Replace Joe Biden? Forget it

The talk in Democratic circles in Washington is about two things: how to persuade Joe Biden to step down at the end off his four-year term and who to put in his place with less than five months to go before the election. All these discussions are pretty silly and certainly a waste of energy and time. Biden has already said that he intends to stick with it and has promised to do better the next time he debates with Trump, and there really really isn't anyone else who can take over his candidacy and beat Trump. Biden beat Trump the last time and believes fervently that he can do so again, despite the Milwaukee malarkey. If he was replaced by someone younger it might make the Democratic party feel more hopeful because, after all, Trump is not many years away from becoming 80. But the hopes would be foolish. Who, seriously, could come forward now and defeat Trump? Kamala Harris? I think not. Gavin Newsom, California governor? No, and no. I anticipate Trump woukld be quite happy for Biden to be dropped and replaced, in desperation, by Newsom or Harris or whoever because, despite his insults about Biden's age and faltering debate in Milwaukee last Thursday he knows the president is the most experienced rival he could possiby face - by far. He would be more than confident of seeing off Harris or Newsom. So the Democratic party must bite the bullet and stay loyal to Biden. He still could win on November 5.

Biden and Trump clash on foreign policy

Foreign policy rarely plays a significant role in a US presidential election. Domestic issues, the economy, money in the pocket, jobs, immigration, these are what voters are most concerned about. But this time, it could be different. The first TV debate between President Biden and Donald Trump seemed focused on one thing: is Biden the man to trust to lead the western alliance for another four-year term? Or, as Trump insinuated, is he so weakened and fragile that none of the adversarial leaders in the world have any respect for him, let alone fear him? Fear, it seems, is the former president’s trump card. As he told Biden and voters in the debate, Vladimir Putin would never have dared invade Ukraine, had he been president. Nor would Hamas have committed the atrocity against Israel on Oct 7 last year, if he had been in the White House. While his claim is unprovable, it has become one of Trump’s favourite mantras and in a debate where Biden stumbled and faltered and struggled to compete with his political rival’s foreign policy boasts, the impression left in people’s minds seemed incontrovertible: Trump is the tough leader who gets things done. In reality, there are a lot of grey areas. While he didn’t put it across with sufficient clarity or robustness, Biden’s great achievement in office was to corral 50 nations into an alliance to provide western backbone for Ukraine’s fight against Russia. The US, on Biden’s watch, has delivered $175 billion in military assistance to Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February, 2022, and, if he wins a second term in the White House, he has promised to support the Ukrainians for as long as it takes to bring the war to an end to Kyiv’s satisfaction. While Biden described this as a noble and necessary endeavour to prevent Putin from winning in Ukraine and moving on to seize territory elsewhere in the region, such as Poland, he has to persuade sceptical voters that this remains the only way forward when his rival for the White House is promising – and did so again in the debate – to bring the war in Ukraine to a close on his first day. Trump didn’t explain how he would achieve this, but he didn’t have to because what he is offering probably sounds a lot more attractive to a hardworking, low-earning American voter than a for-ever war in a country a long way away which is costing taxpayers billions and billions of dollars. Trump had no easy answer to ending the war in Gaza, but he and Biden at least appeared to share some common ground: they both vowed always to support Israel, but Trump said he wanted the Israeli military to destroy Hamas at all costs while Biden has become increasingly concerned about the methods used to achieve that objective. For America’s allies in Europe, the Far East and Middle East, Biden’s lacklustre performance will have caused considerable anxiety. They will be anticipating another Trump presidency with a mixture of alarm and trepidation. He was not an easy man to get along with and gave the impression that he was dismissive of many of the leaders he confronted. Biden, on the other hand, has been viewed as a president willing to listen. No one in the alliance fears Biden. Many fear Trump and what he stands for. Biden accused Trump of planning to destroy Nato. He reminded viewers of Trump’s throwaway remark when he invited Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to Nato members who failed to meet their defence commitments. In fact, more than 70 per cent of Nato allies are now on track to spend at least two per cent of GDP on defence. Trump made no pledges about backing Nato. With the alliance to hold its 75th anniversary summit in Washington next month, allied leaders will be wondering whether it will be Biden’s swansong. The clashes on foreign policy throughout the debate revealed nothing new from either Biden or Trump. But the contrast in presentation was so marked, even when Trump was making highly dubious claims, that it undermined Biden’s insistence that he had been a strong and dependable leader of the alliance. This is the lingering impression that will be left in American voters’ minds which is why foreign policy, normally much lower down the average person’s priority list, could make a difference when they make their decision in the election on November 5.

Biden croaks and Trump shouts

The contrast between Joe Biden and Donald Trump in their first TV debate could not have been more dramatic. Biden sounded so croaky he might as well have stayed at home. He faltered and fumbled and croaked while Trump bellowed and shouted and insulted. If I was a voter in America I would have decided then and there that neither candidate was right to be the incumbent in the White House for the next four years. But Biden did try to get the message across, albeit without any sign of vigour, that he had done a lot in his first four years and was ready to do another four. The US newspapers are now full of advisory commentaries and analyses giving reasons why Biden should step down and let a younger candidate step forward. Biden said he had a sore throat whch was why he sounded so fragile but in recent months that is exactly how he has sounded every time he got up to speak. People who work with him in the White House insist he is still totally on the ball and makes decisions in a proper and authoritative way. But politics is all about convincing the public and allies that you know what you are doing. And that TV performance is not going to convince any doubters that they should vote for Biden.

Will sending US contractors to Ukraine provoke Moscow?

Call it “slippery slope” or “mission creep”, America’s strategy for helping Ukraine defend itself against the Russian invasion has changed, adapted and expanded many times in the last 28 months. However, there was a golden rule laid down by President Biden almost on the first day of Russia’s aggression against its neighbour. There would be no “boots on the ground”, he said. No US troops would be deployed to fight the Russians. That Biden doctrine has not changed. And yet now there is serious consideration going on inside Biden’s national security team over whether to allow American contractors to go to Ukraine to help repair and service the multitude of advanced US weapons supplied in recent months, and the F-16 fighter jets which are being provided by European allies and are due to arrive soon. It is imperative to provide tender loving care to fighter jets to keep them safe and operational. While the Ukrainians have plenty of their own experience in servicing their Soviet-designed combat aircraft, the F-16 is a new beast for their ground crews and any help they can get from American experts alongside them would clearly be crucial for maintaining what could be a battle-changing firepower platform for the Kyiv government. However, Biden is not going to find it an easy decision to make. The counter-arguments are strong. The arrival of American contractors in Ukraine would be viewed by Moscow as a deliberate provocation and would, potentially, put American lives in harm’s way. Kyiv sent engineers as well as pilots to be trained in Europe on the F-16, so it’s not as if Ukraine’s air crews will be required to fly combat missions without adequate back-up. However, the proposal to send US contractors, not just for the F-16s, but also for weapons such as the long-range ATACMS missiles and M1A1 Abrams tanks, would guarantee a much-improved maintenance programme and help Ukraine to keep battle-winning systems in play. The Pentagon insists no decision has yet been made but military officials have been urging for some time for the president to take this step as am important, practical measure. Biden has shown reluctance ever since the Russian invasion in February, 2022, to go too far in helping Ukraine do more than defend itself. In the early stages, fighter jets, battle tanks, long-range rockets were simply not on the agenda. But they were always on President Zelensky’s agenda. Some Nato allies, including the United Kingdom, adopted a more robust approach earlier on. The UK sent air-launched Storm Shadow cruise missiles with a range of 155 miles in May 2023. The first American long-range ATACMS with a reach of 190 miles didn’t arrive until almost a year later, after much pleading from Zelensky. Biden was fearful of escalating the war by giving weapons to Kyiv that could be used to hit targets inside Russia. Even now, the longer-range systems have been sent with operational restrictions. However, it is clear the threshold vis a vis escalation concerns has been lowered significantly in recent months. Red lines have been fudged. The possibility of sending US contractors to Ukraine is the latest evidence of this. Moscow might think, American contractors today, combat troops tomorrow. In the war in Vietnam, “special advisers”, consisting of ex-CIA and ex-military, were sent to assist the South Vietnamese government in the 1950s. The first combat troops, US Marines, arrived in 1965. Civil contractors have played a significant role in the field in every US war in modern times. But the US is not at war in Ukraine. This is why Biden is hesitating about sending contractors to despite the huge benefits it would provide for the Ukrainian military. The same arguments are going back and forth over how far to go in offering Nato membership to Kyiv. The subject, vital to Zelensky, is top of the agenda for the next alliance summit, in Washington next month. Judging by the early signs of pre-summit preparations, Ukraine is to be offered a “bridge” to Nato membership. It’s certainly not what Zelensky was hoping for, and it sounds not unlike the sort of language adopted at the Nato summit in Vilnius in July last year. President Putin has made Nato membership for Ukraine one of his red lines. The peace settlement he offered recently said Kyiv would have to give up any thought of joining the western alliance. Washington’s position is: Ukraine will join the alliance, but not yet. As for sending US contractors to Ukraine, we await the conclusion of the internal debate now underway.

Will Trump pledge to end the wars in Gaza and Ukraine in TV debate?

Donald Trump is always full of promises. He said he would end the war in Ukraine on day one of his presidency if he wins the election in November and, no doubt he has a scheme up his sleeve to stop the war in Gaza, too. But will he reveal all when he comes up against Joe Biden at the first presidential TV debate in Milwaukee on Thursday? General Mark Milley, the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, said a long time ago that the only way the war in Ukraine would end would be by negotiation. He saw from the beginning that there was never going to be an outright military victory by either side. But since then, the war has escalated and escalated and there are no signs of peace. But now there are murmurings in Germany that it's time for a peaceful settlement and I suspect Trump will latch onto that if he is asked directly how he plans to bring the terrible conflict to a close in such a short timeframe. But I doubt he will be transparent about exactly what he has in mind. Sine he first made the pledge, a lot has happened, not least the announcement by the International Criminal Court in The Hague that there should be an arrest warrant for President Putin on war crimes charges. There is an arrest warrant also for his former defence minister and his chief of the general staff, announced today. Will Trump do business with a leader who is on the Most Wanted list? Biden will no doubt give his full backing to Ukraine to help them fight the Russians for as long as it takes. But I suspect that line is going to have to be fudged at some point. "For as long as it takes" means there will be more and more destruction and more and more deaths. That can't be in Ukraine's best interest.

Israel says it's about to change military tactics in Gaza

Benjamin Netanyahu, the under-siege Israeli prime minister, has announced that his military strategy for Gaza is soon going to change. In reality the strategy changed several weeks ago after Joe Biden pummelled him with phone calls and visits from his top officials to reject any idea of "invading" the city of Rafah in southern Gaza. An Israeli division has been inside Rafah for about six weeks clearing the city of Hamas fighters but what we haven't seen is the wholesale destruction of property and huge civilian casualties which occurred at the start of Israel's war against Hamas, much of it caused by the dropping of hundreds of heavy, unguided American bombs all over the place in central and northern Gaza. The Rafah operation has caused civilian casualties, but the toll of death and injuries among the civilian population has slowed significantly. Whether this is because of a conscious effort by the Israeli troops to adopt a much more precise and refined attack mission or whether it has more to do with the fact that under Biden's orders, the heavy American bombs are no longer being supplied, it is difficult to know. But the tactics and strategy changed once the US bombs were put on hold. So it's difficult to see how the war in the south is now going to change dramatically while a whole division is still in Rafah attempting to root out the final two battalions of Hamas fighters operating in the city. Netanyahu remains bent on dismantling/destroying the whole Hamas structure and ruling capability, and I would imagine there is still a fair way to go before this is achieved, if it ever can be. So we wait and see what Netanyahu has up his sleeve for the next stage of the war against Hamas.

Is Israel ready for a war with Hezbollah?

The great Shakespearean actor Sir Donald Wolfit would always take one step back before moving forward to leave the stage in a performance. It was for dramatic effect but it was if he was reluctant to give up his place among his fellow actors. In many ways, the policy of the United States vis a vis Israel and the war in Gaza has followed a series of forward and backward steps, with the Biden administration committed never to leaving the stage but eternally frustrated by the cuts and thrusts of Middle Eastern politics. Another week has gone and little has been resolved to end a war which even Israel admits could last at least another six months. And now, perhaps more than at any time since Hamas caught Israel by surprise on October 7 and went on a killing and raping rampage across the border from Gaza, there are increasing fears in Washington that Israel might soon go to full-scale war with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. The arrival in the region of Amos Hochstein, President Biden's Middle East envoy, a 51-year-old Israeli American with good contacts in Lebanon, underlined Washington's alarm at the potential dangers for Israel arising from a second war front. Until now, Hezbollah, an infinitely superior military force to Hamas both in terms of missile and rocket arsenals and combat manpower, has engaged in regular strikes across the border, some of them ferocious. Israel has forcefully retaliated. Tel Aviv has an approved military plan ready to go to war with Hezbollah, according to senior Israeli officials. The last Israel-Hezbollah war was in 2006 and lasted 34 days, in stalemate. So all eyes were on Hockstein when he flew to Beirut and then moved on to Tel Aviv. But to no avail. He drew a very negative blank in Lebanon. Hezbollah and Hamas and the Houthis in Yemen and, to a lesser extent, the Islamic militia forces in Iraq and Syria, have said that their campaign of attacks will continue while Israeli forces remain in Gaza. Hockstein by all accounts received this message loud and clear. It is often premature to suggest that a war has reached a turning-point. But there are many factors now coming together which seem to indicate that Biden’s fear of an expanding Middle Eastern war is looking more rather than less likely. The anti-Israel protagonists in the region share one thing in common, backing by Iran. But so far there is no evidence of a coordinated, multi-prong strategy, masterminded by Tehran to hit Israel from all quarters using its well-armed proxy forces. Could this change? Israel clearly believes this is a possibility which is why it has acted with increasing robustness in hitting Hezbollah military targets and killing individual commanders to remind the powerful Lebanese Shia Islamist group, led by Hassan Nasrallah since 1992, what it would face in a head-on war. The potential threat of a spreading war has galvanised both Washington and Tel Aviv. This might explain why Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s embattled prime minister, suddenly decided to launch a protest at what he sees as Washington’s deliberate withholding of vital munitions which his forces need to complete the current operation in Rafah, viewed as the last Hamas stronghold in southern Gaza. His accusation met with mild reproof in Washington. Antony Blinken, US secretary of state, who has seen more of Netanyahu in the last few months than any other foreign leader, said the only shipment of arms currently being temporarily suspended was a stock of 2,000lb bombs. The reason for this, as had been expounded on previous occasions, was that the US feared the use of these heavyweight air-launched bombs would cause unacceptable collateral damage in Rafah’s dense urban environment. According to the Pentagon, the one shipment referred to by Blinken and also by Biden, consists of 1,800 2,000lb bombs but also 1,700 500lb bombs. Netanyahu wants both categories and feels Washington is letting him down, and more importantly, refusing to send the promised munitions at a time when Israel says it’s in desperate need of them, perhaps for Lebanon as well as for Gaza. The row developed during the week because Washington felt Netanyahu was trying to give the impression that the Pentagon had stopped sending arms to Israel. “Since Hamas’s vicious attack on October 7 we’ve rushed billions of dollars of security assistance to Israel to enable them to defend themselves and we’re going to continue to provide them with the security assistance they need,” said Major-General Pat Ryder, Pentagon press secretary. The point about these particular bombs is that they are not smart-, precision weapons. They are unguided munitions, and the US doesn’t want to be seen to be helping Israel to drop bombs on Rafah which end up killing civilians and destroying private property. Washington learned this lesson when previous shipments of these heavy bombs did precisely that in Gaza City in the early stages of the war. “There’s not been a final determination at this time on how to proceed with that shipment,” Ryder said. While Netanyahu and Washington have continued their verbal boxing match, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) operation in Rafah has ploughed on but without the sort of offensive which caused such worldwide horror in past bombing missions in Gaza. The IDF’s 162nd Division which has been in Rafah for about six weeks, claims to have killed around 550 Hamas gunmen in the city, reportedly about half of the fighting force there, or the equivalent of two battalions of the four-battalion Hamas Rafah Brigade. In the process, the IDF has lost 22 soldiers, eight of them in a single ambush-attack by Hamas on an IDF armoured vehicle, It's in Israel’s interest to complete the Rafah operation as quickly as possible but it looks likely the IDF will have to wrap it up without those bombs held back in the US. Even then, the war is not going to end because Hamas operatives have been leaving Rafah to set up elsewhere in Gaza. Furthermore, as Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, IDF spokesman, said on Wednesday on Israel’s Channel 13 TV station, eradicating the whole Hamas organisation and its ideology was unattainable. Making Hamas disappear was “simply throwing sand in the eyes of the public,” he said. But this is Netanyahu’s goal upon which Israel’s survival, in his view, and his own political future depend. He duly rebuked the admiral. With all the challenges he is facing at home and in Gaza and across the northern border in Lebanon, the Israeli leader can ill afford to be confronted by disaffection in the military. 2

Biden and Trump prepping for the big duo TV debate

Just a few days away, next Thursday, Joe Biden and Donald Trump will be sizing each other up for the first big TV debate. A lot will hang on how the two rivals perform. Unlike the TV debates for the general election in Britain which have been stultifyingly boring and predictable, helping no one to make up or change their minds about who to vote for, the Biden v Trump show should be pretty watchable stuff, especially if Trump goes crazy or Biden freezes in mid-sentence. The saving grace is that the moderator will be able to switch off the microphone if the verbals get too nasty. Bit it's still going to be potentially explosive and there will be plenty of oportunities for both candidates to get something seriously wrong. This is why the two rivals will be prepping like mad in the next few days to make sure they get everything right, or at least as they see it. I predict that Biden will do better than most people expect and Trump will put off a lot of voters.

Cash for Trump is pouring in

If money is anything to go by in the US presidential election - and it is - then Trump is going to walk it in November. Ever since he was convicted of 34 business fraud charges, the donations have surged. This tells you a lot of about a huge number of voters in the US. They just love Trump, convicted felon or not. It is extraordinary and bizarre and beyond comprehension for most of us on the other side of the Atlantic. The only slight comparison here in the UK is with Boris Johnson who remained popular despite a whole series of alleged or proven misdemeanours. Boris, too, enjoyed popularity despite everything. But he did fall in the end, and was ousted. Trump, on the other hand, looks like he is going to thrive politically and personally whatever he does or whatever happens to him in the courts between now and November, especially if the money keeps rolling in. Joe Biden must be getting worried that even though the latest polls show he is just ahead of Trump, he is not going to be the victor at the end of the presidential race.

Why is the US Supreme Court taking so long over Trump?

How long do you need to make a decision about whether Donald Trump should be immune from prosecution for various alleged crimes he is accused of committing before, during and after his presidency? We've still heard nothing from the US Supreme Cort justicies who have been looking at this issue since March. They are the top of the American legal tree, so they have to make a thoroughly good job of it because once they have decided, it will be an historic precedent that will affect all future presidencies, especially Trump's if he wins in November. So, a big deal. Nevertheless, for us mortals the answer seems pretty fundamental. No citizen, whether the president or attorney general or pop icon or roadsweeper should be above the law. The president should be accountable for everything in a democracy because he or she is the leader chosen by the electorate to represent them and do them proud and keep them safe. So they have to show that they act at all times under the law and, in America, in accordance with the constitution drawn up by the founding fathers. Whether Trump is found guilty of all the offenses with which he has been charged, in paticular the one where he is accused of trying to interfere in the result of the 2020 election, the key point for the Supreme Court is to decide the general guiding principle for those who attain the highest political office in the land, not specifically or uniquely for Trump. Whatever the Supreme Court judges decide, it will of course initially have an instant impact on Trump's future presidential hopes, but the ruling will be there for ever unless or until it is reversed. So, yes, it's a big moment. Yet it is still a mystery why it is taking so long to come to what most sensible people believe is the right decision. Is it possible that the judges, split between Trump and Democrat appointees will decide that the issue is not so cut and dried as it should be and that there might be circumstances in which some form of prosecution immunity might be justified or even necessary for national security reasons? In other words, are the judges trying to come up with a complex legal formula which might give Trump a bit of breathing space.?Even a hint of wiggle room on the question of immunity for presidents would be dangerous and bad for democracy. It seems the ruling from the Supreme Court might come at the end of this month. Perhaps, like with the controversial abortion ruling, there will be a carefully-laid leak to test the waters.

Putin and his new love-in mate

Vladimir Putin doesn't have many friends around the globe but he can always rely on Kim Jong-un. Now they are officially Great Mates as Putin and Kim sign a new defence pact in Pyongyang. The two deserve each other. They come out of the same mould. If it wasn't for the fact that they are leaders of countries which have nuclear weapons and a hatred for anything western, especially American, we could laugh at the sight of them engaged in their own little charm offensive. Putin even gave Kim a fancy big armoured limousine as a gift. Kim of course has probably promised to give Putin all the artillery shells and ballistic missiles he needs to continue fighting the Kremlin's war in Ukraine. It's the sort of quid pro quo which is alarming western capitals and further destroying any hopes of peace in Ukraine. And to think that Donald Trump when he was president tried to be nice to Kim and shook his hand. It didn't come to anything and now the North Korean dictator is firmly in the Putin camp. I wonder whether this has upset Beijing in any way. Xi Zinping sees himself as Kim's best friend, and now Putin is rivalling for the North Korean leader's attentions.

The worst job would be to be Trump's vice president

It's said that Republican stalwarts are jostling for position to become Donald Trump's running-mate in the presidential election. Politicians such as Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, North Dakota governor Doug Burgum, Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina and Representative Elise Stafanik of New York Personally, I qwould have thought being Trump's running-mate and potential vice president in a Trump administration would be a job from hell. Nothing worse in any political world. Look what happened to poor old Mike Pence. Four years as Trump's vice president, standing in the background like an awkward wax statue trying not to look shocked or dismayed as his boss made some outrageous statement or other and finally being harangued to twist the 2020 election result and try and force Congress to overturn Joe Biden's victory. And where is Pence now? Nowhere. So why on earth are these Republicans so desperate to be the one standing mutely behind Trump for the foreseeable future? I guess it's the glamour with a very small 'g' and being part of the secret circle of insiders and, of couser, the potential for being the president in due course. But what a cost to have to pay. Anyway, Trump would be stupid not to pick Nikki Haley as his running-mate if he is going to improve his chances of winning in November. But my advice to the former governor of South Carolina is: turn him down!

Netanyahu stands alone

Binyamin Netanyahu is now his own war cabinet. He has scrapped the formal one after the resignation of two of its members last week. Now he is on his own although the two most extreme members of his overall cabinet will still be breathing down his neck, demanding no end to the war and no concessions. Netanyahu himself doesn't want to end the war until he has fulfilled his objectives of destroying Hamas for good and bringing all the surviving hostages home. But it must be a daily pain to have these two individuals constantly shouting in his ear about pushing on with the war in Gaza come what may. The two cabinet members, Itamar Ben-Gvir, the national security minister, and Bezalel Smotrich, the finance minister, hold Netanyahu to ransom because without their support in his government his coalition would collapse. So he has to keep them sweet. Even Joe Biden has criticised them openly for being so far right wing and uncompromising. But this is politics in Israel and if Netanyahu wants to survive as prime minister which he desperately does, he has to listen to their demands. So he may have axed the war cabinet but he still has to remember that one false move and he'll be out of a job. And facing corruption charges. Not an ideal environment for talking peace.

Protagonists in wars in Gaza and Ukraine are nowhere near a settlement of any kind

The meeting of dozens of international leaders in Switzerland to talk peace in Ukraine is basically a total waste of time. It's PR at best. Russia and Ukraine are miles apart in terms of even contemplating an end to the war and all the support Zelensky is getting from most of the world leaders is meaningless because neither Russia nor China are at the meeting. So it's all well-meaning verbiage. Putin cunningly set down his marker for peace prior to the meeting in Switzerland which caused no surprise: peace, he said, would be immediate if Ukraine agreed to hand over four chunks of the country to Russia for ever and renounced any ambition to join Nato. Simple, Putin said. Zelensky and his 50 supporting international leaders, have of course joined together to give a very different message - total sovereignty for all of Ukraine and withdrawal of all Russian troops. So, absolutely no room for compromise, no room for a meaningful peace settlement and no end to the war. End of meeting, end of story. The same goes for Gaza. Biden wants compromise to bring the war to an end, but neither the Hamas leaders in Gaza nor Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, are interested in compromise. Netanyahu wants the total destruction of Hamas and the safe return of all the hostages, and Hamas wants all Israeli troops to leave and to stop fighting. Total impasse whatever the Biden administration says. The two wars will go on and on.

Uplifting to see Kate, Princess of Wales on public duty

Catherine/Kate, Princess of Wales has without question become one of those treasured individuals whose personality, presence and beauty have given her a unique place in British society today. I would say she is loved by everyone, whatever their political or republican leanings. Since her shocking revelation that she has cancer and is enduring months of chemotherapy treatment, I think that love has intensified. We all desperately want her to get fully better and to enjoy life the way she did before her illness. I can't think of anyone else in this country right now who has attracted this sort of devotion. It's not just a fairytale liking for a young member of the Royal Family. It's much more personal than that. She is an important part of our lives because whenever she is out in the public eye her smile and grace uplift everyone. Her apearance in a royal carriage with her children today and her brief presence on the balcony of Buckingham Palace on the day of the Trooping the Colour to mark King Charles's official birthday provided the whole country with a huge sense of relief that she seemed to be ok, she smiled and chatted to her children and looked stunning. It is absolutely true to say that this country cares for her and needs her to be fulfilling her duties as the wife to the future king. And keeping us all happy!

Donald Trump sympathises with Joe Biden

An unusual headline if ever there was one! Donald Trump has been reacting to the news of the conviction of Hunter Biden, son of his big Democratic rival for the White House. Trump normally hasn't a kind word to say about Biden but, to his credit, he seems to be feeling genuine sympathy for the Biden family because of Hunter Biden's past cocaine addiction and alcoholism ,nd his conviction on the charge of purchasing a gun while on drugs which is a federal offence. Trump's brother, Fred, suffered from alcoholism and died in 1981. And also, of course, he has been convicted of a crime (business fraud), and like Hunter Biden, is potentially facing a prison sentence. Both Trump and Biden Jnr are first time offenders, so it's unlikely either will be sent to jail. But for once, instead of seizing and exploiting a political advantage and attacking Joe Biden and his son, he has decided to show synpathy, or at least, empathy. In the past Trump has called the Biden family criminals. Perhaps his appearance in court and his conviction has changed Trump in some way. On the surface he is still accusing the court and the judge involved in his case of engaging in a witch hunt against him. But deep down I suspect Trump feels vulnerable for the first time in his life. Out of that vulnerability he has found reason to feel sorry for the Biden family over Hunter's downfall.

Russia moves to counter Ukrainian attacks on Crimea

Moscow has moved its most advanced air defence system to Crimea to protect the peninsula’s Kerch bridge, as Kyiv steps up its attacks in the area and inside Russia itself. The deployment of the road-mobile S-500 Prometheus, with a range of 370 miles, has been confirmed by Lieutenant-General Kyrylo Budanov, chief of the Ukrainian defence intelligence directorate. The arrival in Crimea of this weapon system which was only supposed to be in full production in 2025 underlines the changing priorities adopted by Ukraine in the 28-month war. Judging by the year-on-year increase in attacks by Ukraine on Russian-annexed Crimea and inside Russia since Moscow’s invasion in February, 2022, the focus of the war is dramatically changing, and escalating, aided by the supply of longer-range weapons from the US, Britain and other European countries. In 2022, there were around 40 Ukrainian strikes on targets in Crimea and Russia, according to Ukrainian, Russian and western figures, the most dramatic of which was the sinking in May of the Moskva, the Black Sea fleet’s flagship guided-missile cruiser. The Kerch bridge was also attacked by a truck bomb in October. In 2023, the number of these strikes, involving aerial and naval drones, missiles and special forces sabotage raids, rose to more than 80, at least 22 of them in Crimea. In July, Kerch bridge was attacked by drone boats. So far this year there have been around 55 attacks in Crimea and inside Russia. This month, they have included a strike on a Russian S-300/S-400 air-defence complex in Belgorod, bordering Ukraine, using the US Himars artillery rocket weapon; a strike by armed drones, “destroying” a Russian Su-57 stealth fighter at a base in Akhtubinsk in southern Russia; and an attack on two troop and equipment ferries on the Russian side of the Kerch Strait, involving the US 190-mile-range Atacms ballistic missile system. With the delivery later this year of American F-16 fighter jets, supplied by European allies, Ukraine is already engaged in a series of missile and drone strikes on Russian S-300 and S-400 air-defence systems to try and reduce the threat they will pose to the combat aircraft. The deployment of the Russian S-500 air defence system in Crimea is clearly aimed at countering the strike power of the F-16s. After months of pleading by Kyiv, the US has agreed to deliver a second battery of up to eight Patriot anti-missile launchers to help Ukraine defend against Russian attacks on its cities and towns.

Hamas playing for high stakes in ceasefire push

I feel sorry for the Biden administration which is so desperate to end the war in Gaza. The latest ceasefire proposal looks pretty good but the Hamas leaders concealed below ground in Gaza are playing a canny game. Knowing how much the Americans want a foreign policy breakthrough, they have come up with their own version of a new deal. Although Antony Blinken, the ever-tired-looking US secretary of state, has only said that the Hamas counter-proposal, or parts of it, is unacceptable, without going into detail. But it's clear what Hamas is demanding. They want not just a ceasefire but a total end to the war and the removal of all Israeli troops and as quickly as possible. They have probably set a timeline which Israel would never agree to because Benjamin Netanyahu is not going to give up until Hamas, and especially the two main leaders, has been eliminated. Netanyahu wants to finish the job, so there is no way he is going to agree to a timeline set by Hamas. He and only he will want to set the timeline, any timeline. It looks like the latest ceasefire proposal, approved by the United Nations Security Council, is going to go the way of all the other proposals over the last few months. Poor Blinken, poor Biden and poor Palestinian people who want a life without war.

Ukraine is getting bolder

The Kyiv government is getting bolder, spreading the war against the Russians further and further into their own territory. The damage or destruction of a prime Su-57 Felon multi-role fighter jet by Ukrainian armed drones is the latest incident in which Kyiv has gone way beyond its own borders to strike at Russian targets. Russia's most advanced fighter was targeted at its base at Akhtubinsk in the Astrakhan region, about 365 miles across the frontier. First of all, that's an impressive long-rage drone strike, and second it will underline for Moscow that its most prized military assets are now going to be vulnerable whether they are based inside Ukraine or in Russia itself. In fact, I see the war changing dramatically. With the frontlines in the Dombas region in eastern Ukraine pretty much set in stone, I envisage President Zelensky going more and more for Russian targets both way over the border and in Crimea. In the end, even the cautious Joe Biden will acknowledge this is the only way to force President Putin to reconside his war in Ukraine. Russia will always have the advantage in firepower, manpower and time. But if he begins to lose a lot of Russia's most advanced weapon systems to bold Ukrainian long-range strikes, Putin might begin to think it's time to end the war, especially if Russian-annexed Crimea suffers unacceptable death and destruction.

Joe Biden will need to up his game to win the White House

Joe Biden certainly did his stuff at the 80th D-Day Normandy landings commemorations. He didn't leave early as the British prime minister did, but stayed to pay proper homage to those who died in the operation to liberate Europe from the Nazis. But now he has a real fight on his hands to prevent Donald Trump from winning the November election. The US economy is improving and more people are in work but it seems there is a general sense in the country that no one is better off than they were when Biden took over the White House in January 2021, except the super rich who carry on increasing their money stacks. Money in the pocket and job security are the two key issues always in a general election. But added to the feeling that things are not going so well under Biden are a whole list of challenges, domestic and foreign, which are not helping the president to win a second term, not least the continuing immigration crisis on the Mexican border, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and the rise and rise of China. Voters are wondering whether Biden is tough enough to deal with these challenges or whether Trump would be stronger and bolder. I suspect this question is going to be in the forefront of American voters' minds in November rather than whether a criminally convicted Trump should be allowed to stand for the presidency.

The tragic cost of hostage-rescue in Gaza

The celebrations over the dramatic rescue by Israeli special forces of four hostages held by Hamas in Gaza since October 7 have been tempered by the appalling number of Palestinians killed in the process. The Hamas-controlled Gaza health ministry has claimed the death toll is 274, a figure which is difficult to confirm, although Jake Sullivan, the US national security adviser, has acknowledged that there were many civilian casualties. There is no such thing as a pure, 100 per cent perfect military operation, but a mission of this kind, with Israeli commandos smashing their way into two buildings to get to the heavily-guarded hostages was never going to be an easy, and certainly not a casualty-free operation. Some of the 274 killed will have been Hamas fighters, reducing further the overall strength of the terrorist-designated organisation. But it's claimed women and children also died. Tragically, this was inevitable because Hamas had concealed the hostages in buildings where Palestinian families were also living. US forces were not used in the operation but it seems clear that American spy and eavesdropping satellites and other forms of electronic surveillance were deployed to pinpoint the location of the hostages and Hamas guards. One has to assume that such systems also identified the fact that hundreds of civilians were in the buildings. Would the US have warned the Israelis to be ultra-careful about killing civilians? I'm sure Washington would have urged caution. But the release of the four hostages was the priority objective, and nothing was going to get in the way. More of these hostage-rescue missions are likely in the next few months. And more civilian deaths as a consequence.

Biden's failed push for a ceasefire in Gaza

Ceasefire deals to end the war in Gaza have come and gone. President Biden’s unexpected announcement of the latest formula for a settlement, supposedly proposed by Israel, has already fallen by the wayside. In fact, Biden’s three-stage ceasefire deal looked remarkably like the previous ones: a six-week halt to fighting and withdrawal of Israeli troops from populated areas, with a release of some hostages in return for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners; a negotiated Israel/Hamas settlement for a permanent end to the war; and finally, comprehensive reconstruction of Gaza. However, Israel’s attack on the southern Gaza city of Rafah, the growing hostility around the world towards Benjamin Netanyahu’s grim determination to destroy the terrorist-designated organisation and the perceived failure to stem the deaths of Palestinian civilians had added a new sense of urgency. Biden’s move was unusual. First of all, he claimed the latest ceasefire proposals were from Tel Aviv, not Washington. Second, it seems the White House had not warned the Netanyahu government that Biden was planning to tell the world about the new proposed deal; and third, there appeared to be a large element of psychological arm-twisting involved, presenting a fait accompli to Tel Aviv. The strategy didn’t work. The reason is, there is a fundamental flaw in the behind-the-scenes negotiating between Washington and Tel Aviv, and also in the wider ceasefire talks involving the US, Egypt and Qatar. Only Israel, and specifically Netanyahu, its leader, is really committed to the total destruction of Hamas as a designated terrorist organisation and as the governing body of the Gaza Strip. Biden signed up to this objective but he has now wavered. He has publicly stated that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) have caused such damage to Hamas that as a military group it would no longer be capable of carrying out another October 7 attack when 1,200 Israelis were killed, women were brutally raped and disfigured and more than 250 hostages were seized. Netanyahu clearly doesn’t share this assessment. Despite suffering a huge fatal casualty toll approaching 15,000 of its combat fighters, Hamas remains resilient. The IDF has had to return to areas of Gaza which it thought had been cleared of Hamas fighters, and because of restrictions on military operations in Rafah, imposed by Washington, there are still enough surviving combat battalions to continue the war with Israel. Most importantly, the two main Hamas leaders in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, the overall leader in the Strip, and Mohammed Deif, commander of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, are still believed to be alive and orchestrating the battle with the IDF from a labyrinth of underground bunkers. Netanyahu says they were the architects of the October 7 atrocities. Israel has a reputation for pursuing its enemies, however long it takes. After the slaughter of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972 by the Black September Palestinian terrorist group, Mossad, the secret intelligence agency, spent years trying to track down and kill those responsible. From Netanyahu’s point of view, agreeing to a ceasefire involving the eventual withdrawal of all Israeli troops, while Sinwar and Deif are still functioning as Hamas leaders, and while they have under their command perhaps 10,000-12,000 fighters, would be impossible to digest. It would also lead to Netanyahu’s political downfall because the two most conservative members of his coalition cabinet, Bezalel Smotrich, finance minister, and Itamar Ben-Gvir, national security minister, have vowed to resign and bring down his government if he succumbs to pressure from Washington and agrees to the ceasefire deal. There is another significant problem causing a seemingly intractable divergence of view between Washington and Tel Aviv. Biden who has his own reasons for wanting to bring the war in Gaza to an end – growing antipathy towards him among young pro-Palestinian American voters opposed to US arms sales to Israel – has a grand scheme in mind for realigning and remodelling relations in the Middle East to create greater stability and a more effective anti-Iran alliance. At the heart of this Big Idea is for Saudi Arabia and Israel to form close diplomatic relations, a potentially historic development which would also involve a hugely expanded strategic partnership between Washington and Riyadh with increased advanced weapons sales and help with building a civilian nuclear industry. The potential breakthrough agreement was getting close, according to the US State Department, when Hamas launched its October 7 attack on Israel. As a consequence, all bets were off, or at least suspended for the foreseeable future which was a blow to Biden because he would have been counting on the diplomatic coup for his re-election campaign. However, no such deal was ever going to be on the cards unless Netanyahu agreed to the formation of a Palestinian state as part of the grand bargain. That was always going to be the trickiest ingredient because the Israeli leader was against it, and now, post-October 7, it’s not going to happen. Not on Netanyahu’s watch. So, all in all, Washington’s hopes of pressurising Tel Aviv into agreeing a ceasefire and a permanent end to the war in Gaza would seem to be premature, if not hopelessly unrealistic. Meanwhile, Netanyahu has made it absolutely clear that he intends to complete his military objectives before a ceasefire can be contemplated, let alone discussions about any sort of meaningful future for the Palestinian people. Tragically, that means there will inevitably be more civilian Palestinian deaths, more destruction of property and the shelving of Biden’s hopes for reshaping the Middle East. Whether Netanyahu will ever succeed in eliminating Hamas is a moot point. Some elements will probably survive, and, of course, the political leadership of the organisation is residing in safe refuge in Qatar, beyond Mossad’s reach, or at least while ceasefire negotiations are carrying on and have a hope of succeeding.

Huge huge error of judgment by Rishi Sunak over D-Day

Not just Rishu Sunak but all of his advisers, presumably including David Cameron, the foreign secretary, were guilty of a monstrous error of judgment by letting the British prime minister leave the 80th D-Day landing commemorations early to attend a TV interview with ITV on Labour's tax proposals. What on earth happened? First of all, how could Downing Street have even contemplated arranging a TV interview for Sunak on the same day as the 80th D-Day event, and how, when they put it in the diary, did the prime minister not react by saying no no no, not on that day of all days. It was his duty to be there in Normandy until all the ceremonies had been completed. There shouldn't have been any question about it. Yet off he went to get to the ITV studios in time to do his bit about his claim that if Labour wins the election it will tax everyone another £2,000 a year. It's so mindboggling that it is difficult to see how anyone in his inner circle thought it would be a good idea, let alone for PR reasons, for the prime minister representing this country at a time of great historic importance should think it more fruitful to be sitting in a TV studio back in London rather than standing alongside his fellow international leaders in the final ceremony of the day. Sunak's apologies just don't cut it.

Another Israeli airstrike with "collateral damage"

Yet again, an Israeli airstrike in Gaza kills dozens of civilians, including women and children. It's beyond comprehension. Posecuting a war in a dense urban environment where thousands of civilians are sheltering as refugees is as challenging a task as any form of military operation. So it is imperative that when launching a raid, the operational commander has a legal and moral obligation to make sure that any civilians known to be in the targeted area have to be protected. What went wrong this time? The destination for the air-launched bombs, a UN school, was known to contain senior Hamas commanders and an operational structure. But if the Israeli intelligence was that good, surely it must also have been known that Palestinian families were sheltering in the same building. Bombs cannot distinguish between Hamas fighters and civilians if they are all in the same target spot. So why did the airstrike go ahead when the risk of "collateral damage" was so high? Ever since the war began in Gaza following the October 7 atrocities committed by Hamas in Israel, the Israeli military have faced an enemy that has been hiding among innocent people, making the task of precision targeting almost impossible. Tragically this is why so many tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed and injured and made homeless. But after eight months of war when so many mistakes have been made - humanitarian aid workers killed, hospitals bombed, a campsite in Rafah which caught fire after an airstrike, killing at least 45 people - how is it possible that another mistake may have been made, killing 35 civilians? The Israeli military have detailed how 20 Hamas fighters in the school were killed. So more civilians than Hamas fighters lost their lives. This can't be right.

Five months to the US election!!

The US presidential election has been going on for so long that it seems like it will never end. But here we are, it's June 5, and there are exactly five months to go. Five long months no doubt. But we are sort of on the lastish stretch and still there is no way of knowing for sure who is going to win, Joe Biden or Donald Trump or someone totally different who comes out of the woodwork because one or other of the two main candidates drops out, suffers a health setback, goes to prison or whatever. It's that sort of election because both candidates arev moving towards being really pretty old and one of them is Donald Trump whose future is uncertain for all kinds of legal reasons. The two planned TV debates, the first one this month, will help some voters to think they have made up their minds but basically the November 5 winner is going to be chosen for a multitude of reasons, some of which have yet to be clarified, ie the sentence by Judge Merchan in the case of Defendant Trump. But in just five months the US and the rest of the world have the prospect of another four years of Old Joe or four new years of Trump. Judging by all the opinion polls, a lot of Americans are not sure whether they want either of these gentlemen in the White House, but realistically, it's going to be Biden versus Trump, and the doubting American voters will have to lump it. So, too, will the rest of the planet. Five months to go.

Biden acknowledges Netanyahu is putting his political survival as priority

Now Joe Biden has said what everyone else has been saying for months. Everything Benjamin Netanyahu does is all about surviving as the leader of Irael. Biden says there is good reason for thinking this. Netanyahu is basically in a cleft stick. He needs a ceasefire in Gaza so that he can get more hostages home before they are all found dead in the ruins of the Palestinian territory. The release of the remaining hostages is crucial to his survival as prime minister. But he can't agree a ceasefire until he has satisfied himself that Hanas has been destroyed, and there's some way to go before that happens, despite Biden's claim that Hamas has been so diminished that it will never again be able to mount another October 7 attack on Israel. If Netanyahu agrees a ceasefire prematurely, then the two most extreme right wing members of his cabinet will resign and the government will fall. Netanyahu has to survive as leader because if he is toppled, his political career will be over and he will face the long-suspended corruption charges that have hovered over his head like the sword of Damocles. So, in order to survive as leader, the war has to go on. There will be no ceasefire. Not for months.

Putin is in warning mood

So now one of Putin's lackey's has given a warning to the US that if Ukraine uses American weapons to hit Russia there will be fatal consequences. Sergei Ryabkov, Russian deputy foreign minister, seemed to be suggesting that if a single America-supplied rocket or missile ventured over the Russian border and hit a military target, there could be a counter-strike against a Nato country in the region. If that were to happen what would President Biden do? If a Russian strike killed people in a Nato country, theoretically there should be no alternative but a Nato response against Russia. But I seriously doubt it would happen. As it is, Biden is so desperate to avoid a catasrophic escalation in the war bringing Russia against Nato that he has given the most tentative of approvals for Ukraine's use of US long-range weapons to strike at over-the-border sites. It is by no means a carte blanche for Kyiv to strike where and when it pleases. He has quietly given the green light for Ukraine to use US weapons inside Russia but only as counter-strikes on military sites from where attacks had been lanched on the city of Kharkiv where all the major fighting is currently being concentrated. So, very limited indeed. This is in stark contrast to the UK government whch appears to have given Kyiv full permission to fire UK-supplied Storm Shadow cruise missiles at any targets it wants, whether inside Ukraine or inside Russia. It is extraordnary that two such close allies should have such different approaches towards Ukraine. Storm Shadows have been launched against targets in Crimea which, of course, following its annexing by the Russian military in 2014, is seen by Moscow as sovereign Russian territory. No "fatal consequences" followed these attacks. So perhaps the pronouncement by the Russian deputy foreign minister is all the usual bluster. But it has to be said, Putin at some point might just feel the US and the rest of Nato have crossed the line. We don't know what "fatal consequences" might mean under such circumstances but Biden will try his best to avoid this sort of scenario I am sure.

Biden desperately needs the war in Gaza to end

If the war in Gaza goes on and on and more and more Palestinians are killed or injured by bombs supplied by the United States, Joe Biden is going to lose the November election. Never mind that his Republican opponent, Donald Trump, is facing a possible prison sentence for business fraud, Biden has to stop voters, particularly young, angry voters, from turning against him for the massive suffering endured by Palestinian men, women and children as the Israel Defence Forces attempt to destroy Hamas living in their midst. The huge protests that have been going on in universities and elsewhere are bad news for Biden because young Americans are blaming him for helping Israel to kill and maim Palestinians. The Pentagon is still suspending delivery of the heavier 2,000lb and 500lbs air-launched bombs because of the devastation they have caused to urban areas and to people's homes. But the perception remains that America in general, and Biden in particular, are responsible for many of the deaths that have occurred in Gaza. Young voters will punish Biden on November 5 by not voting for him, maybe even voting for Trump instead. So Biden has to persuade Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, to agree to the latest ceasefire proposal and to stop fighting Hamas, or it's going to be a huge election loser. But Netanyahu is fighting for his own political survival and he knows that if he does agree to a ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli troops, as per the proposal, two extremist members of his cabinet will resign and his government will fall. So that means one thing for Biden - bad omens for November 5.

Biden says Hamas no longer a threat to Israel

Yet another ceasefire proposal to end the war in Gaza. But this time it's different. First, it was Joe Biden, and not Bibi Netanyahu, who made the announcement, and, second, Biden made the claim that Hamas had been so badly damaged that it would never again be able to carry out an attack on Israel on the scale of the October 7 assault which left 1,200 Israelis dead. The latter claim presumably was made after consultations between the US and Israel intelligence and military experts. But is it true? Does Netanyahu believe it to be true? The Israel Defence Forces have certainly killed a lot of Hamas fighters, at least 14,000 and probably many more since the operation in Rafah began. But the big sticking point is the apparent survival of the top Hamas leaders, Yahya Sinwar and Mohammed Deif. I can't imagine Netanyahu will be satisfied that the IDF operation has been completed until these two Hamas masterminds have been killed or captured. They orchestrated the October 7 atrocities. But if they are never found, how can a ceasefire and the total withdrawal of Israeli troops - key ingredients of the new proposal - be agreed by the Israeli prime minister? He has already hinted that while he approves of the proposal announced by Biden, the war will continue until Israel has met all of its objectives. So the Biden announcement gives reason for optimism that the war can come to an end - and that would be good for Biden's election prospects - but Netanyahu could make this just another ceasefire deal that comes to nothing.