Netanyahu has gone for the a la carte war menu and chosen the lot

Benjamin Netanyahu clearly believes that he now has a unique opportunity to go for all of Israel's enemies all at once while the world waits for a new American president to enter the White House. Right now, nothing can stop him, certainly not the United States, and so he has grabbed his moment and issued order for the Israel Defence Forces to eliminate as many of the country's enemies as possible and to destroy their strongholds and command bunkers and missile stocks. In a whirlwind of military aggression, the Israeli leader has ordered attacks on Hezbollah, anti-Israel forces in Syria and Yemen and a decapitation operation which has already removed about three-quarters of the Hezbollah leadership hierarchy. President Biden can't stop him, no leader in Europe has any power to stop him and no one in the Middle East dares interfere. Netanyahu is on a roll and won't stop until he has completed his list of enemies to be annihilated. Whether that will involve a full-scale invasion of southern Lebanon we have yet to see, but all the signs are that one or maybe two divisons of troops and tanks will cross the border in an attempt to drive Hezbollah back. If there is an a la carte war menu, Netanyahu has chosen everything in the knowledge that at least for the next few months he will probably get away with it.

Mossad intelligence-gathering at its finest

No one will ever know for sure precisely how Mossad tipped off Benjamin Netanyahu that the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah would be at a certain address on a certain day at a certain time in a suburb of Beirut. But you can be sure that when the Israeli prime minister took the phone call from Tel Aviv shortly after his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Friday late morning, he was informed that 100 per cent identity had been confirmed and that a bunch of heavy bombs, probably 2,000 pounders, would do the trick to destroy the building and the bunker in which he was presiding over a meeting of surviving Hezbollah leaders and an Iranian general. What would Netanyahu have said? "Go ahead", or "Permission approved", or "Go for it", or perhaps there was a special code. But within minutes the 2,000 pounders attached to Israeli F-15 jets were airborne and on their way. Mossad has been showing in recent months that its intelligence-gathering is second to none. Unlike the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden which was only 60 per cent confirmed by the CIA, I suspect Mossad's confirmation was so positive Netanyahu wouldn't have had time to blink before he gave his go ahead. Mossad agents, whether disguised as Lebanese fruit sellers or passing taxi drivers or "homeless" bodies on the street opposite the Hezbollah HQ would have spotted the arrival of Nasrallah and then whispered into their hidden mics. Nasrallah, with his long white beard and turban would have been relatively easy to identify. Why he took the risk of entering the HQ building at all, again we will never know, except that Netanyahu's presence in New York at the UN must have been a gambling factor. Nasrallah and his security advisers were fooled. The Israeli leader was always ready to seize the moment when his Mossad agents came up with the goods. And what better time to do it when he was haranguing the UN and anti-Israel political leaders and pledging to win win win against Hamas and Hezbollah whatever the cost.

An angry Netanyahu at the UN gave the order to kill Hezbollah chief

Any lingering hopes in Washington of an end to the fighting in Gaza and Lebanon were given short shrift yesterday by Israel’s prime minister in his address to the United Nations General Assembly. In an uncompromising speech in which he accused the UN body of a history of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel bias, Benjamin Netanyahu laid bare his determination to end the war in Gaza only when Israel’s objectives had been met: the destruction of the Hamas terror organisation and the demilitarisation of Gaza. While the language he used was familiar, he was speaking at a time when the Israeli military appear poised to enter southern Lebanon to drive back Hezbollah, Hamas’s most powerful neighbour and supporter. The Israeli leader was in no mood to discuss ceasefires or concessions. The only way forward, he said, was to destroy the enemies who posed a threat to Israel’s existence. Such expectations in Washington and New York of a possible 21-day ceasefire to halt the burgeoning war between Israel and Hezbollah, but so quickly dashed. Netanyahu had already made it clear to Washington that while he was always ready to negotiate peace, now was not the time to hold back on confronting Israel’s enemies. Hezbollah and Hamas had to be dealt with so that the state of Israel could live without having missiles and rockets fired at Jewish communities every day. He condemned Hezbollah for attacking Israel with rockets the day after Hamas had carried out its massacre in southern Israel on October 7. More than 8,000 rockets had been fired by Hezbollah into Israel since October 8, he said., forcing 60,000 Israelis to abandon their homes in the north, near the border. Netanyahu had to face pro-Palestinian protesters outside the UN building in New York and some diplomats walked out of the chamber before he began his speech. The Palestinian delegations’ seats were empty. But there was scattered applause for him each time he made a particular point or raised his voice to emphasise the challenges facing Israel. Although the focus of Washington’s diplomatic efforts in recent days has been to prevent an all-out war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, Netanyahu was keen to emphasis the achievements already made in the war in Gaza. Hamas had begun the war with 40,000 members, 15,000 rockets and an underground tunnel network that was bigger than the New York subway which has 472 stations and 24 different lines. Netanyahu claimed 50 per cent of the total Hamas force had been eliminated, 23 out of the 24 fighting battalions had been annihilated and 90 per cent of the rockets destroyed. . “Now we will mop up,” he said. He claimed Israel Defence Forces had done more than any other army in wartime to protect civilians and prevent deaths and injuries among men, women and children. The casualty statistics put out by Hamas and by the Lebanese health authorities might tend to cast doubt on that claim. Indeed, Kamala Harris, Democratic nominee for the presidency and potentially the next incumbent of the White House, has on several occasions stated that the toll of civilian casualties in Gaza has been unacceptable. The Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza says 41,500 people have been killed, although Israel would stipulate that half of the deaths involved Hamas members. In Lebanon, more than 700 people are reported to have died since the Israeli airstrikes began on Monday. An unspecified number would have been Hezbollah fighters. Since Israel’s military retaliation against Hamas began after October 7, Netanyahu has had to fight what he sees as another war – a pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel war. This sense of persecution came out in his address to the UN. “I didn’t intend to come here this year. My country is at war , fighting for its life. But after I heard the lies and slanders levelled at my country by many of the speakers at this podium, I decided to come here and set the record straight.” In a direct message to Washington, he likened Hezbollah’s attacks in northern Israel which had driven Israeli civilians from their homes to a similar scenario happening in America. “Just imagine if terrorists turned El Paso and San Diego into ghost towns. How long would the American government tolerate that?” he said. He also had a warning for Iran, the principal sponsor for every act of terror against Israel. “I have a message for the tyrants of Iran. If you strike us we will strike you. There is no place in Iran that the long arm of Israel cannot reach,” he said. This was an angry Netanyahu, a man under huge pressure at home and abroad, committed to destroying Israel’s enemies but still hoping for a better and more peaceful future. He referred to the Abraham Accords, the agreements signed between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain for normalisation of diplomatic relations. But he spoke of the even more significant potential breakthrough still to come: full relations with Saudi Arabia. The October 7 Hamas massacre and the near year-long military action by Israel in Gaza brought the Washington-sponsored negotiations with Riyadh to a shuddering halt. Saudi Arabia wants, in return for diplomatic relations with Israel, the formation of an independent Palestinian state. But Netanyahu left out that crucial ingredient in his address. The future status of Gaza and the wider issue of reconfigured Arab/Israel relations seemed a long way off, as the Israeli leader grew more and more angry at the podium. AND THEN ISRAEL BOMBED THE HEZBOLLAH HQ OUTSIDE BEIRUT AND KILLED THE FOUNDING LEADER HASSAN NASRALLAH!

How good or bad is Biden's Middle East foreign policy legacy?

No one can accuse President Joe Biden of failing to do his utmost to prevent a full-scale war from breaking out in the Middle East. He and his indefatigable envoys have this year spent more hours of the day on the Middle East than any other issue. The intensive diplomatic efforts by Antony Blinken, secretary of state, Jake Sullivan, national security adviser, Bill Burns, CIA director, and Amos Hochstein, Biden’s man for Lebanon, among others, were supposed not only to find a workable solution to the myriad of crises but also enhance the president’s foreign policy legacy after what has turned out to be only one term in office. The Middle East has been a political and diplomatic graveyard for successive American presidents. But Biden’s hopes of forging an historic alliance between Israel and Saudi Arabia as part of a grand vision of fending off Iran, Israel’s Enemy Number One and the arch manipulator behind every theatre of conflict in the region, fell brutally by the wayside when hundreds of Tehran-trained Hamas fighters crossed the border from Gaza on October 7and committed the worst atrocity on the Jewish people since the Holocaust. The slaughter of at least 1,200 people and the kidnapping of around 250 threw all of Biden’s grand-design diplomacy into an abyss from which it has failed to reemerge in the intervening eleven and a half months. Biden now has about 16 weeks left of his presidency to broker some form of settlement, or a stepping back from a regional war at the very least, if he hopes to depart from the Oval Office in January with a Middle East legacy of which he can be proud. The omens are not good. Ever since October 7, Biden and his team have faced intransigent and obstructive players, seemingly determined to undermine or ignore his administration’s endeavours to bring a lasting ceasefire to the war in Gaza, a return of all the hostages, alive and dead, and to stop a disastrous repeat of the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, has agreed to many of Biden’s plans and proposals but in the end he has always gone his own way. By all accounts, Biden and Netanyahu have had frequent angry conversations over the phone, highlighting the frustration on both sides. In the midst of continuing ceasefire efforts by Washington with Egypt, Qatar and others, Netanyahu authorised the assassination of Ismael Haniyeh, political leader of Hamas (and principal ceasefire negotiator in Qatar) while attending the inauguration of the new Iranian president in Tehran, gave the go ahead for detonating thousands of Hezbollah pagers and walkie-talkies with Mossad-supplied explosives, and lined up two reserve infantry brigades to launch an incursion into southern Lebanon. Now, Netanyahu has rejected the 21-day ceasefire proposal by the US, UK and other countries to suspend the firefighting between Israel and Hezbollah. Dealing with Israel, a longstanding friend, partner and ally to the United States, should have been the easy part for Biden’s diplomacy and foreign policy strategy . But Netanyahu, reliant as he is for his political survival on an extreme right-wing coalition which demands no concessions of any kind, has been unable or unwilling to contemplate anything other than the annihilation of Hamas, after October 7, and retribution against Hezbollah for supporting Hamas with constant rocket firings over the border into Israel. The succession to the political leadership role of Hamas by Yahya Sinwar, architect of the October 7 massacre who has refused to consider further ceasefire and hostage releases while Israeli troops remain in Gaza, has added to the Biden administration’s growing realisation that all the efforts made to bring this nightmare to a close are going to end in failure. They won’t give up but time is running out. Could Biden have done more? Could he have saved his legacy in the Middle East by adopting a much tougher stance with Netanyahu, notably by rigorously opposing the expansion of Jewish settlements on the West Bank which has led to violent clashes with Palestinians, and perhaps by demanding a quid pro quo: more arms for Israel in return for an agreed timetable to lay down the foundations for creating a new and improved Palestinian Authority to run Gaza as well as the West Bank once the war is over. The reality is that after October 7, there was never going to be a moment when Netanyahu would be ready, let alone, happy, to discuss Gaza being placed in the hands of the much-maligned Palestinian Authority. As for the two-state solution, Israel and a sovereign Palestine living amicably alongside each other, that scenario is further away than ever and there is nothing Biden can do about it before he hands over to a new president on January 20. President Jimmy Carter signed the Camp David Accords in 1978, a peace treaty forged after 14 months of diplomacy which ended hostile relations between Israel and Egypt. Under President Bill Clinton, the Oslo Accords were signed by Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation in 1993 after months of secret negotiations. Biden began his administration with high hopes of a new broad Arab-Israeli alliance which could have brought greater stability to the whole region. His legacy would have been assured. Instead, the war in Gaza continues relentlessly and without any sign of stopping in the near future, and a new war between Israel and Hezbollah appears unavoidable.

Trump is getting feistier about Zelensky giving nothing to Russia

Until now, all Donald Trump has said, over and over again, is that he would resolve the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of becoming president and that had he been president in 2022, Putin would never have invaded Ukraine in the first place. Neither statement is remotely checkable but it makes a good rallying call when he is campaigning and I experct a lot of people believe him. Now, however, he is turning against Zelensky, the Ukrainian pr4esident, who has done his best to turn from professional comedian to war leader since the invasion.Trump now openly blames Zelensky for failing to give anything to Putin, as if handing over part of your country's sovereign territory to your bully neighbour is a natural thing to do for any sensible leader. Had he surrendered territory to Putin there wouldn't have been all the deaths and destructions of cities, Trump is now saying. Well, I guess that's true. You could say the same about Hitler. If we had allowed him to take over Europe we wouldn't have had so many millions of deaths and countries ravaged by bombs and tanks. Sometimes, sacrifices have to be made for a better future. Assuming Trump has read about the Second World War, he should have come to that realisation. But in the case of Ukraine, his view is that Putin for some reason had a right to occupy large swathes of Ukraine and therefore Zelensky is somehow responsible for all the deaths and destroyed cities that have occurred since February 24, 2022. It's a pretty twisted argument, but if he becomes president, that is presumably what he plans to do. Give Putin what he wants and end the killings. But Putin, I suspect, won't listen to him and will carry on trying to destroy Ukraine whether he gets a territoprial concession from Zelensky or not. Then what will Trump do?

Iran president says he comes in peace

The new Irainian president Masoud Pezeshkian arrived in New York for the UN General Assembly and pronounced he wanted peace not war and hoped for better dialogue with the West. If only one could believe him. The reality says otherwise. He may not want war with Israel because he knows it will be devastating for his country and would probably involve the US. But he is still relying on Iran's proxie forces - Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis and Islamic militia in Iraq and Syria - to do Iran's dirty work for him. This is how Iran's strategy works. Let Iran's "forward defence" allies fight Israel while backing them with arms, training and money. But Israel isn't fooled. Its biggest enemy is Iran and if Benjamin Netanyahu can finally defeat Hezbollah and Hamas, neither of which looks likely at the moment, Iran is going to feel very very vulnerable. Which is probably why the new Iranian president is now in New York trying to convince everyone that it's all Israel's fault and he just wants to make Iran into an accepted member of the international community. While it's always a nice change to hear an Iranian leader talking about the need for peaceful dialogue, there are hard men in Iran, notably the leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard who have no truck with peace of any kind and just want to destroy Israel. War between Israel and Iran is, therefore, more, not less, likely at some point in the future, whatever President Puzeshkian says.

Zelensky's victory plan visit to Washington

President Zelensky is in the United States for his latest, possibly last, throw of the dice before the American election, in his attempt to prove that victory can be achieved against Ukraine’s Russian invaders. The redoubtable leader of Ukraine has brought what he calls his “victory plan” which embraces every facet of his nation’s future. It includes his strategy for forcing President Putin to end the war and for the West to guarantee his beleaguered country’s long-term security and economic prosperity. It’s a grand vision which he will present to President Biden in the White House on Thursday. There are a number of conditions which are dependent on American support whoever wins the election in November. It also envisages a time when Putin might be persuaded to accept that a for-ever war is no longer in Russia’s interest. Victory has been a word Washington has tended to avoid. Biden has been Zelensky’s fervent supporter and defender ever since Russian troops crossed the border two years and seven months ago and has always promised to back Kyiv however long it takes. But did that mean all the way to victory? When he was Chairman of the US Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley said the war would end by a politically-negotiated settlement, not by military prowess. That is the reality. But the longer the war has continued, the more entrenched the political view, not just in Kyiv, has been that Putin needs to be deterred from any future aggressive ambitions and that Ukraine, therefore, had to win the war. Donald Trump was asked during the TV debate with Kamala Harris in Philadelphia whether he wanted Ukraine to win. He replied he just wished to end the fighting and stop people dying. He was taken to task for this reply. But this probably reflects many private views even within the Biden administration. Indeed, for a long time officials in the National Security Council have been quite open about the need for the Kyiv government to recognise that a negotiated settlement had to be taken into account at some point in the future. The issue was always, if negotiations were to take place between Kyiv and Moscow, Ukraine had to be in a position of strength on the battlefield in order to achieve maximum advantage. This is where Zelensky’s new victory plan comes into its own. Although the fine details have not been made public, it seems clear that the Ukrainian leader will argue that now is the time -between October and December, he said – for big decisions to be made in Washington and by Nato as a whole. He is thinking, of course, of his desire for authority to use long-range western-supplied missile systems to hit multiple targets in Russia; and for Ukraine’s future to be embedded in Nato. Zelensky is hoping that attacks on air bases and missile sites deep inside Russia, using the Franco-British Storm Shadow cruise missile and the US ATACMS rockets, plus the continuing presence of Ukrainian troops in a large slice of Kursk in western Russia, will finally persuade Putin to come to his senses. Negotiating from strength. That’s what Washington has been saying for months and that’s what Zelensky is now offering. It’s probably unfortunate that he chose to call his blueprint a victory plan because victory implies the other side has been defeated. And Putin is not a leader who will ever concede defeat. Indeed, as the battleground stands at the moment, the Russian leader has seen his troops make progress in eastern Ukraine, he has brushed off the Kursk invasion and will be feeling quietly satisfied that his warning of war with Nato if Biden were to permit western long-range missiles to be used within Russia appears to have paid off. This is why Zelensky’s visit to the US at this time is so important. Apart from seeing Biden on Thursday, he will also have sessions with Kamala Harris, Donald Trump and Congressional figures. Can he use his undoubted eloquence and persuasive powers finally to convince Biden and the future American president, whoever it is, to back what would be the biggest gamble of the war: to go for Putin with all guns blazing and force him to the negotiating table. Biden has so far demurred. His vice president has shown no indication of adopting a different position if she wins the election, and Trump has made it clear he wants to impose his own plan on both Kyiv and Moscow to end the war as quickly as possible. Zelensky will make his pitch to the current and potential future presidents and will present his case for continued support when he addresses the UN General Assembly in New York tomorrow (WED). Will his victory plan make a difference in Washington? Only eleven days ago, Biden hesitated yet again when he met Sir Keir Starmer in the White House and discussed the question of authorising Zelensky to fire long-range US and British missiles at Russian targets. Starmer insisted the meeting was more about strategy than individual missiles. But Storm Shadow and ATACMS are inextricably linked in Zelensky’s mind with his strategy for winning the war. If Zelensky’s victory plan is met with mixed feelings in Washington, he will return to Kyiv at the end of the week with the bitter realisation that he will have no alternative but to fight on in the hope of gaining some advantage on the battlefield before the winter sets in. And then wait to see who wins the US election and start another round of presentations, armed with his blueprint for victory.

Israel and Hezbollah escalating towards disaster

We keep on hearing that neither Israel nor Hezbollah want a full-scale war but they are going about it in an odd way. Israeli airstrikes in southern Lebanon today killed more than 270 people, and Hezbollah has been firing longer-range missiles which have hit the suburbs of Haifa. Every day is worse, every day the escalation builds. The focus is suddenly away from Gaza and more on southern Lebanon. Everyone knows that Iran has helped Hezbollah build much more advanced and much longer-range weapons which have yet to be used. Why? Because Iran wants Hezbollah to keep these weapons for when there is a real threat by Israel against Iran itself, and, more specifically, against its nuclear weapons research facilities. So Hezbollah has yet to unleish these much more advanced missiles against Israel, under Tehran orders. But this may change if Israel launches a ground invasion of southern Lebanon as part of its determination to push Hezbollah further back away from the border with northern Israel to allow Israeli citizens to return to their homes in that area. A ground operation could be the final straw that forces Iran to authorise Hezbollah to resort to the weapons that can penetrate far into Israel. That would be a disaster for Israel and for the whole of the Middle East. Who is going to pull back from the brink? Israel is counting on Hezbollah blinking first.

What could go wrong for Kamala Harris?

The American historian Allan Lichtman who has nearly always correctly predicted who will win the US presidential election has said Kamala Harris will win in November unless something goes seriously wrong. What could that be? With seven weeks to go, any number of things could happen which might halt her progress to the White House. The first thing that comes to mind is u-turns. She is famous for changing her mind over the years, but right now she can't afford to go flippity-flop on any of the big issues. She did one of these this last week when she was quoted as saying that if someone broke into her house the intruder would be shot. The image was of the vice president standing in the hallway of her house with a shotgun in her hands and blasting the intruder. First of all it was a pretty inflammatory thing to say, even in America, but then her officials quickly stepped in and said she was just joking. She probably lost a lot of gun-possessing voters who would definitely open fire at anyone breaking into their homes. It was only a minor u-turn, but any bigger ones and she could be in real trouble. What she says about the economy, the war in Gaza, the war in Ukraine and immigration/the border over the next few weeks will be instantly compared with what she has said in the past. Voters like to know where their leaders and future leaders stand on all the major issues. If Kamala is going to win, as Allan Lichtman and polls seem to be suggesting, she dare not put a foot wrong between now and November. No wonder she seems so reluctant to hold press conferences.

Revenge killings in the Middle East

One of the notable aspects of the Israeli attacks in Lebanon this week has been the targeting of specific Hezbollah commanders. One of them has been on a most-wanted list for decades, not just a list compiled by Mossad but also by the CIA. Ibrahim Aqil was supposed to have been one of those who planned the catastrophic truck bombings in Beirut that killed more than 300 people. The targets were the US Marine barracks and US embassy in the Lebanese capital. This was in 1983. So, 41 years later, he has been killed. So the killing was a coup for Israel for tracking this man down and a coup for the CIA which, presumably, has been trying to track him down for four decades. The war against Hamas and Hezbollah has truly taken on a different character ever since the pager and walkie-talkie blasts this week. It's all-out war with Hezbollah, short of a ground offensive, although this cannot be ruled out. Israel has decided to throw everything at its enemies in the final weeks before the US election. We can expect many more targetings in Lebanon and probably an even more intense effort to find and kill the one man who has escaped the Israelis so far, Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas mastermind in Gaza. If they can get him before the US election, the incoming American president might find it easier to get a ceasefire deal. The next few week are going to be crucial for Israel.

How many more Russian dead before Putin cries halt?

The latest figure of Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine is 70,000. Will this make Vladimir Putin sit up in shock as he starts his day in the Kremlin? Does he actually care? There will surely come a time when even Putin will decide that enough is enough and that some form of settlement must be negotiated. With Ukrainian troops still in the Kursk region in western Russia, and long-range drones hitting missile depots and airbases inside Russia, will Putin be making any moves in the near future to stop this terrible conflict? He will want to claim victory but the way things are going he will have to make some concessions. President Zelensky is in Washington next week with his new "victory plpan" which he will present to Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Donald Trump and people in Congress. Will it be any different from his previous ones, all of which would involve the withdrawal of Russian soldiers from currently occupied territory, including Crimea? Assuming Putin would reject this out of hand, what possible alternatives might there be. Only Trump has come up with a "plan" to end the war but Zelensky has already effectively rejected his proposals which would basically give everything Putin wants. Will Biden and Kamala produce something new? It seems unlikely, although officials such as Antony Blinken, secretary of state, and Jake Sullivan, national security adviser, must be advising a change in terms of the US position vis a vis Ukraine. A proper strategically sensible deal will have to be worked out which will involve concessions by both Kyiv and Moscow. I wonder if the new Zelensky victory plan makes any concessions. We will have to wait for next week.

What was the point of Israel attacking Hezbollah pagers and walkie-talkies?

What exactly was Israel's strategy in detonating explosives inside thousands of Hezebollah pagers and walkie-talkies? To prove they could do it and make Hezbollah feel vulnerable? Or was it a precursor to a full-scale war with Hezbollah? Or was it really a message to Iran? Or was it a way of telling Hezbollah to back off helping Hamas in Gaza and to move back from the border with Israel and stop launching rockets at Israeli towns and cities? The pager/walkie-talkie explosions killed three dozen people and injured thousands more. Was this Israel's intention, to kill and maim and to do it in a way that made the whole world think, Oh my God, this is the way war is going? Of course, nothing, absolutely nothing compares with the atrocities and rapes and hostage-takings carried out by Hamas on October 7. But this latest form of warfare against Hezbollah leaves a very uncomfortable feeling somehow. It was dastardly, it was brilliant espionage. But what was the real point of it all? Killing people in markets and in the streets and in their homes with technical wizzardry. What really is the message Tel Aviv is sending out? Will it help to bring the war in Gaza to an end? Surely not.

Mossad's technical department let loose on Hezbollah

Two days of an extraordinary low-tech war between Mossad and Hezbollah have grabbed world headlines. To what end, we don't know yet. But Israel's secret intelligence service has a history of dastardly targeting of the Israeli nation's enemies, from booby-trapped public phone booths to remote-controlled machinegun devices to the mass insertion of malware codes to destroy Iran's uranium-enrichment gas centrigue systems. So the blowing up of thousands of pagers and walkie-talkies in Lebanon, held by Hezbollah operatives, is the latest version of a war that has been going on for years. It's not high-tech sci-fi stuff, unlike the Stuxnet virus that was fed into Iran's nuclear weapons development programme 14 years ago. This is pure espionage with a Mossad killer touch added. First came the intelligence that Hezbollah had ordered neary 3,000 pagers from a company linked to a firm in Taiwan, then came the interception of the shipment and the insertion of one or two ounces of explosives fixed to the battery and a triggering device, then finally, all wrapped back into place and sent on its way to the eagerly-awaiting Hezbollah organisation which duly sent them out to all members for what was hoped to be discreet, untappable communication between leaders and operatives. Mossad had laid thousands of mini Trojan Horses among the Hezbollah members to be detonated whenever the government of Benjamin Netanyahu judged to be the right moment. According to US officials, Netanyahu was forced to give the go ahead to detonate all the tiny bombs prematurely because intelligence revealed Hezbollah was beginning to have suspicions that Mossad had interfered with the pagers and walkie-talkies. "Use it or lose it," one official said. So the bombs were triggered. Another coup by Mossad but the deaths and injuries that followed will not have helped to bring the war in Gaza to an end. In fact, the reverse. So Israel's action, or alleged action, may have scared Hezbollah like hell but I doubt it was well received in Washington where Joe Biden in his last few months as president is desperate to get a ceasefire deal in Gaza and an end to constant rocket-firing between Hezbollah and Israel.

Trump wins sympathy vote

Donald Trump has suddenly found that everyone is on his side. After the second assassination attempt which yet again showed up alarming weaknesses in the Secret Service protocols for protecting him both as a former president and as the Republican presidential nominee, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton et al have come forward to express their relief that Trump survived and have questioned whether enough is being done to keep him safe.The circumstances surrounding the latest attempt on Trump's life are totally bizarre. A man with a semi-automatic rifle just biding his time in the bushes for 12 hours -TWELVE hours - and no one spotted him. The Secret Service didn't check the perimeter of the golf course before Trump began his round. Extraordinary. Thus the total sympathy for Trump from everyone, including his political opponents. This will give Trump extra momentum in his campaign. This is not a cynical judgement, it's reality.The race between Trump and Kamala Harris is already very tight and this incident will narrow the gap even further. The polls may show Harris to be slightly ahead but the November election is won according to what the electoral college votes say, and for the moment Trump looks likely to win more of these votes than Harris. Trump will benefit from the sympathy vote for the next few weeks at least to ensure that the election if going to be a nail-biter.

How much longer can Ukraine fight Russia?

Wars can go on for ever. There was the 100-year war between England and France from 1337 to 1453 over English claims to the French throne. But the Ukraine/Russia war is different. While the former was a series of military skirmishes over more than 100 years, the latter is a full-scale modern war which has already lasted two years and nearly seven months. How much longer can it go on? Joe Biden has always said that the US-led coalition of 50 countries will continue to support Ukraine to defend itself against Russian aggression "for as long as it takes". But this is totally unrealistic if the war never stops. The war has to come to an end sometime, and the sooner the better. But how on earth is this going to happen without Putin winning much of what he hoped to gain when he launched his invasion on February 24, 2022? Biden and Keir Starmer held what they called strategic talks about the war in Ukraine at the White House last week, meaning presumably they discussed the end game. But is there an end game? The only one put forwaqrd so far is the vague "plan" of Donald Trump's to shut it all down if he wins the election in November. Judging by what JD Vance, his vice presidential running-mate has indicated, that will mean giving Putin everything he wants: hanging on to all the land he has seized in eastern Ukraine, building a demilitarised zone separating this vast area from the rest of Ukraine, giving Kyiv guaranteed independence but no right to join Nato or the EU. Putin doesn't get the whole of Ukraine under his wing as he had hoped but he gets pretty much everything else he wanted. Victory for Putin. Oh and Trump expects Germany and other EU members to foot the bill for reconstructing Ukraine, not Putin whose bombs and missiles have been destroying cities and towns throughout the country. All of thse options will surely be rejected by Biden and Starmer and obviously by President Zelensky. So will Biden and co come up with anything remotely realistic to end this war. I haven't heard Kamala Harris suggest any proposal.

Trump's eating pets jibe at Haitian migrants is a social media phenomenon

Normally when a politician makes a ridiculous claim or allegation he or she is lambasted as an idiot or a weirdo. But not in Donald Trump's case. He claimed that Haitain migrants living in Springfield, Ohio were eating people's pet cats and dogs. There is supposedly no evidence of this at all, apart from the odd rumour on social media about a dog or cat being snatched and eaten. But no one, until Trump latched on to it, has taken any of this seriously. But Trump claimed it was going on to underline his political position which is that millions of migrants should be deported. Instead of being castigated by everyhone, Republicans and Democrats alike, his claim has become a social media phenomenon. His words have been set to music and it's so hilarious that it has become a source of huge entertainment. One, in particular, by @TheKiffness, called Eating the Cats, is very slickly put together and has become a big hit. Trump will benefit from this huge interest in his comment because a lot of people in America believe everything Trump says. Haitians eating cats and dogs in Springfield is no doubt the talk of the dinner table across the country. This is social media gone mad.

Biden slowly slowly decides about long-range US missiles

Storm Shadow, Britain’s highly-prized, air-launched cruise missile, is not going to win the war for Kyiv against the Russian invaders. However, this particular weapon, along with the American ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) are literally waiting in the wings for Kyiv to launch a new-style, more deadly and more provocative strike on air bases and missile sites deep inside Russia. They could transform the near-31-month war into the biggest confrontation between Moscow and the West since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. President Putin has warned that if authority is given for these weapons to be used against targets inside Russia, it would mean war between Russia and Nato. Storm Shadow, a heavyweight weapon with a range of more than 150 miles, and ATACMS which can reach 190 miles, have already played significant roles in the war, but exclusively against Russian targets in occupied eastern Ukraine and Russia-annexed Crimea. Ever since the start of the Russian invasion on 24 February, 2022, the US-led coalition supporting Kyiv has ploughed billions of dollars’ worth of weapons and ammunition to the Ukrainian military to fight off the Russian aggressors – in the hope of protecting Ukraine’s sovereignty. However, there was from the beginning a proviso, set in stone by President Biden., that the weapons which progressively became more advanced and more sophisticated should be used to defend Ukraine from attack, not deployed to mount over-the-border strikes into Russia itself. To Kyiv this made no military sense. If Moscow could launch attacks on Ukrainian cities from the safety of the Russian motherland – stand-off cruise missiles fired by bombers well away from Ukrainian air defences- then why should Ukraine not do likewise and hit the very bases inside Russia from where the strikes originated. A basic military maxim is that you hit the enemy where it hurts the most. But Biden said no, fearful of pushing Putin too far, down the nuclear escalatory road. Other members of the pro-Ukraine coalition went along with Biden’s edict, although with less enthusiasm in London. All that has now changed, and for a number of reasons. First, Biden is slowly becoming persuaded that Russia deserves to be targeted in retaliation for the huge increase in destructive missile strikes on Ukrainian cities, and, in particular, attacks by heavy precision-guided glide bombs that can weigh up to three tons. Second, Ukraine is developing its own longer-range missiles which will be capable of hitting targets inside Russia. Kyiv already possesses long-range armed drones which have had some notable successes in striking Russian sites, although with only limited explosive warheads. Under this reasoning, the US and UK would just be contributing towards Ukraine’s own home-grown weapons capability. Third, there is a growing confidence, albeit with an element of having one’s fingers crossed, that Putin is never going to resort to using tactical nukes against Ukraine. The West sent battle tanks and F-16 fighter aircraft, both supposedly red-line escalatory moves in Putin’s mind, but his warnings of dire consequences proved to be bluster.Fourth, Iran has sent hundreds more short-range ballistic missiles to Russia, all of which will be used to hit Ukrainian civilian and military targets. Although Iran had sent ballistic missiles to Moscow earlier in the year, the continuing flow of such systems between Tehran and Moscow has begged the question: if Moscow can get arms from an overseas ally for use against Ukraine, why shouldn’t Kyiv be allowed to fire Western long-range missiles at Russian targets, wherever they might be. This is where Storm Shadow and ATACMS have come into play. Both are highly effective weapons which, with the benefit of their longer range, could cause significant damage to the bases from where Russia is currently launching aircraft with their payload of deadly glide bombs. The new Labour government in Britain clearly wants to be on the front foot as far as the war in Ukraine is concerned, and already appears to be persuaded that Storm Shadow, a Franco-British weapon which has performed to all expectations since its introduction into Ukraine last year, should be used to help Kyiv strike at legitimate targets inside Russia. David Lammy, the foreign secretary, and Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, who were in Kyiv together this week, appear to be of the same mind, that now is the time to concede to President Zelensky’s long-argued wishes for the US and UK to remove the caveat covering the use of these weapons. In Washington DC yesterday, Keir Starmer met Biden to discuss the Storm Shadow issue, and left without the approval that he badly wanted. The final decision, he hinted, could be taken at the United Nations General Assembly at the end of the month. Putin has only just got round to sending infantry and marine brigades to try and push Ukrainian troops out of the Kursk region in western Russia which they invaded last month. What would the Russian leader do if Western F-16s flew bombing raids with Storm Shadow cruise missiles over the border? Would it mean war between Russia and Nato? Does the West back down or call Putin’s bluff? It will be the biggest decision Biden has to make in his last four months as president.

Israeli commandos abseil to destroy Syrian missile bunker

Israel's special forces commandos have to be the most brazen military operatives on the planet. Last week, it has now been revealed, the Israeli Air Force carried out a series of airstrikes on a deep bunker buried in a mountain in Syria where the Syrians, Iran and Hezbollah have been developing new missiles and who knows what else, probably chemical and biological weapons. But because the bombs used by the air force couldn't penetrate deep enough, dozens of Israeli special forces abseiled from helicopters and entered the bunker, killing guards as they approached and then went right down into the depths, grabbed computers and documents and then laid time-fused explosives everywhere. Once they were back on the helicopters, the bombs exploded, destroying everything. Amazing. Israel had known about the secret bunker for about five years but every time the special forces' leaders came up with plans to destroy it, it was judged to be too risky. This time, Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, who could do with some good news for a change, gave the go ahead. This extraordinary mission will serve as a warning to Iran which has its own deep bunkers in mountains where Iranian scientists are developing a nuclear weapons programme. Only the US has the sort of deep-penetration bombs that could reach the depths of these bunkers. So Israel, if it ever carries out an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, knows that without the American bombs, it will have to do a similar operation as the one in Syria, with airstrikes and special forces ground attacks. Tehran will be on notice.

Trump may be right, it's time to stop the war in Ukraine

Britain's foreign secretary and the US secretary of state are doing the rounds together, in Kyiv and elsewhere in Europe, making up their minds and other people's minds about giving permission to Ukraine to use US/UK-supplied long-range weapons to attack targets in Russia. If authority is given which seems inevitable, Britain's Storm Shadow cruise missile and the US ATACMS missiles will be fired at Russian air bases and other targets to reduce or eliminate Moscow's launch points for strikes on Ukrainian cities. Militarily it makes sense to hit the enemy where it hurts. But Joe Biden has, until now, been reluctant for Ukraine to forge ahead with this strategy using US missiles. For obvious reasons. It will antagonise Putin and give him justification for accusing the US of directly attacking Russia. Likewise if Britain says yes to Storm Shadows hitting Russian targets inside Russia, rather than inside Ukraine. It would be a serious escalation but with Putin destroying Ukraine's infrastructure with missiles fired from inside Russia, the argument for striking back is sound and fully justified. Except that global politics are involved and if authority is given to Kyiv to do what they will with US- and UK-supplied long-range weapons, the war is going to get doubly dangerous and could lead to escalations we can only whisper about. So, before we get to this stage, surely it is time for some serious talks to be held about how this war can be brought to an end. Neither Ukraine nor Russia is going to win. Accept that as a basis for negotiations and start getting the two sides round a table. Trump is right. The war is just killing more and more people and destroying more and more property and there is no end in sight. Announce the decision that Kyiv can start hitting Russia with western weapons and then make a move to bring this terrible war to a halt. The facile question asked of Trump by the ABC interviewer during the TV debate with Kamaala Harris -"Do you want Ukraine to win the war?" - is meaningless. There will be no winner. Both Russia and Ukraine have lost. It's time to talk.

A good debate for prosecutor Kamala Harris

Judging by the ABC TV debate between the two presidential candidates, Kamala Harris stuck to her brief pretty rigidly and Donald Trump wavered off course, goaded by the woman next to him who dared to highlight his bad record. It was certainly Kamala's night. She came out on top and perhaps for the first time showed that she had the hutzpah to be the next president. She was tough and clear and decisive. Trump looked pretty put out. He had clearly hoped to diminish her in every way but failed. This doesn't mean she is guaranteed the keys to the Oval Office but Trump will have gone away with the awful thought in his mind that he might not win. That would mean two defeats in a row, never mind his claim he beat Joe Biden in 2020. He didn't and everyone bar him and a few other loyalists accept that. I doubt he will want another TV debate although Kamala said she is happy to do more. The Democrats will be cock-a-hoop. They have gone from having a candidate who could hardly get his words out, let alone his thoughts, during his debate session with Trump to an articulate woman with stars in her eyes. Yes, it was a good night for Kamala and a good night for the Democrats.

The suffering of the six Israeli hostages who were murdered

The terrible war in Gaza has become synonymous with death and destruction, innocent men, women and children dying or being severely injured as the Israeli bombs land, seeking out Hamas fighters hiding amidst the civilian population, even when they are taking refuge in designated refugee camps.But the suffering of the hostages taken by Hamas on October 7 should never be forgotten as the main focus continues to be on the appalling plight of the Palestinian people. The six young Israelis who were murdered by their Hamas captors just minutes before Israeli commandos arrived to rescue them, had lived for months in a tiny section of a tunnel in southern Gaza which, according to the Israeli military, was just two to three feet wide and five feet high. There were no washing facilities, just bottles, and terrible ventilation, made worse by what must have become a stinking hellhole. Not for the first time it is difficult to imagine negotiating with people like this who are prepared to put other human beings through such agony. The suffering they must have experienced is too awful to contemplate. What the remaining hostages are going through should never be forgotten. Nor should it be forgotten that the man who is orchestrating these brutal conditions for the innocent hostages, Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas in Gaza, is still alive and plotting his next moves to exploit their fate for his own political and ideological purposes.

Tomorrow night is the Big Night for Donald and Kamala

Unlike the TV debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden after which everyone who watched it went to bed feeling excrutiatingly nonplussed, tomorrow night's debate between Trump and Kamala Harris has a helluva lot riding on it. It's Kamala's big chance to show she can outgun Trump and it's Trump's chance to belittle Kamala and put a final end to her honeymoon period as the Biden replacement for the Democratic presidential nomination. It could go either way. If Kamala sticks to her briefs and sounds off like the prosecutor she once was, she might do serious damage to Trump's self-confidence and self-importance and come out smiling. Trump won't do his campaign any good if he starts insulting Kamala and behaves like a spoilt brat, or worse still, a grumpy old man. Kamala has nearly four years of experience as Biden's vice president and she can claim to be partly responsible for the achievements of Biden's administration. But she will also have to acknowledge that not everything went according to plan. Like the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. Trump, or course, will be able to boast that he was the president for four years and can claim all sorts of wonderful achievments, even if they are not born out by the facts. It should be quite a show. Good luck, Kamala.

In memory of Queen Elizabeth II

The Queen who had been monarch for most people's lives died two years ago. Since her passing some extraordinary things have happened, none of them good: she shook the hand of Liz Truss as the new British prime minister just before she died, but Truss lasted only 49 days in the job, resigning after nearly destroying the economy, a terrible atrocity took place in southern Ksrael by Hamas invaders after which an horrific war of slaughter started and continues in Gaza, Donald Trump was found guilty of paying hush-money to a porn star and was convicted of business fraud but is still the Republican party's nominated presidential candidate, poor old Joe Biden was forced to step down despite desperately wanting a second term, riots took place in towns and cities across England following a false, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim social media post, the world suffered the hottest year on record, King Charles and the Princess of Wales announced they had cancer, Maduro lost the election in Venezuela, but he claimed otherwise in Trumpian style and stayed on to ruin the country even more, the new Labour government is threatening to destroy the Middle Class's investments and plans for the future of their children, the Far Right are making huge advances in France and Germany etc etc. I wonder what the late Queen would be thinking.

Good news and bad news for Donald Trump

The really good news for Donald Trump this week came from the judge in the hush-money trial. Sentencing has been delayed until after the November election. While that might sound as if the judge gave into pressure, it was sort of inevitable. If he had announced sentencing, however harsh or mild, the judge could have been accused of electioneering on the side of the Democrats.So, while there appeared to be no legal reason why the sentencing should be postponed, it kind of made sense. But it was still good news for Trump, especially if he wins the election because he can then, as president, make moves to delay it further or may be even get the conviction dismissed. The bad news is that Dick Cheney, one of modern history's most powerful Republican vice presidents, announced that he couldn't vote for Trump because of his lies and plots to overturn the 2020 election result and intended to vote for Kamala Harris. For Cheney, the arch political manipulator, to say he will vote for a very liberal-minded Democratic nominee would seem to be extraordinary. It doesn't mean a whole bunch of Republicans will follow suit but Trump nust be worried that others will start to think twice about voting for the man who refused to accept defeat by Joe Biden in 2020.

Trump could still win

It's always dangerous to start predicting the defeat of Donald Trump. So much of the current momentum to the November election is going Kamala Harris's way, including polling figures in key states, that it seems almost inevitable that she will win and Trump will lose. Again. But, despite there being less than two months to go, it's a long time in terms of presidential election campaigning. Things could go wrong for Kamala. Things could go right for Trump. Next week's big TV debate, probably the only one they will have, could be a show stopper, with Trump giving a commanding performance and Kamala struggling between her smiles. Or, she could dominate and Trump could bumble his way through. But Kamala, being the new, fresh nominee for the Democratic party, will have to keep her wits about her if her current momentum is to be maintained. Trump is still sounding confident and has been talking about the importance of picking the right people for his administration. He obviously believes he is going to win although the polls say otherwise. But with all the felony trials facing him being pushed into the background, he can concentrate on making bold claims and promises which, whether credible or not, might persuade an undecided voter to go for him rather than risk the relatively unknown Kamala Harris.

Putin is playing games with US electors

So Putin likes Kamala Harris's laugh. He thinks it's infectious and is one of the reasons why he says he hopes she will win the election in November. Somehow I doubt whether Putin's opinion of Harris or Trump will make any difference to the way Americans vote. But it does show that Putin is becoming more and more relaxed and confident with his presence on the world stage. And, the war in Ukraine is going his way right now. He has studiously avoided doing what the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, had hoped would happen which was to force him to transfer thousands of troops from eastern Ukraine to take on the Kyiv invasion force which is currently spreading its wings in the Russian province of Kursk. Putin has made it clear he is not that bothered by the Ukrainian incursion and will sort it out another way. Meantime Russian troops are making real headway in eastern Ukraine and could seize the strategic town of Pokrovsk any day. So while he is satisfied about his campaign in eastern Ukraine, he has found time to joke about the US election and praise Kamala for her laugh, the samer laugh which Donald Trump says makes her sound like a crazy woman. Putin would probably like Kamala to win because Trump, while a fan of his as a strong dictator, is more likely to try and push him around over Ukraine. If Kamala has any sense she should laugh in Putin's face.

Putin strikes while the world's attention is on Gaza

With Gaza and the appalling politics surrounding the hostages still being held by Hamas in underground tunnels, Putin has leapt in to launch more and more strikes against Ukrainian cities, killing dozens and destroying buildings. War is a cynical business and the Russian leader knows better than most how to exploit situations when they become available. Gaza has been in the forefront of the world's attention, with the brutal killing of six hostages, including an American, Britain's decision to suspend some arms sales to Israel, and the never-ending search for a ceasefire and hostage release deal that is never going to happen. Putin chose this moment to order one of the biggest missile attacks on Ukraine for months, causing devastation. And all this is playing out while the US is divided over who is going to be the next president. The wars in Ukraine and Gaza could just make the difference between an election victory for Kamala Harris and an election triumph for Donald Trump. Trump at least gives the impression that he would sort out the wars almost as soon as he takes office whereas I think it's fair to say that Kamala Harris hasn't promised to do anything that might bring the wars to a close in the very near future. American voters who read the terrible news about Ukraine and Gaza every day might just be tempted to risk going for Trump because of the belief, rightly or wrongly, that he is more likely to stop the bloodshed than the calm and smiling Kamala. The truth, of course, is that neither Trump nor Kamala would really be in a position to wave a hand and stop the fighting. It has all become much too complex and unresolvable.

The timing of Britain's partial suspension of arms to Israel is shameful

Politics is often about symbolism and more often than not about timing. Suspending some of the UK arms shipments to Israel now, at this very moment when six Israeli hostages have just been brutally murdered by their Hamas captors is not just shameful, it's unbelievably crass and damaging for our country's reputation. The fact that it won't make a huge difference to Israel's ability to continue prosecuting its war with Hamas is not the point. The point is it sends a message to Hamas that all is not lost. Keep going and perhaps other countries like Britain will stop fully supporting Israel. Of course every country supplying arms to Israel, even if it's mainly spare parts for aircraft like in Britain's case, has a duty to ensure that the weapons or parts of weapons are not used to target civilians or run the risk of causing casualties among civilians. But the war in Gaza has been going since the October 7 atrocities by Hamas and the previous Conservative government examined exactly the same licensing issues and came to the view that exports to Israel could and should continue. The US carries out the same reviews and came to the conclusion that it should suspend deliveries of heavy air-launched unguided bombs because of the huge risk of collateral damage. Israel was furious but the rising deaths among Palestinians in dense urban areas proved Washington's point. But this partial suspension by the new Labour government in Britain is much more about political symbolism than actual battleground judgements. The same civil servants and government lawyers presumably examined the same issues as they did when the Conservatives were in power. So the change of judgement was pure politics. For that reason, it sends the wrong message at totally the worst possible time.

The total cruelty of hostage-taking

The taking of 250 hostages by Hamas on October 7 last year has led to nothing but brutality, cruelty, suffering, misery and death. For Hamas it was the one card they played which they knew, because they have done it before, would cause the biggest challenge for Israel. And so it has proved. Today there are only about 100 hostages left, more than 30 of them known by the Israel Defence Forces to be dead. Will any of the survivors be freed or will Hamas hang on to them to try and force Israel to a ceasefire deal BEFORE Benjamin Netanyahu has completed his principal objective of destroying totally the terrorist organisation that has been running Gaza since 2007. The murder of six hostages last week just before Israeli commandos arrived to free them has created a massive dilemma for Netanyahu. The whole of Israel is today calling for a ceasefire deal to free the remaining hostages, dead or alive, but the nurder of the six hostages will make it even more difficult for the Israeli leader to do any sort of deal with Hamas. How can you agree to a deal with such an organisation? And yet if he doesn't agree to a deal, his own people will rise up against him. It's an impossible dilemma. I suspect Netanyahu will redouble his efforts to destroy Hamas. The war will go on and more hostages will die.