle landscape. Putin has always claimed that his hypersonic missiles are indestructible because they go too fast and can be manoeuvred in flight to evade enemy radars. That boast is now an empty one and shooting a Kinzhal down is a helluva fillip for the Ukrainians.

Why Biden can't go to the Charles and Camilla coronation

I thought it was a bit odd that Joe Biden had declined to come to the coronation of King Charles and Queen Camillla and then I remembered something which was directed at me every year on August 24 when I was Pentagon correspondent and working from the world's biggest office building. "You British," I was reminded at each anniversary, "sacked Washington and burned down the White House." August 24, 1814, during the colonial war between Britain and the United States. The Capitol and the Library of Congress were also burned down. The Brits and Yanks may enjoy a special relationship but dang! do they remember what we did to their capital in 1814! So it was quite appropriate that Biden should not come to Charles's coronation. Instead he is sending his wife, First Lady Jill Biden, and also John Kerry, the tallest man in the Biden administration. American presidents historically don't do British coronations. Eisenhower didn't go to Queen Elizabeth II's coronation, and there was never any question of Biden going to Charles's. It all goes back to the sacking of the White House! Long memories.

Drone assassination plot? What a load of.....

The Kremlin is either very nervous or just having fun with a bit of black propaganda. In wartime the first thing that can rarely be relied on is the truth. So the Kremlin's claim that Ukraine had launched two armed drones to assassinate Vladimir Putin is so far-fetched that it's laughable. First of all I seriously doubt Ukraine has a drone of sufficient range to hit the Kremlin unless it were to be launched from well inside the Russian border and second of all, unless the Russian president makes a habit of sitting on or just under the Kremlin roof, I fail to see how any drone strike could he classed as a realistic plot to remove the Russian president. So it's all a load of nonsense but of course it mightily stirred up the crazies in the Duma and in the Kremlin, especially the former prime minister and briefly president, Dmitry Medvedev, who these days has joined the "let's nuke 'em" brigade with such enthusiasm you do wonder what he is eating for breakfast. It's far more likely that those clever chaps in the FSB (former KGB) carried out the "drone" strike, causing them to explode just above the roof to avoid any damage, and then promptly blamed Zelensky and co for the dastardly plot, in the hope that the whole country would rise up in anger and demand Putin take revenge. Which is what he did, ordering a mass launching of missiles against Ukrainian towns and cities. It's all so cynical I can't imagine anyone with a brain in their head would believe the Kremlin story that Kyiv was out to get Putin who, by the way, wasn't even there but was sitting quite comfortably in his out-of-town residence.

Counting the dead in Ukraine

Counting the Russian death toll in the war in Ukraine has become a top priority for western intelligence, partly, it is aassumed, to enable officials to tell the world how badly Putin is doing. The casualty figures continue to be totally staggering. According to US intelligence, and relaid by John Kirby, press spokesman for the White House National Security Council, 20,000 Russian soldiers - regular and Wagner mercenary (prison convicts) - have been killed since December, the majority during the continuing battle for the small city of Bakhmut. The Ukrainian military have openly said they are trying to kill as many Russian sodiers as possible before launching their long-awaited counter-offensive in eastern Ukraine. Is anyone in the Kremlin counting the dead? Does Putin know how many of his troops are being killed and wounded and, if so, does he have even a moment's hesitation about whether to carry or not? How long can this slaughter go on for? Obviously the Ukrainians have lost huge numbers too but the White House isn't telling. But the figure is probably not far off from the Russian death toll. But Ukraine is fighting for its sovereignty, for its nation, for its people, so the sacrifices, although horrific, will not be in vain provided Russian troops are driven out and defeated. So the big question for Putin is: as commander-in-chief, does he lose sleep over the mounting casualties from his war, does he care, and will there come a point when he realises a breaking-point has been reached? I fear the answer is NO to all these questions. He will drive on until he has carved up the whole of eastern Ukraine, never mind how many die in the process. For this reason the Ukrainian counter-offensive, when it comes, will have to be so devastatingly successful that it WILL make Putin hesitate. That's a lot to ask of the Ukrainian military who have not stopped fighting for more than 14 months.

Will the coronation of King Charles III be a magical moment or just a day out?

The coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla is just five days away and people are already putting up tents along the Mall so that they can get the best views as the famous old creaky gold coronation coach goes by with a waving monarch. So is this day - May 6 - going to be a wondrous, magical occasion for everyone living in this great country and also for millions of others around the world, or has the whole idea of kings and queens gone slightly off the boil in this super-stressful, struggling, social-media-mad, war-damaged planet? The answer is: probably the latter. There is no doubt that the pageantry will be wonderful to watch and it will be a reminder that we Brits can do public ceremonial occasions like no other nation on earth. But magical, romantic, emotional and awesome? Not so much. This is partly or mainly because Charles has been around for decades waiting to take over the top spot in the monarchy, so we know him as well as we are allowed to - and actually a lot more because of all the excrutiatingly embarrassing intercepted phone calls between him and Camilla way back during their secret love affair - and he is in his 70s, and his wife, soon to be our new queen, is of the same agee. The two of them look like a very happily married couple of pensioners. Such a contrast - and it's not their fault of course - to when Princess Elizabeth became queen in her 20s. She was so pretty and so unprepared for taking over the monarchy after the sudden death of her father that she became the darling of the nation. Everyone sympathised with the immense responsibility placed on her shoulders and loved her speech when she promised to serve her subjects till the day she died. THAT was a magical moment, and the coronation WAS an awesome spectacle. The one on May 6 has no hope of matching the one on June 2, 1953. But it will be a nice day out and by all accounts the sun will be shining. So a bit of true Brit ceremonial magic but not magical.