Why is the White House lowering expectations for the Putin summit?

There is no point in having low expections for this upcoming Trump-Putin extravaganza. Why bother make the journey if all we are going to get is a Putin victory parade or a Putin nothing-doing show or a smiley-smiley handshakey get-together where the weather in Alaska takes up most of the conversation. The White House is dampening down any expectation of any sort of deal. But I think this is all part of the deliberate policy to warn us ordinary folk that this summit is just a way of meeting face-to-face with Putin but nothing else. This is probably nonsense. In the real world, you don't even have a summit unless the whole procedure has been orchestrated by officials. Behind the scenes, before the announcement of the Alaska meeting, an agreement will have been reached between Trump's people and Putin's people for a breakthrough of some sort. Otherwise, as I say, it's all pointless. So, Putin is going to come up with a compromise. It may be a tiny one but it will give Trump what he needs - progress or perceived progress towards an end to the war. Trump will also come up with a Big Idea, also already discussed between Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, and Putin, when they met in Moscow last week. Trump has said he will walk out if Putin says nothing to give hope of an end to the war. But Trump won't walk out because everything has been agreed. This is the way business has always been done when it comes to summits. Well, not always. Trump did walk out from his summit with Kim Jong-un in his first term in the White House. But that's because the North Korean leader had not played by the rules. What was agreed beforehand didn't materialise. More fool Kim Jong-un. Putin, I suspect, is far too wily to give Trump nothing.

Trump and Israeli settlers share one thing in common

Washington DC may be 15 hours flying time from Ramallah in the West Bank but the two places are currently engaged in the same kind of people-movement strategy. Donald Trump has sudenly become worried about crime in Washington DC, even though the violent crime rates are significantly down, and he has ordered all homeless people living on the streets in the capital to move out and find somewhere else to live. Likewise, Israeli settlers, not the most gentle of souls, are stepping up their efforts to expand their territorial presence in the West Bank which entails driving Palestinian people from their homes. It's an ugly business and coincides with the Israeli government's intention to force all 800,000 Palestinians out of Gaza City while the military seeks out the last live and dead hostages, and root out the remaining Hamas gunmen - still believed to be in their thousands. In the Bosnia war in the 1990s, it used to be called ethnic cleansing. But in Israel, it's described as the right strategy to eliminate Hamas and keep the Israeli borders safe. In Washington, the plan to force out all homeless people who live in tents dotted around the capital, is all about prettyfying and safeguarding the US capital. The last time I went to Washington it all looked pretty clean and safe. The thousands of tents on every blade of grass in the capital had gone. But Trump is of the view that the mayor of Washington has failed to keep the capital city safe and he wants to send National Guard soldiers and FBI agents to patrol the streets. That's on top of the myriad of police forces which already patrol the city, and the Secret Service which mounts 24-hour armed protection around and in the vicinity of the White House. Getting rid of undesirable people is now the Big Thing. Personally, I feel sorry for the homeless in Washington and the Palestinians being forced out of their homes in the West Bank.

Can there be peace in Ukraine without Zelensky?

There is something morally wrong and disasteful about two nuclear superpowers rearranging the landscape of a country which haw been brutally invaded and is now fighting for its future. Arbitrarily drawing lines on the map to sort out border and territorial issues has historically been a disaster, and all the signs are that between them, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are going to redraw the borders of Ukraine to suit Moscow and not Kyiv. This is why poor old Zelensky whose army of brave souls has been fighting the Russians for more than three years will have to play a part in the Big Summit if Kyiv is going to get a word in edgeways to bring the terrible war to an end. Whatever ideas Trump and Putin talk about at their summit in Alaska on Friday, none of it will be good news for Zelensky because the reality of the situation is that Russian troops occupy large parts of eastern Ukraine as well as Crimea and they are not going to hand any of it over to Kyiv. That's the basic fact of life. But the only person who can really argue his case against such a deal is Zelensky, and if he's not there in Alaska, the Ukrainian voice will be drowned out. Unless Trump has a plan to force Putin to give Zelensky something, and I'm not talking about half a town here or a third of a village there. It will have to be something truly substantial, something he can sell to his battered country to make all the sacrifices even a tiny bit worthwhile. Without Zelensky in person - not a Zoom call - in Alaska, there is a far greater chance that the Ukrainian leader will be presented with a fait accompli. Or nothing at all. Peace may turn out to be the one word that doesn't get mentioned. A possible deal, yes. But, peace? No.

Impasse over land-grab in Ukraine

A long time ago a very sensible chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, said that the war in Ukraine would come to an end only through a diplomatic deal and that such a deal would inevitably require compromise on both sides. Are we now at a pivotal point where a deal is at least theoretically on the cards? Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are to meet in Alaska on Friday to go through the possible deals and all of them will include some form of land-swap, or land-grab, to put it more honestly. Sources from within the Trump admnistration have said that Trump will be ready to accept the reality that to get a brokered aggrement, Putin will have to be allowed to hang on to some of the territory his troops have seized both before and after the February 24 2022 invasion. In other words, the whole of Crimea, annexed illegally in 2014, and much of the eastern Donbas region of Ukraine, some of it grabbed before 2022 and most of it since the invasion. This has been in Trump's thinking ever since he promised to end the war within 24 hours of taking office for his second term in the White House. But President Zelensky who has not been invited to the Alaska summit, has now said, as he has always said, that no peace can ever be achieved if the aggressors - ie Moscow - are gifted chunks of Ukrainian land. Europe has always said the same thing, so there won't be any European leaders who will agree to what Trump appears to have in mind. The Alaska summit will, therefore, be a total waste of time. Or will it? Zelensky has understandably taken his position on land because it is his country which is the victim of Moscow's aggression and he cannot voluntarily agree to hand Russia the land which his army has fought over so hard and with such sacrifice. But the reality is that if he wants "peace" he will need to compromise. There will be no deal without compromise. What Zelensky needs to focus on is what he can get in exchange from Moscow if he concedes some territory. Russia MUST be seen to have compromised as well. Even if it's not on land it will have to be something else that is important to Ukraine, such as its survival as an independent country and protected by some form of Western-backed structure.

Fifty million dollar bounty on Nicolas Maduro's head

How Nicolas Maduro has survived for so long as president of Venezuela is hard to fathom when the United States thinks he is a major drug trafficker and nearly every impoverished citizen of that desperate country hates him. He is a monster of a leader and should have been behind bars a long time ago. He has destroyed his country and put fear into its population, driving hundreds of thousands of people to leave the country and find succour almost anywhere else in central and south America. Now Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, has upped the bounty for his arrest from $25 million to $50 million. Surely that will provide enough incentive for someone to plot his arrest. But, as with all dictators, Maduro is protected by a well-paid army and police force whose livelihoods are dependent on staying loyal to him. Previous coup attempts, whether engineered from overseas or from within Venezuela, have all failed. Donald Trump has probably had thoughts about sending in the Marines to grab him but so far has kept such a plan on the shelf. So the $50 million bounty is seen as the next best thing to root this dictator out of his luxury palace and see him taken away in handcuffs. The whole of Venezuela, except the military and police, would applaud.

Trump and Putin to meet in UAE?

So it's going to happen at last, a meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. It's obvious why Trump wants the meeting but why has Putin agreed finally? What does he have up his sleeve? Will his message remain the same as ever re the war in Ukraine. Sorry, HIS war in Ukraine. He might possibly agree to give up the objective of conquering/destroying Ukraine but he will never give up his main red lines: that Ukraine can never ever ever join Nato, and preferably not the European Union either, and that the army must demilitarise, and, probably above all, that Volodymyr Zelensky must step down as president. Trump can probably give Putin something on the Nato question because he has hinted at it in the past. He doesn't envisage Ukraine becoming part of the alliance. But he can't force Zelensky to resign and he will surely argue that a country the size of Ukraine has the right and necessity to maintain armed forces to protect its sovereignty against aggressors. ie against any future Russian invasion. If Putin is not prepared to concede on these key issues then I can't see the summit between Trump and Putin getting anywhere. So why has Putin agreed? Because, despite everything, he wants to keep in with Trump. Never in more than 20 years of being Russian leader has Putin had a man in the White House he could actually do business with, and he wants to keep the relationship going somehow. So he will arrive for the summit seemingly ready to talk about a peace deal but I reckon we are still a long way from a Putin signature. As for the proposed meeting betwen Trump, Putin and Zelensky, it won't happen if the UAE summit goes badly and either Trump or Putin walks out.

Trump "probably" won't go for 2028 election

The word "probably" has so much depth to it. It's probably no but not necessarily no, it could be probably no but depending on the political and constitutional situation at the time, or it could probably be no unless the nation appeals to him to stay on for another four years. It's the last one which will attract Trump's ego. If he has had a relatively successful second term, he might think every American will want him for another four years by which time incidentally he would be approaching his late-80s. However, on balance, he appears to be coming round to the view that he won't stand again, either because the constitution says he can't or because he is happy with his potential successor, provide of course it's a Republican. So, when asked outright whom he wants to succeed him he puts JD Vance first, because as vice president that is his right. But in his latest comments, he couldn't resist praising Marco Rubio who is still combining three jobs. secretary of state, national security adviser and head of international aid. Trump seemed to be suggesting that Marco Rubio could be Vance's running-mate. Vance might have other ideas. It all shows that Trump is already thinking ahead. He wants a Trump III in the White House in three and a half years, and clearly thinks Vance and/or Rubio will just carry on the MAGA momentum. If that is what happens, then the Trump brand could be here (well, in the US) for another eleven and a half years. BUY MY NEW SPY THRILLER, AGENT REDRUTH, PUBLISHED BY ROWANVALE BOOKS. BUY FROM AMAZON.

Has Trump now given up on Putin?

Ultimatums, deadlines, warnings, threats, none of them have changed Vladimir Putin's strategic objective which is to turn Ukraine into a vassal state. It doesn't seem to matter what Trump says, he is ignored by Putin. So, have we reached a point where Trump has officially given up on Putin and will push ahead with huge new sanctions to punish Russia and cripple its economy? He has been threatening to do it for weeks but he told the BBC in an interview recently that he hadn't yet given up on Putin. That may well have changed since the interview with the excellent Gary O'Donoghue in Washington. There is really very little point in giving Pytin one last chance. He will ignore that, too. He is just steaming ahead with trying to conquer Ukraine, in the hope that his former friend, Trump, will not go ahead with the new round of sanctions. But Trump has no other option. The bombs and missiles keep coming and hitting Ukrainian cities and destroying the infrastructure. Threats make no difference. Action might. If Trump imposes 100 per cent or 500 per cent tariffs on all countries who buy cheap Russian oil, it could very quickly undermine Putin's war machine. He needs the oil money to feed and arm his soldiers in Ukraine and produce more artillery shells, rockets and missiles. So, no more deadlines, Mr President, just go ahead and do it. Slam the biggest-ever tariffs on Russian oil and goods and, for heaven's sake, do something about the billions which the Russian elite have secreted away in overseas bank accounts. Freeze the lot and see if that takes the smile off their faces. BUY MY NEW SPY THRILLER, AGENT REDRUTH, FROM AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES ETC.

Netanyahu's all or nothing strategy

It's supposed to be a new strategy, with the Israeli prime minister now wanting all remaining hostages in Gaza released in one final batch and the demilitarisation of Hamas. Only then will the war be able to come to an end. Actually its pretty much what Netanyahu wanted from the beginning, although on day one of the war in Gaza after the Hamas atrocities of October 7 2023, he also said he wanted to kill every member of Hamas. Nobody know for sure how many Hamas fighters there are left alive after the onslaught by the Israel Defence Forces, but with all the extra recruits they got from the Palestinian prisoner releases, the designated terrorist organisation probably has between 12,000 and 15,000 members left. That's a lot of killing still to be done and as the IDF has failed to eliminate the whole organisation so far, it seems highly unlikely they can literally wipe Hamas off the map. But it looks like the IDF is under orders to do just that, so that means the war will carry on regardless. But will this persuade Hamas to hand over all the remaining hostages, only about 20 of whom are thought to be still alive. Again, it seems unlikely. Likewise, Hamas has already ruled out demilitarising. So the new all or nothing plan is really an acknowledgment that Israel will just carry on prosecuting the war until all the hostages are released and Hamas is destroyed. The only change is that it seems Netanyahu intends to use the military option to free the rest of the hostages. That means a massive ground operation with the likelihood of more civilian deaths. Nothing has really changed. The rhetoric is slightly different but Netanyahu still wants all-out revenge for October 7. While that sentiment is understandable, we all know by now that what that will mean for the non-Hamas Palestinians is a continuation of the nightmare they have faced for nearly two years. BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER PUBLISHED BY ROWANVALE BOOKS. Check out Amazon and Waterstones.

Trump and his two nuke submarines

Donald Trump sending two nuclear submarines to an appropriate region has got everyone very excited. In reality, it's a decision of no military or deterrence value. If the two boats are "boomers" - nuclear-powered ballistic-missile (nuclear) submarines which is presumably what Trump was hinting at - they can launch their Trident II D5 missiles from a range of about 7,000 miles. So, they could hit a target in Russia from any oceon, and even from an Ohio class boat moored in its home port in King's Bay, Georgia or at Banggor in Washington state. The one person who knows this Vladimir Putin. So he knows that the Trump announcement, delivered by social media, was a political statement, not a warning of potential military confrontation. Trump got the headlines he wanted, and Putin kept quiet. Whether it was a statement that was necessary or wise is difficult to say but the fact is, it reminded Russia and the rest of the world that the US is not pepared to put with the ridiculous, inflammatory, irresponsible comments from the former Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, now a flunkey official on the Security Council of the Russian Federation. Medvedev has become a laughing stock for his outrageous, bellicose comments. But this time Trump thought he had gone too far when he warned of nuclear war between the US and Russia. Perhaps Putin will now order him to quieten down or shut up. BUY MY NEW PAPERBACK SPY THRILLER, AGENT REDRUTH, FROM AMAZON

Donald Trump wields the big stick, again

Donald Trump is in a truly bullish mood. He has launched a new tariff war by upping the rates to the countries which have failed to negotiate a trade deal by the deadline of August 1. Just watch them all scampering to broker a last-second deal. Trump has been generous and offered August 7 as the date when the new tariffs will be enforced, giving, I guess, a little leeway for those nations such as Canada which have tried to stand firm against a deal with Trump. Canada will probably come begging. But Canada hasn't helped its cause by announcing that it will recognise Palestine as a state. Trump will hold that against the Canadian leader Mark Carney. Keir Starmer must be feeling relieved that he signed his UK trade deal with Trump before he, too, announced that he would recognise Palestine unless Israel announced a ceasefire in Gaza by September. This man in the White House really has grasped the world by the most sensitive parts and squeezed. I can't think of anyone else on the planet currently capable of doing that. Is this a good thing for the US and for the West in general or is it a sign that democracy is now being shaken to the roots? Answers on a postcard! NB Buy my new paperback spy thriller, AGENT REDRUTH, from Amazon or all good bookshops.

Does Kamala Harris really still want to be president?

From today you can buy/order my new spy paperback thriller, Agent Redruth - easiest way is to order from Amazon. Six authors have endorsed it as a fantastic, gripping read. So does Kamala Harris actually think she can win the presidency in 2028? She has decided not to run for the governorship of California despite hinting at it for months. So the only conclusion one can make is that she fancies her chances for the job at the White House. She missed out badly when she tried in 2024, losing to the heavyweight Donald Trump. Could she revive her chances by going for the Democratic nomination, with Trump no longer allowed to stand again (we will see!). I think she has a lot of talent and could make a good president but she simply failed to convince the American voters that she has what it takes to be president when she tried the first time. Obviously, she had everything against her in 2024. She had just three months to persuade the voters that she was the natural replacement for Joe Biden and with Trump having already been on the campaign for over a year, she needed to make a huge impact very quickly. She didn't do that. Trump's presence was overwhelming and she got shunted to one side. The only chance she has now, if she decides to vote for her just to get some rest and relief. But somehow I doubt that will happen. Trump's popularity rating is pretty low at the moment but no one can doubt that this big man has managed to dominate the globe one way or another, and someone like Kamala Harris is never going to do that. She might be wise to step back and let someone else take on the Democratic baton.

Keir Starmer caves in to pressure over Israel

Well it didn't take long. Keir Starmer not that many hours ago said he would not be recognising Palestine as a state because he felt the war in Gaza should be brought to an end first. Then he summonses his cabinet colleagues from their summer hols to ask their views, and out he comnes and says he does want to recognise Palestine as a state unless Israel agrees a ceasefire in Gaza and lets all the humanitarian aid into the territory to feed the "starving" Palestinians. Like France, he has picked September as the month when the final decision will be made. I doubt Israel will bother to take heed of the mighty Starmer's ultimatum. The Netanyahu government has already accused Britain of siding with Hamas who, incidentally, have praised the countries (France and UK) for considering recognising a Palestine state. The Palestinian people DO deserve to have their own nation, their own borders, their own independence, and they have waited longer than most for the day to come. But in the midst of a war and an occupying force everywhere, it is difficulkt to see how recognition of a Palestinian state will make any difference to the lives of the average Palestinian family. So, what's the point of it? It won't put pressure on Israel to end the war. It won't help Donald Trump and his special envoy Steve Witkoff to get a ceasefire negotiated. In fact it won't do anything other than bring a smile and a cheer from every Hamas gunman.

Keir Starmer should remember he is the leader

All the papers, in UK and the US, are saying that Keir Starmer is coming under huge political pressure from within the Labour party to recognise Palestine as a state. And the same papers are suggesting he is close to giving into the pressure. Well, one predecessor of Starmer's, Maggie Thatcher, famously said "this lady is not for turning", and she stuck to her guns. Starmer should do the same. If he believes that it's too early to declare Palestine as a state, then he should remain loyal to his convictions and remind everyone that he is the prime minister and he has to take into account a whole mass of things, not just the simple idea of recognising a state that doesn't actually exist at the moment. I assume the Labour MPs demanding Starmer joins them have Gaza in their mind. But Gaza still contains thousands of Hamas members whom the UK government officially says are terrorists. So, how can you recognise Gaza as the Palestinian state under such circumstances? Starmer is right, the war has to come to an end and a brave, political and diplomatic decision then needs to be made by all leaders in the region as well as the US and Europe, about the way forward for the Palestinian people. If that ever happens, then that's the time for the whole world to recognise a Palestinian state. Doing it now is just gesture politics and meaningless. If Starner caves in under pressure it will be yet another example of our prime minister not having the strength of character and steel to stand up to his critics and fight for what he believes is right. And, by the way, if he gives in, he will seriously damage the relationship he is stoically nurtering with Donald Trump who would no doubt dismiss him like he dismissed Macron when he announced he would recognise Palestine as a state.

Trump's tariff war is getting results

Donalsd Trump set a deadline of August 1 for all countries to negotiate a trade deal with the United States or continue to face the extraordinarily high tariffs on imported goods he set in April. The fact that a rising number of countries have now done deals suggests that Trump's trade war is beginning to work in his favour. The biggest one so far was with the EU which is now facing a 15 per cent tariff on goods rather than 30 per cent. The best deal so far was for the UK which now faces just ten per cent tariffs on goods. Other countries, including Vietnam, Indonesia and Japan, have all negotiated better deals - but still with Trump winning the day. The huge one, China, is still being negotiated and it's not clear whether Beijing will meet the August 2 deadline, but I expect Trump will give a little on timnetables if he thinks a proper deal is on the way. The result of all this is that the world now knows how Trump does deals. He starts off with ridiculous threats, such as the 145 per cent tariffs for Chinese goods, in order to scare America's trade rivals into a state of panic and then starts to offer concessions over the following few months until foreign governments are so relieved they won't be facing astronimically high tariffs they accept a lower figure even though it's still much higher than the tariff rate before Trump's trade war began. It's not subtle but it seems to work. It could even be argued that Trump has been pretty smart about the whole thing, although what is not often taken into account is that US companies which rely on foreign imports for their businesses are having to pay more. Trump, of course, wants US companies to stop depending on foreign imported goods and buy American. But that's going to take time. But all in all, it's a big MAGA success for the much-maligned president.

Will Macron's recognition of Palestine do any good?

Most people will probably understand why President Emmanuel Macron announced that he intends to recognise Palestine as a state. He has been sickened by the deaths and destruction and reports of malnutrition and suffering of children in Gaza and felt someone, ie him, should at least do something to try and change the world's antipathy. But is it just a premature gesture? Will it comfort Hamas? Will it actually achieve anything? Will it bring the remaining hostages home to their families in Israel? Will it end the suffering? Unfortunately the answer to all these questions is, no it won't. In fact, what it will do is muddy the waters, bring further division between the US and France/Europe, and make Israel angrier and more dismissive of outsiders trying to muscle in. Also, there isn't a state to recognise. Gaza is being destroyed, the West Bank is a wasp's nest of hostility and rivalry and there certainly isn't a decent leader ready to become president of a Palestinian state, if it ever materialises. So Macron's announcement is fairly pointless, especially if no other European country joins him. Keir Starmer has already indicated that he won't follow Macron, realising that it's not the time to make gestures. The worst reaction to Macron's announcement came from Hamas which was very happy with the French leader, praising him for his statement. It was Hamas which was responsible for the appalling tragedy we see every day in Gaza when the terrorist rulers of the tiny territorial Strip sent hundreds of armed gunmen and rapists across the border to kill 1,200 Israelis, civilian and military, and foreign nationals, injure and maim hundreds more and capture 250 hostages on October 7, 2023.

Cambodia-Thailand border war warnings

A border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia which goes back more than a century has once again erupted in fatal clashes, leading to diplomatic alarms and appeals for international help. Both countries are tourist hotspots, and their people are famous for their friendliness, courtesy and hospitality. However, while the violence is not in an area frequented by holidaymakers, the rising death toll from gunfire and aerial bombing has underlined the ever-present schism between the two countries over an arbitrarily-drawn 817-kilometre border conceived by the French in 1907. The present confrontation began in May when a Cambodian soldier was killed during an exchange of fire between Thai and Cambodian troops in a border region known as the Emerald Triangle because it also shares a frontier with Laos. Despite attempts to prevent escalation, tensions continued to rise. Troops on both sides were reinforced, border crossings were restricted and Thailand threatened to cut electricity and internet links to border towns in Cambodia. There were further deaths and injuries caused by legacy landmine explosions. The mines had been left buried along the border with Thailand after years of conflict from the 1970s to 1990s, including the Vietnam war and the Cambodian-Vietnamese war which involved the brutal, communist Khmer Rouge rulers of the renamed Kampuchea. A Thai soldier lost a leg from a mine detonation on July 16 and then five more soldiers were injured from blasts. The deaths and injuries led to a huge escalation between the two countries. Thailand launched six F-16 fighter jets to the border, one of which bombed a “military” target in Cambodia; and in a second raid, four F-16s were sent to bomb more military sites. Cambodian troops fired rockets and artillery shells, striking homes and public buildings. At least one Thai civilian was killed in Surin Province, and three others, including a five-year-old boy, were injured, according to Rear Admiral Surasant Kongsiri, a Thai government spokesman. According to the health ministry in Bangkok, at least eleven civilians and one soldier have been killed in Thailand from artillery fire in the recent clashes. Twenty-four civilians and seven military personnel, have been injured, the ministry said. Casualties in Cambodia are unknown. In one incident, the Thai army claims, six people were killed at a petrol station in Thailand from Cambodian rocket fire. Hundreds of people have fled their homes near the border. Thailand eventually closed its entire border with Cambodia. Each country condemned the other’s aggression and refused to take responsibility for starting the new round of border clashes. In the midst of the border confrontations, Thailand’s prime minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, was caught making a highly controversial telephone call to Hun Sen, the powerful former leader of Cambodia in which she denigrated the Thai army’s actions on the border. She addressed Hun Sen as “uncle”. The conversation was leaked, and the Thai prime minister was suspended. She now faces possible dismissal. In terms of firepower and military capability, Thailand is streets ahead of Cambodia. With more than 360,000 active military personnel, Thailand has triple the manpower of Cambodia. Thailand’s air force is “one of the best-equipped and trained in Southeast Asia,” according to Military Balance 2025, published by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies. At the heart of the current border dispute is the Ta Muen Thom temple in Cambodia. The Cambodian defence ministry accused Thai soldiers of installing barbed wire around the base of the temple and flew drones across the border. Bangkok said Cambodia made the first aggressive move with troops advancing over the border. Temples have played the key role in the century-old border dispute between the two countries. Ever since the French mapped out the border between the two countries in 1907, the 11th and 12th century temple of Preah Vihear which has both Hindu and Buddhist influences, was placed just inside Cambodia. That topographical decision provoked persistent conflict between Thailand and Cambodia. But a judgment by the International Court of Justice in 1962 ruled in favour of Cambodia. It has been a constant source of anger and disagreement to this day. Both countries have cultural and religious links to the temple but all attempts to share its historic importance have failed. The border has been too contentious, as has been proven today with the latest clashes. “Preah Vihear should be a magnet for tourists and a shining example of cultural traditions that exist on both sides of the border, not a graveyard for young Thai and Cambodian soldiers,” John Ciorciari, assistant professor at the Gerald R Ford School of Public Policy, Michigan University, wrote in a recent article

Why is the US Justice Department going to see Ghislaine Maxwell?

Donald Trump is said to be furious that the Jeffery Epstein stpry is still hogging the headlines. He had hoped that with the summer recess, it would all calm down and he could get on with other more important things. But now Justice Department officials are expected to visit Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former associate, in prison where she is serving 20 years for aiding Epstein's trafficking of young girls. What, one has to ask, do the officials expect to be told by Ms Maxwell? Even if she tells them the names of every high-profile person on her former boss's supposed client list, what will they do with it and what proof can she provide? She has been appealing against her sentennce but without any luck. Does she hope perhaps that if she cooperates fully with the Justice Department visitors, they might support her case for a more lenient sentence? But that wouldn't look good for those in Washington who are convinced there is a huge conspiracy going on here and wouldn't look kindly on Ms Maxwell marching out of jail before she has finished her sentence. So, I suspect the visit to her prison will elicit very little, especially since a judge has already ruled that the evidence given during the grand jury hearings into Epstein cannot be release because there are strict laws of confidentiality with grand juries. For Trump it means the Epstein scandal is going to run and run.

Has Zelensky made a disastrous mistake?

It sounds like someone got the headline wrong: Zelensky clamps down on anti-corruption. What on earth is the Ukrainian leader and hero of the West doing trying to stop key agencies uncovering corruption. Does he have something to hide? One of the major things that concerned the West when they took on the role of helping Ukraine defend itself against Putin's invasion army was the bad reputation the country had for corruption. With billions of dollars-worth of military equipment being delivered to Kyiv, Congress in the US and parliaments in Europe have always been anxious that some of the military aid might go AWOL in a nation so embedded with corruption. But Zelnsnky announced a huge programme to stampt out corruption and over the years, numerous military commanders and others have been fired for corruption. Now, for reasons that are hard to explain, Zelensky wants the anti-corruption agencies to be shut down. He says it's to do with fears that these agencies have been infiltrated by Russian spies. But his political opponents in Ukraine are claiming it's the latest sign that Zelensky is becoming autocratic. I don't know who to believe but if Ukraine wants one day to be a member of the European Union, then fighting corruption is one of the EU's big things. Zelensky will fail the EU test if he persists in closing down the anti-corruption agencies. It won't do him any good either with the US-led coalition providing him with weapons to fight the Russians. All in all, a bad move.

Which is Donald Trump's foreign policy priority?

Donald Trump might be the most powerful American president since Ronald Reagan but, despite his overwhelming presence in terms of policy and action in the United States (the Republicans in Congress are in thrall to him), he hasn't managed to achieve a major foreign policy triumph since coming to power on January 20. Ok, the B-2 bombing of three Iranian nuclear sites was heavy stuff and was the boldest of all military statements to the ayatollahs, but Iran's foreign minister is still insisting that his country will continue to pursue nuclear enrichment as one of its main tasks. He admits the bombings caused serious damage but apparently he is confident Iranian scientists and engineers can get back to enrichment in due course. So the Trump bombing hasn't broken Tehran. As for Gaza and Ukraine, the wars are continuing relentlessly and Trump appears to have realised that all those promises before he was elected just cann't be honoured. No one is stopping Benjamin Netanyahu from killing Palestinian civilians and destroying their homes, and Vladimir Putin is ignoring the man in the White House. He carries on doing what he does, whatever Trump says to him. Now you havey to ask what Trump wants to achieve on the foreign stage. Hi initial priority was the war in Ukraine. But that hasn't worked out as he planned, so has Ukraine slipped down the priority list? If so, what is top of his wish list? Not Iran because Trump will feel he has done enough for the moment to make the ayatollahs wary. Trade tariffs, of course, are a big number for him, and maybe that's what he wants to focus on more than anything else. When was the last time he rang Netanyahu and told him to stop the war NOW.

What is actually left of Gaza?

Because foreign journalists are banned from entering Gaza to cover the war - apart from a few escorted visits a long time ago - it's impossible to know how much of Gaza is actually left. Is there any building in the whole of the Strip which has not in some form or other been scarred by bombs and bullets or destroyed? The two milion people of Gaza are living as displaced people in tents. The only images we get of the tiny territory show World War 11-type destruction. But there must be some areas which are relatively untouched? Is this possible? Israel is now embarking on a new ground offensive to find Hamas and the remaining hostages which will mean more destruction, and one has to ask, when it's all over, if that ever happens, what on earth is the world going to do about rebuilding Gaza? Will Israel even allow it or will Benjamin Netanyahu decide it's in Israel's interest to keep Gaza as a place of rubble so that Hamas cannot reinvent itself and go back to threatening Israelis. If this is the case, then the population of Gaza, what's left of it, will have to be found new homes. There is already talk of countries offering to take Palestinians from Gaza. Mossad chief David Barnea is supposed to have had discussions with Ethiopia, Indonesia and Libya. Really? Is this honestly the answer? Does anyone ever mention the two-state solution any more? This has clearly died a death. Right now, there is no future for the Palestinian people.

The continuing killing of Palestinians in Gaza has to stop

Almost every day there are grim reports of Palestinians, often in their dozens, being killed in air attacks by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), often, it is claimed, while queuing up for UN food aid. Civilian deaths in war are always tragic, always unacceptable but, sadly, always inevitable. However, the toll of civilian deaths in Gaza, now purported by the Hamas-run health service to total 60,000 (although at least 17,000 of those were Hamas fighters), has reached a level that is way beyond acceptable or proportionate. Added to that, the IDF is bulldozing huge areas of urban living areas, reducing homes to rubble. What is the objective, what is the meaning of this? Can it be any longer justified by the IDF mantra that every Hamas member must be eliminated? The more Hamas members are killed, the more radicalised the people of Gaza will become and the more likely it is that they will be replaced by fanatical jihadists who will join the cause against Israel. Hamas, in other words, will probably keep going because their ranks of survivors will be boosted by jihadist volunteers which means the war will never come to an end. It's the civilian deaths which in the end will force Israel to compromise on its objectives because even Donald Trump, a devout supporter of Israel, will put his foot down. The civilian deaths in Gaza have to stop.

Trump and MAGA unite over "defamatory" Epstein article

In the Donald Trump and MAGA world there's nothing mnore likely to unite them inextricably than an article in a heavyweight newspaper they claim to be false and defamatory. Trump is using The Wall Street Journal for $10 billion over the sensational report yesterday that he sent a letter to the sex trafficker Jeffery Epstein to mark his 50th birthday with a drawing of a naked woman and his signature over a lower party of that sketch. With Trump claiming he never sent the letter and had never drawn a sketch of a naked woman, his supporters in MAGA who had become angry at the president's failure to release everything about the Epstein grand jury investigation, leapt to his defence and turned their attention to the Big Bad Media, their favourite topic. This is likely to go on and on. The Wall Street Journal is sticking by its story and presumably has a copy, fake or otherwise, or the original alleged Trump drawing. Meanwhile he and his loyal supporters are back to their former cosy love-in and hamering away at the newspaper for publishing a "fabricated" letter. One interesting and curious development is that while Trump denies doing drawings - not his style - he has actually done numerous ones in the past, all or mostly all, of tall buildings which he has given to charity to raise funds for different organisations. Good for him but it does raise a tiny question: he appears to have a talent for drawing sketches of buildings along a waterfront, all with his familiar signature written at the bottom. If this libel suit ever gets to court, there will no doubt be a full exchange on Trump's past drawing abilities.

Cover-ups always get found out

Politicians never learn. What really gets to people are cover-ups. We appear to have two going on at the moment: one in the US over the late convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and here in the UK over the release of personal data about thousands of Afghans who worked for the British in the war in Afghanistan and the names of special forces and MI6 personnel who backed them. The Epstein conspiracy theories, both about his supposed secret client list and his death in a prison cell in 2019 have been running for a long time but have suddenly leapt again into the headlines because the Wall Street Journal has reported that Donald Trump wrote a letter to Epstein on his 50th birthday and included a hand-drawn picture of a naked woman with his partial signature written over it. Trump has said it's a total fabrication and denies ever writing such a letter, let alone drawing a picture of a naked woman. He is suing the paper and, as Trump would say, we'll see what happens next. Also Pam Bondi, the attorney general, has confused everyone by first saying she had an Epstein client list on her desk and then denied having any such thing. So whether it's a cover up or not, it seems like one to most people. So, unless Trump wants this to linger on all summer, total transparency should be the order of the day. Let it all out. Likewise in the UK, this gross leak identifying thousands of potentially vulnerable Afghans and the superinjunction imposed to stop anyone knowing about it should be sorted as quickly as possible. Conservative defence ministers from the last government who were responsible for covering it all up have said they did it to save lives. Prove it.

Syrian leader has toughest job in the world

Ahmed al-Sharaa, the Syrian president, must be eligible for the "most difficult job in the world" title, followed closely by Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. The new Syrian leader who did the Syrians and the world a favour by ousting President Bashir al-Assad, has just had his presidential palace bombed by Israel. While it must surely be in Israel's national interest for a new leader in neighbouring Syria to be given a chance to forge stability and peace in his country, Benjamin Netanyahu doesn't like the way the minority Druze people in Syria are being treated, so he sent jet fighters in to bomb a few government targets to get the message across that the Druze (allies of Israel) who live in the southwest and near the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights (formerly part of Syria) and in a suburn of Damascus must be protected from discriminatory attacks. Bombing seems to be the answer every time in the Middle East these days. Al-Sharaa has enough trouble on his hands what with the heady mix of Isis, al-Qaeda, numerous other militia groups, Turkish forces, American troops etc etc, all pounding their beat in different parts of the country. Throughout it all, he is trying to rebuild Syria's economy and develop relations with a formerly hostile western world and sort out Vladimir Putin who wants to keep his troops and aircraft in the country which he had been allowed to do under Assad. Bombing by Israel must have been the last straw.

Nightmare human crisis on Iran/Afghanistan border

Apart from the daily slaughter of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, can there be anywhere worse on the planet right now than Afghanistan? More than one million Afghans who have lived in poverty but relative safety in Iran, some for all of their lives, are being kicked out of Iran as illegal immigrants and thrown to the mercy of the Taleban. These Iranian refugees are not wanted in Iran where they have become a source of hatred and persecution and they are not wanted in Afghanistan where the Taleban does not want, nor can afford, to take responsibility for them. Some will temporarily find refuge with relatives but since the majority of Afghanistan's 41 million population are living close to or actual poverty, with no jobs, little food and constant fear, these million or so Afghans from Iran will soon be in desperate straights. Can the world help? Does the world care? The biggest problem for these poor people is that the western world is so relieved to be shot of Afghanistan that they cannot be stirred to launch a massive assistance programme. The Taleban won't allow it and since the Kabul government is not recognised by the vast majority of the planet, there is little incentive to do anything that might benefit the medieval rulers. So these million Afghans have a terrible future ahead of them. Many will die. Men, women and children kicked out of Iran in intense heat only to perish in what is supposed to be their own country of origin.

Trump and "great gentleman" King Charles

There has been such a fuss about Donald Trump's upcoming State Visit to Britain in September. Was he deliberately snubbed when it was made clear he wouldn't be addressing the Houses of Parliament? Obama did. Was it a poke in the nose when President Emmanuel Macron was invited fo a State Visit before him? Was it going to be a nightmare for Charles, having had his own state visit to Canada recently when Trump was earbashing the new leader Mark Carney and telling Canada to become America's 51st state? Judging by a twenty-minute chat with the BBC's Gary O'Donoghue, chief North America correspondent, Trump is all very relaxed about the trip to Britain. He says he doesn't want MPs to give up their holidays to come and listen to him giving a speech during parliamentary recess, and insists all he wants to do is meet up with King Charles whom he describes as a "great gentleman". Not addressing parliament will probably save him from a lot of protesting anti-Trumpers. The last time he came on an officiaL visit to Britain during his first term in office, some idiots flew a huge rubber Trump baby balloon over central London which I thought at the time was unnecessarily disrespectful. I doubt the people of Windsor, where the State Visit will take place, will resort to such rudeness, for the sake of the king.

Trump is back on Ukraine's side

It took a few hiccups and a dressing down in the Oval Office, but Donald Trump is now back on side, pro-Ukraine and pro-arming Ukraine. It has taken six months of prevarication and six months of brutal bombing by Putin. But today Trump announced a new arms deal for Kyiv and a potential sanctions programme against Moscow. No longer a friend of Putin because of the Russian leader's betrayal of the so-called trust between the two, Trump has decided to go all out to help his former sparring partner Volodymyr Zelensky. What a reversal of intentions, what a change in mood on the part of the US president. And it's all because he is angry with Putin for playing him along. Every time they chatted on the phone, Putin talked "nice", as Trump later said. But then off he went and bombed Ukraine to bits. That was like Trump being slapped hard in the face and you don't do that to a man like Trump. So Zelensky is now his new best friend and the dancing with Putin days are over. I wonder if Putin realises he has miscalculated. Having Trump on his side was surely a bonus for him, but now he has screwed up. Bye bye Putin.

Russia to attack Britain in five years?

According to yet another British Army general, we have just five years before an invasion by Russia. The government, he says, should start building nuclear bunkers for everyone. What the hell is wrong with all these generals? Britain is not sitting on its own, vulnerable to a massive Russian attack. We are part of the most successful and powerful defence alliance in history. If Putin is seriously considering attacking Britain, and Britain alone, he will face a counter-strike by the US and the whole alliance. Moscow will be obliterated (a favourite Trump word). This is called deterrence, nuclear deterrence. Does Putin, and this British general, seriously think it would make any sense for Russia to select Britain to be removed from the planet? This is all nonsense and scary stuff, and silly. Russia can't even defeat Ukraine, let alone take on the whole Nato alliance. So, please, all these scaremongering generals, remind youreselves it's all about deterrence and allies. We don't need this poor Labour government of ours to start spending billions on nuclear bunkers everywhere.

9/11 accused conspirators lose plea to stop death sentence

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of 9/11 and three alleged co-conspirators are back where they started. For years they have been fighting to get a legal deal to stop them facing the death sentence. They actually agreed to plead guilty in return for getting a life sentence instead of facing capital punishment. The bargain was approved by a senior figure in the Pentagon but it was abruptly overturned by the then defence secretary, Lloyd Austin. Then his decision was overturned and now the Appeals Court has reinstated the death sentence. All accused have been in Guantanamo Bay detention centre for so long they have probably forgotten how long it has been. It's about 20 years. They live in a twilight world in Guantanamo under conditions of maximum security. They will never be released and now once again they face the death penalty if they ever come to trial. For reasons that are eminently understandable, no one in America cares a jot about them, but it is wholly right that they should be brought to trial and dealt with in a proper way according to the rules of US justice.

Why did Pete Hegseth act without asking Trump first?

In the Trump administration, especially in the Trump administration, surely nothing is done without the president's prior knowledge and say-so? But apparently Pete Hegseth, his often-embattled ex-Fox News defence secretary, went ahead with a decision that was hugely political, and didn't inform the White House. Trump had to admit he knew nothing about it. Extraordinary. The decision was about suspending deliveries of Patriot missiles and other vital weapons to Kyiv to give the Pentagon a chance to do an inventory of arms left in US storage for the US's own use. While that might seem to be practical and sensible, it was, of course, no such thing because suspending arms to Ukraine can have a catastrophic impact in the war-ravaged country and sends all the wrong signals both to Kyiv and to every western ally supporting the Kyiv government against the Russian invaders. In other words, arms to Ukraine is a US administration policy. It's a projection of US power against Moscow. It's a political and diplomatic statement. It's everything. Stopping the arms flow to allow the Pentagon to count their own weapons is like stopping direct debits at your bank because you are not sure you have enough money coming in each month. How could Hegseth have thought he could authorise this Patriot-missile suspension without talking to the White House first, especially at a time when Putin is bombarding Ukrainian cities with missiles and drones on a scale never seen before since the invasion began on February 24, 2022? As soon as Trump realised what had happened he reversed the decision and told Zelensky the next batch of Patriots were on their way. Meanwhile, therre IS a shortage of weaponns in the Pentagon's stocks, especially Patriot missile interceptors, but it's their job to up production on a huge scale. Every country wants Patriots. Hegseth must be treading on such thin ice it's like he better learn to swim.

Trump is getting angry with Putin

The so-called personal relationship between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin has come to nothing. It has born no fruit. It is empty gesture stuff. It's baloney. Why? Because Putin is playing the game. He's not interested in what Trump wants, he only wants what he wants. So every time he picks up the phone to talk to Trump he pretends to offer partnership and hope for a better future, and even maybe an end to the war in Ukraine but as soon as he puts the phone down he rings the ministry of defence and tells his defence minister to blast the hell out of Kyiv. Now Trump is getting frustrated and angry with Putin. He has realised that all his efforts have fallen by the way side because Putin is deaf. In both ears. He can't hear anything unless it sounds like something he thinks is good for him and for his Russian expansion dreams. So Putin answers Trump with more bombings. Which is why Trump has totally reversed a decision made by the Pentagon's policy chief only a short time ago to halt the delivery of Patriot missiles and rocket rounds to Ukraine while he checks out the department's inventory of weapons, fearing the stocks are getting too low. One phone call from Zelensky and Trump scraps that idea and promises more Patriot batteries and missiles to Kyiv to combat the massive increase in missiles and bombs and drones launched from Russia against Ukrainian cities. It's the one US weapon system that really pisses off Putin because he knows it has more capability than any other system to thwart his strikes against Ukraine. So, Trump is angry with Putin, and Putin is no doubt angry with Trump. Thus the Beautiful, Big Friendship has come to an end.

State visit for French president who does nothing to stop migrants boating across the Channel

Thousands and thousands of migrants from across the world climb into small rubber dingies on the beaches of Calais, goaded on by criminal smugglers and generally watched by inactive French police officers, and try to make the perilous Channel crossing to Britain. It has been going on for years, large numbers have drowned, but still they come, especially when the weather is clement. They pack into the boats in their dozens, with no room to move. Still, the Gendarmerie just watch. Occasionally they take action, like last week when they saw a boat was so top-heavy they feared all would probably drown mid-Channel and a police officer stepped forward with a knife and slashed the rubber hull and it sank in shallow waters. The migrants stepped out and retreated across the beach. But this was just one occasion. Mostly, the boats leave the Calais beaches and no one stops them. The rubber boat that was slashed with a knife was almost exclusively packed with young, fit-looking men, with a few women to make up the numbers. So it wasn't a boatload of starving women and children from Sudan, or petrified-looking children from war zones. These were hearty young men who no doubt returned the next day and climbed into another boat. So, as President Emmanuel Macron enjoys the hospitality of the king and queen and the British people and travels around in a golden coach and walks on red carpets, perhaps he might reflect that it's time after all the promises actually to stop these boats from leaving the French shores. Will it happen? I doubt it.

Gaza is a place of total anarchy

It's impossible to know the full extent of what life is like in Gaza because Israel doesn't allow journalists to cover the war from inside the territorial strip of land. There are plenty of reports appearing in the world's press and television and radio based on brave Palestinian, Gaza-resident journalists. But the war needs to be covered by outsiders, journalists who have war-correspondent exsperience and can give us a complete picture. There is a brilliant piece on the BBC World website today which gives an alarming account of life inside Gaza, provided by a former Hamas security officer who now lives in Cairo. So he's not there in Gaza but one assumes he has all the right contacts. He says there is anarchy in the Strip with gangs and groups rivalling Hamas who are trying to overthrow the so-called "rulers" of Gaza. He says Hamas has lost control of Gaza and its leadership annihilated and that there are different political groups, no doubt financed by Israel, who are pulling together to get rid of Hamas. While that might sound like a solution for Israel, it surely means even more danger for the Palestinian residents. There are, the former Hamas official says, armed groups who are trying to take over who stop people at a whim. So there is war and anarchy and rebellion. How is it possible for Palestinian citizens to survive in this appalling and terrifying environment? Is the world caring enough? No.

Israel and Hamas talk but to brick walls

When it was announced that Israel and Hamas would talk about a ceasefire, it might have seemed a positive development. But the two sides in the ghastly war in Gaza are so far apart that I doubt a ceasefire of any kind will hold for more than a day or so. Hamas demands an end to the war and the withdrawal of all Israel Defence Forces troops, and that's not going to happen, not according to Benjamin Netanyahu. And, understandably, Netanyahu wants all remaining hostages, dead and alive, to be released and returned to their families, and that's not going to happen unless the IDF gets out of Gaza. Voila! A vicious circle. We might get a couple of hostages released with something offered by Israel. But a long-term ceasefire? An end to the war? Still, I fear, a long way to go.

Ukraine needs Patriots

Ukraine has survived more than three years of Vladimir Putin’s war because of massive western arms supplies, an appreciation and exploitation of Russian military weaknesses, audacious special forces missions and an extraordinarily successful development of home-grown drones. All these ingredients have helped Kyiv hold off the Russian forces, saved Volodymyr Zelensky from early capitulation and prevented Putin from marching further into Europe. An achievement by any standards of modern warfare. However, the balance of power between Russia and Ukraine, a very tenuous concept over the last three years as Putin turned to hypersonic weaponry to strike at Ukrainian cities, depended on the continuous arms flow from the US and Europe, particularly from the Pentagon. Now, the hierarchy at the Pentagon has decided that the weapons stocks held for the US armed forces have been reduced to such a dangerous level as a result of the generous handover of weapons to the Kyiv government, that key systems are being withheld to give the American defence department a chance to recoup its arsenals to ensure full readiness for war whenever and wherever it may occur. While the checking of inventories is a vital responsibility for the Pentagon chiefs, the decision to suspend some of the weapons’ deliveries to Ukraine couldn’t have happened at a worst time. Russia has amassed 50,000 troops along Ukraine’s Sumy Oblast in the north, and overnight on Sunday Moscow launched 477 drones and 60 missiles, targeting seven Ukrainian towns and cities, in the largest Russian attack of the war so far. In Ukraine the most desirable and most in-demand weapon to protect the country from Russian air attacks is the US Patriot missile system. Ukraine has about eight batteries of Patriots, each of which can consist of between six and eight launchers with stocks of PAC-2 and PAC-3 interceptors. Zelensky has appealed for a total of 25 Patriot launchers to provide an integrated air defence system for Ukraine. Patriot, more than any other air defence system, has shot down hundreds if not thousands, of Russian drones and missiles, preventing mass destruction in the country’s major towns. However, after a thorough weapons count in US arms stocks, the Pentagon has now reportedly halted deliveries of PAC-3 interceptors to Kyiv, along with munitions fired by the US Army’s High Mobility Rocket System (HIMARS) and the M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS), as well as 155mm artillery rounds, portable Stinger anti-airweapons and Hellfire anti-tank missiles. The decision to suspend deliveries of these vital weapons was made after an investigation of US munition stockpiles ordered by Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon’s powerful policy chief. There have been concerns ever since the war in Ukraine began and the Biden administration started sending US weapons to Ukraine to defend against the Russian invaders, that American armed forces’ munitions stocks could run low. These concerns have intensified since Donald Trump came to power, especially after the US involvement in attacks on Iran and the perceived growing threat from Beijing to use military force to seize Taiwan by 2027. “This decision [to halt some weapons for Ukraine] was made to put America’s interests first,” Anna Kelly, deputy White House press secretary, said., adding, with potential adversaries in mind: “The strength of the United States armed forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran.” The America First justification for the suspension of key weapons for Ukraine will have come as no surprise to America’s allies in Europe, although every attempt has been made recently to woo the US president to persuade him to maintain military support for Kyiv as part of an alliance-wide effort to stop Putin’s aggression. The wooing of Trump was epitomised by the extraordinary comment made by Mark Rutte, Nato secretary-general, when he referred to the president as the “daddy” trying to intervene between two spoilt children, a reference to the breaches of the ceasefire announced by Trump between Iran and Israel after twelve days of attacks. Europe, as well as Ukraine, depend on the good will and superpower support of the United States, and the announcement of the suspension to Kyiv of key equipment, especially the Patriots, will have rocked the alliance. The Patriot missile system has become the de riguer weapon. Everyone wants it. Ukraine is on a long list of customers and has had to compete with Israel, among others, for the fastest deliveries. The largest single Patriot engagement in US military history took place in Qatar last month when Iran launched a barrage of missiles at the US base at al-Udeid in Qatar. All were shot down. Any shortages of Patriot interceptors in the Ukrainian armoury will increase the risk of death and destruction in the country’s towns and cities, as Putin continues to launch missile strikes on civilian areas.

Trump and Putin talk Ukraine but no breakthrough

Vladimir Putin I would say is settling in for a long war in Ukraine. For the Ukrainians, it is already a long war, more than three years. But for Putin, he has a lot more he wants to do. In fact he still hopes I am sure to force the Kyiv government into capitulation. So when Donald Trump rings and they have a long chat about Ukraine and other things, the Russian leader doesn't seem remotely interested in talking about, let alone considering, agreeing to a ceasefire. Trump came away from his latest phone chat with Putin saying nothing had been achieved. At least they are still talking to each other but Putin has the upper hand. He knows Trump is desperate to bring the war in Ukraine to an end, to add to his list of "triumphs", following the B-2 bombings of Iran's nuclear plants. He gave Trump nothing. It didn't help Trump's case that the Pentagon had ordered a suspension of key weapons to Ukraine in order to build America's own stocks for a future war. That would have brought a smile to Putin's face. And when Putin smiles, you know he is feeling on top of the world, well his world, and has better cards than his friend, Trump.

Trump's unpredictability is his strongest card

Being unpredictable as the leader of the United States of America isn't necessarily a bad thing in terms of America's biggest adversaries. Keep them - ie Russia, China, Iran and North Korea - on their toes, not knowing from one day to another what Donald Trump might decide to do. But it must be intensely annoying for America's allies who, above all, want to know they can trust the US to give its backing in a security crisis. In the latest case, the US has suddenly announced it is suspending some key arms to Ukraine to make sure it has enough weaponry in its own stocks. Zelensky has been pleading for weeks that the arms from the West have to keep on being delivered or else his country's towns and cities will suffer. But the truth is, Europe as well as the US, has the same problem. So much has been handed over to Kyiv in the last three yers to help the Ukrainian military defend against Russian invasion forces that stocks everywhere will be running short. The war in Ukraine needs to come to an end to allow Europe and the US to restock. It will be in Putin's interest of course for the war to carry on. He will be pleased by the announcement from the Pentagon that deliveries of Patriot missiles, vital for air defence over Ukranian cities, is being suspended. But Trump being the unpredictable president he is, may have something up his sleeve to surprise Putin. One can only hope so.

Does Iran have any other option but surrender?

Iran retaliated massively against Israel after the first Israeli strikes on its nuclear sites last month. Many of the ballistic missiles got through and killed Israeli civilians and damaged property. So, unlike the first retaliation against Israeli raids in April when Tehran launched a fairly modest retaliatory strike and achieved very little, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei this time round might feel satisfied that his military dealt a significant blow to Israel. Nevertheless, the overall result of the twelve days of war and then the intervention of Donald Trump and the B-2 Spirit bombers is that Iran has been hugely weakened, its nuclear programme has been set back potentially by years, its stockpile of ballistic missile launchers have been partially destroyed and its air defence systems have been ravaged. Iran, therefore, has nothing to show for its strike back against Israel, and as for its retaliation against the US for the B-2 bombers, no one died and every missile aimed at the American al-Udeid base in Qatar was intercepted. All the ayatollahs have got as a bargaining chip is the relative mystery of whether they have managed to hide away the 400 kilos of 60-per cent-enriched uranium and whether they have an unharmed inventory of gas centrifuges also concealed somewhere. TRhey could play on that if there are going to be negotiations between Iran the US. But, basically, Iran is in a pretty poor state to negotiate anything and if the regime refuses to cooperate, then Israel and possibly the US will return with more bombs and missiles.

Will Trump bomb again?

President Trump has already warned Tehran that he’ll be back if Iran tries to revive and advance its nuclear programme, following the strikes by B-2 stealth bombers.Judging by the comments of the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Trump may find himself with this dilemma sooner than he thinks. Iran could return to enriching uranium in “a matter of months”, according to Rafael Mariano Grossi, IAEA’s director-general, in an interview with CBS News at the weekend. However, a number of questions need to be asked before the B-2s take off again from their Whiteman Air Force base in Missouri.Trump hopes that the combination of twelve days of Israeli air raids and the one-off attack by seven B-2s each armed with 30,000lb Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs) will persuade the Tehran regime to give up any ambitions of building a bomb and focus all efforts on a long-term diplomatic deal to bring the nuclear nightmare to an end. The chances are slim. The survival of the Islamic Republic under the leadership of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei largely depends on its often-stated position which is that Iran has the right to enrich uranium and it will never give that up, however many “western” bombs fall. The IAEA chief clearly believes that, despite serious damage to the three main nuclear sites, Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, Iran still has sufficient stocks of unharmed gas centrifuges secreted away to continue the process of enriching its stock of 400 kilos of 60-percent-grade uranium, potentially to reach the 90 per cent level required for a bomb. Grossi’s assessment, unfavourably, for Trump that is, echoes the sombre report leaked from the Pentagon’s Defence Intelligence Agency soon after the B-2 bombing of the three nuclear sites which claimed the strikes had only set back Iran’s nuclear programme by a few months. There are important nuances here. There can be little doubt that the 14 MOPs dropped through ventilation shafts to reach a long way down towards the deeply buried nuclear plants caused a lot more damage than the DIA seemed to be implying. Furthermore, and crucially, the bombings did destroy (or obliterate in Trumps’ language) the metal conversion facility at Isfahan whose role was to transform enriched uranium gas into dense metal, a process known as metallization, which is one of the key last stages of forging the explosive core of a bomb. CIA director John Ratcliffe reportedly told a classified congressional hearing that the destruction of the sole metal-conversion plant would put back Iran’s suspected nuclear bomb programme by years. So, whether the 400 kilos of highly-enriched uranium Iran developed are buried under rubble at Isfahan or one of the other sites, or have been removed to an unknown bunker (depending on which report you believe), the destruction of the metal-conversion plant is a plus for Trump’s obliteration mantra; and possibly a reason for the US president to hold back the B-2s for a second go for the moment. That’s not to say he won’t be tempted to launch another bombing raid if Tehran refuses to cooperate on the offered diplomatic path. Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, told the BBC that the US would have to rule out any further strikes if diplomatic negotiations were to be resumed. Trump isn’t going to fall for that one. Trump knows that he won’t face any trouble from Congress if he decides to bomb again. Attempts by the Democrats to obligate the president to seek authority from Congress before pursuing more attacks on Iran were thwarted by the Republican-majority Senate in a 53-47 vote. The other big question of course is Israel. Mossad and the rest of the Israeli intelligence apparatus will be keeping the closest eye and ear on what Iran does next after seeing its prized nuclear facilities hammered by nearly two weeks of targeted strikes. Last week, Israel Katz, the Israeli defence minister, ordered the military to draw up an “enforcement plan” against Iran, including maintaining air superiority over the country and taking whatever steps are necessary to prevent progress in Tehran’s nuclear programme. “Operation Rising Lion [codename for the Israel Defence Forces’ twelve days of attacks] was just the preview of a new Israeli policy,” Katz wrote on X. So, Operation Rising Lion has been granted longevity. That has to mean further attacks on nuclear sites and against nuclear scientists in the future, whether Trump and the B-2s are going to be involved or not.

Iran is now the most-watched country on the planet

Whatever happens in and to Iran in the next six months, every move the ayatollahs and Revolutionary Guard make that looks like they are trying to revive their damaged nuclear programme and advance towards 90-per-cent enriched uranium for a bomb will be watched and eavesdropped on by both Israel and the United States. Nothing they do will go unnoticed. Mossad agents who have penetrated the Iranian regime for years will be sending back intelligence reports to make sure Tehran's intentions are going to be assessed in the finest detail. There will be no escape for Tehran's nuclear scientists. Many of them have been assassinated already. Others will no doubt be wondering every day they awake whether Mossad will be waiting for them. How diplomacy can succeed when there is this sort of pressure on the regime is difficult to fathom. But both the US and Israel must be hoping that the tension will increase to such a level that the regime itself will fall or be toppled. But one should feel pity for the younger generation in Iran who are probably desperate to lead a decent more western-style life, free of repression by the ayatollahs and the Revolutionary Guard but who will be too scared to protest at the state of their lives.

Kim Jong Un must be laughing his head off

The 41-year-old Supreme Dictator of North Korea must be grinning and slapping his thighs in enjoyment. He's sorry for Iran, of course, for the Israeli and US attacks on the three nuclear sites, but Kim Jong Un is sitting pretty with his nuclear warheads and intercontinental ballistic missiles(ICBMs) and his plutonium-producing reactors and thinking to himself: "There's no way anyone, including and especially the United States even under Donald Trump, is going to do the same to me and my stockpile of nukes. I'm a winner." And he's right, he has somehow managed to develop nuclear warheads, carry out nuclear tests when all other nuclear nations had stopped doing them, launched ICBM tests over Japan and has got away with it. No one has done anything to stop him. And now it's all too late. There is absolutely no way Kim Jong Un is ever going to give up his nukes. He has built himself a super-deterrence to stop anyone attacking North Korea (not that anyone wanted to) and he knows he can actually threaten almost every city in the United States with a nuclear-armed ICBM. Iran could never do that and won't ever be able to do that. North Korea has won every battle, diplomatic, political and military (by deterrence). With all the fuss about the "successful" strikes on Iran's nukes, hardly anyone dares mention North Korea and why the Little Dictator was able to build his nuclear bombs with impunity. The sanctions have made no difference. He just exports and imports clandestinely. There are always countries who will trade with anyone when they need to. China backs him. Putin backs him. Kim Jong Un is laughing all the way to the nuclear bunker.

The US it seems can't avoid wars

Coming into office and saying there will be no more for-ever wars is a perfectly respectable platform but if you are the president of the United States, avoiding wars seems to be an impossible objective. That's one of the lessons learnt by Donald Trump. Ok, the attack on Iranian nuke sites doesn't signify a for-ever war. But I doubt the attacks over last weekend will be the last. Iran will always pose a threat, nuclear or otherwise, so in some senses the confrontation between the US and Iran is for ever. Then there's the Putin issue, what might he do after Ukraine? If he marches towards a Nato country (which I doubt he'd be foolish to contemplate), then Trump could find himself involved in a much bigger war. And there's China and Taiwan. If Beijing invades Taiwan, will Trump send in the carriers? So, the lesson is, however much you want to be a peacemaker and not get the US further involved in wars of any kind, the US is and has always to be a global force because it is a military and economic superpower. So, I fear the attacks on Iran will definitely not be the last time the US has to go to war under this administration or any future administration.

So much confusion over the US bombing of Iran

Who is right about the US bombing of Iran nuke plants? The leaking of the initial assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) of the US bombing in Iran last week sent all the wrong messages around Washington. President Donald Trump had declared the bombings by B-2 stealth bombers had “obliterated” Iran’s three main nuclear sites. But the leaked DIA report rejected the president’s triumphant announcement. It dealt a political blow to the president and provoked a huge debate about whether the bombings had achieved the objective which was to destroy Iran’s ability to develop and build a nuclear bomb. Whether the leaker acted deliberately to undermine the president’s case is not yet clear. But the reality is that the DIA assessment was far too premature to give the true picture of what level of destruction those bombs achieved. Every expert in this field has said that it takes weeks for a proper assessment to be made; and it’s not just a question of looking at satellite images. A full assessment has to take into account a whole range of other sources – for example, on-the -ground human intelligence and electronic eavesdropping of Iranian government communications. Even then, it won’t be possible to be absolutely sure of the damage unless international inspectors are allowed down to the underground bunkers and see for themselves. The Iranian regime has, meanwhile, acknowledged that the nuclear sites have been damaged. The problem for the Trump administration is that the leak of the DIA assessment has created doubt, and Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei exploited that confusion by claiming the US had failed to destroy the country’s nuclear programme. The media has played a significant part in fomenting doubt about the bomb attacks, but that was inevitable and unavoidable after CNN first received the leaked DIA report. The report was a genuine document and the media seized on it. To try and downgrade the DIA assessment, Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, and General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, gave an incredibly detailed account of the bombings by seven B-2 stealth bombers which painted a very different picture. It appeared to be an immaculately well-planned operation, with twelve of the Pentagon’s heaviest and largest bombs dropped one after the other through a ventilation shaft at the main underground site at Fordo, south of Tehran. Assuming they all detonated, that must have caused immense damage to the facilities more than 2,000ft feet below. If that turns out to be the case, then the DIA report was basically not just premature but wrong. No wonder the FBI has been called in to investigate who leaked the document. The lesson learned from last week is that in this crazy social media world, everything becomes political. What was intended to be a triumph for Trump and for the Pentagon turned into a political battle, with the media and Trump critics seizing on the DIA assessment to cast doubt on the US military’s ability to damage, let alone, obliterate Iran’s nuclear sites.

Iran's Supreme Leader claims victory over America!!

It's extraordinary how one man's victory is another man's defeat or the other way around. Seven US B-2 Spirit strategic bombers armed with 14 30,000lb Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs flew into Iran with ease and total immunity and bombed three of their nuclear plants and flew home again unscathed, and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, emerges from his own secret bunker and pronounces victory over the Americans. Perhaps he hasn't had time to speak to his intelligence people or go on a trip to Fordo, Natanz or Isfahan, the three attacked sites. But to declare victory would seem to be somewhat bizarre. Ok, the Iranians were obviously smart because it looks like they removed the 400 kilos of 60 per cent-enriched uranium, plus some key enrichment equipment before the B-2s arrived. But their programme to build a bomb which the ayatollah still denies, has clearly been set back by a considerable time whatever the different US intelligence agancies are saying. Obviously Khamenei feels he has to rouse his people to support him against the US but will the average Iranian actually believe their master when he declares victory? The reality is that if he and his regime try to restart their clandestine bombmaking programme, the Israeli air force will be back, and probably the B-2s as well, although the US will have to get on fast with producing more Massive Ordnance Penetrators, having used up possibly more than half of the existing stock. Judging by Khamenei's statement today, Iran will always remain a threat while he is in charge.

Was Iran's uranium-enrichment plant "obliterated"?

Donald Trump chose the word "obliterated" when he announced the successful hits by 30,000lb bombs onto Iran's nuclear facility underground at Fordo. Ever since there have been doubts cast on how much damage was actually done. The US Defence Intelligence Agency which I guuess will now be abolished, reported (and it was leaked of course) that only enough damage was done to put back Iran's nuke programme by a few months. Trump is furious and has stuck to his favourite adjective, "obliterated". I hope for the sake of the world that Trump is right and the DIA is wrong or at least premature with its assessment. But if the DIA turns out to be right, then it means the dropping of FOURTEEN Massive Ordnance Penetraors(MOPs) by seven B-2 staelth bombers didn't do the trick after all. To be honest, there was always doubt about whether these mighty bombs could actually reach the parts that had to be reached, way way down under a mountain. Anyway, Iran smartly removed key equipment as well as the 400 kilos of 60 per cent-enriched uranium from Fordo and from Natanz, another nuke facility hit by MOPs. General Dan Caine, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said that battle-damage assessment still has to be completed. But Trump has made up his mmind that the Iranian sites have been obliterated. So someone must have told him that this was the case, or was that someone too scared to tell him the truth. Even Marco Rubio, the secretary of state who has been totally loyal to his master so far, has suggested the bombing caused severe damage but didn't use the word "obliterated". The battle-damage assessment is going to be pretty tricky if it's seen through the eyes of spy satellites because the images, while showing big craters in the mountain, don't show us the inside of the plants down below. This is not going to be resolved one way or the other in a matter of days but it certainly hasn't helped Trump's case that someone inside the DIA leaked the initial findings to the media. But then this is what always happens in the US.

Trump curses Israel and Iran for violating his ceasefire

The overnight announcement by Donald Trump of an agreement by both Israel and Iran to stop attacking each other was a rabbit-out-of-the-hat surprise. It didn't last long, but then Trump with some choice expletives told Israel to turn its bombers back and Tehran to stop firing missiles. When both sides are so fired up, perhaps it's to be expected that a few wild shots will be launched as the tempo starts to fall. Trump's intention was to fly off from Washington to The Hague in The Netherlands for the two-day Nato summit with peace in his pocket. As he boarded Air Force One he must have been looking forward to the cries of praise and congratulations from alliance leaders. But all will depend on whether the ceasefire holds. I would have thought Israel feels it still has much to do to stop the nuclear threat from Iran. Fordow, the deeply buried uranium-enrichment facility, is not "obliterated" as Trump claimed. It's badly damaged but could Tehran in the future rebuild it and get back to enriching uranium, this time to weapons-grade, 90 per cent, level? They have removed the 400 kilos of 60 per cent enriched-uranium in steel caskets to a secret site and nobody seems to know where it is. No doubt Mossad will find it and then we'll see what happens, as Trump likes to say. While Trump is distracted in The Hague, I fear Israel and Iran will continue to breach the "deal", each accusing the other of being the first to do so.

How can Trump keep it a short war with Iran?

The length and scale of the American confrontation with Iran will depend on two things: how much destruction was actually caused by the 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrators dropped by the seven B-2 Sprit bombers on the nuclear sites at Fordow and Natanz, and by the US Navy submarine Tomahawks on Isfahan; and how Iran retaliates to the bombings. If, after battle-damage assessments have been completed, it's discovered that much of Fordow still survives and Natanz, too, Trump will have little alternative but to send the bombers back for another round of MOP strikes, although the inventory of these mighty bombs is limited. Likewise, if Iran launches attacks on American troops based in the Middle East or tries to close the Strait of Hormuz entrance into the Gulf waterway with mines, then Trump will have to do what he said he would do which is to strike back at multiple targets in Iran. Either way, the result will be a more prolonged battle with Iran, something which neither his political supporters at home nor the American people want. Iran will no doubt feel that it has to respond to the B-2 strikes but Tehran knows that if it goes big, the US response will be huge. Can they take that risk? And if they block the Strait of Hormuz, stopping all shipping, much of it carrying oil around the world, the repercusions will be enormous economically and Iran will face significant American military action. Also, blocking the narrow channel into the Gulf waterway will hurt Iran's economy because oil from Iran bound for China goes through the waterway. Not that long ago, Iran might have been able to rely on Hezbollah or Hamas to carry out retaliatory attacks on the Americans, but each of these organisations have been devastated by Israeli attacks over the last 20 months. Iran's proxy forces are no longer capable of launching major attacks on the Americans. My feeling is that the US battle-damage assessment carried out by the Pentagon will show that insufficient damage has been done to the nuke sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, and the B-2s will be back. Then the Iranian retaliation will follow.

The US attacks Iran's nuke sites!

Donald Trump has done it and he didn't wait two weeks. It was obvious Iran wasn't goinbg to play ball. Tehran wasn't going to budge on new nuke talks unless Israel stopping bombing. Trump was never going to agree to that, let alone Benjamin Netanyahu. So Trump called his national security team for a meeting last night and he gave the go ahead to bomb in the early hours. The six B-2 Spirit bombers assigned for the bombing run and a collection of air-to-air refuelling tankers were all set to go. Instead of going to the base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, the B-2s flew off from their Whiteman Air Force base in Missouri for the long-haul flight to Iran. This was the better option because it guaranteed more surprise. Six B-2s each armed with two Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs, 30,000lb in weight and with devastating explosive power, were dropped on the main uranium-enrichment bunker at Fordo, 100 miles spouth of Tehran and, according to Trump, it was obliterated. The only way it could have been put totally out of action would have been if the B-2s followed in a line and dropped the 12 MOPs one after the other into the same hole created by the first one. Twelve MOPs falling through the same hole wold have reached the floor of the bunker and devastated the whole place. Assuming that's what happened, it was a simple but unprecedented-in-history attack on a single underground installation by conventional bombs. Two other nuke sites at Isfahan and Natanz were hit by dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles fired fromn US submarines. All the talk of diplomacy and deescalation urged by everyone except Israel was also obliterated. But, despite all the appeals and concerns and fears and criticism emanating from around the world, it is just possible that the US, along with Israel of course, has saved the world from facing a nuclear-armed Iran, a nightmare for the whole globe. As the new German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the other day when referring to Israel's action, Israel was doing the dirty work for everyone. Now Trump has also done the dirty work for the planet. Let us hope that's an end to it and Iran realises there is nothing it can do against the might of the US without huge retaliation. They can try with attacks on US forces and embassies in the region. But if they do that, Trump will just bomb more sites until Iran is thrown back into the 14th century. Ultimately, all countries, especially in the Middle East, will be grateful.

Will two weeks bring the result Trump wants?

Donald Trump likes putting things off for two weeks. He has done it before. The thinking is that it builds up pressure on "the enemy", whoever that is, and forces them to plead for a deal. But will it work this time? With Israel continuing every day and night dropping bombs and firing missiles at Iran, there will be no let-up for the Tehran regime. But throughout the next two weeks, the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei will know that Trump is waiting for him to crumble and give in. As the days tick by, that pressure is going to get bigger and bigger. It doesn't matter what the Europeans and Canada do to try and forge some diplomatic deal. This is all about Trump versus Khamenei. The die has been cast and the Iranian leader will be the one who blinks, not Trump. I think that if by the time the two weeks have passed and Tehran has refused to budge, Trump will order the US military to finish the job the Israelis have started. Khamenei must know that. So it's all up to him. His whole purpose in life is to make sure he and the Islamic Republic under his leadership survive. And it may not survive if the US enters the war. So, to avoid regime change, the ayatollah will seek a deal. That's my prediction. However, there is a big extra ingredient here. How will the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps react if the Supreme Leader caves in? It could cause a revolution of a different kind, not the demise of the Islamic Republic but a take-over by the IRGC, the military taking even more control than they do today. Trump would hope that US bombing of Iran's nuke plants will lead to an uprising in the country with democracry shining through. That outcome would seem unrealistic even if the Supreme Leader is toppled.

Trump's big decision time

The danger with having a weapon system that was specifically developed to destroy deeply-buried military/nuclear bunkers is that if they don't do the job properly, there will be a huge anti-climax. Donald Trump, by all accounts, is worried that the Pentagon's Massive Ordnance Penetrator, 30,000lbs in weight and supposedly capable of breaching 200ft of concrete, won't actually reach Iran's most secret uranium-enrichment plant at Fordow south of Tehran which is half a mile down. Will the detonation from the MOP spread down far enough to destroy the plant? The reality is that the US might have to drop four or five of the $3 million MOPs, each one going down through the hole achieved by the previous one. Then it might be possible for the MOPs to get their targets. It's a big IF. Trump won't want to drop the bombs and discover that Iran's fuel-enrichment facility is untouched. That would be seriously embarrassing and make the whole effort look unachievable. That would be a huge bonus to Iran. Wars are rarely, if ever, won by airstrikes alone. Can the MOP do what other bombs in the past have failed to do - bring Iran to its knees and force it to give up all idea of building a nuclear bomb? Trump must be hoping so but it's why he has so far hesitated to give the go ahead for an American strike.

US involvement in Israel war with Iran inevitable

There are really only two options facing Donald Trump: either saying no to joining Israel in attacking Iran or start bombing. The only other possible option, but now seemingly vanishing fast, is to try one last diplomatic push as the bombs keep falling on Tehran. But Trump is a realist. He must know that diplomacy is now off the table because Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is resolved to fight Israel all the way. So the war option is really the only answer which is tragic but practical. I don't believe Trump will hold back now that the Israeli air force has cleared the way for a bombing run on the nuclear plants with America's Massive Ordnance Penetrator. But what will Russia do if Trump gives the go ahead? Russia and Iran are strategic partners. Iran is providing crucial armed drones to Russia for attacking Ukraine. Putin will feel obliged to support Iran. What will that mean? And China is not going to stay quiet. If China comes out on the side of Iran, this could turn out to be a mighty confrontation between the three big power rivals. All of this will have to be taken into account when Trump makes his final decision. The B-2s with a payload of Massive Ordnance Penetrators are waiting for the go.

Only the US has the weapon to destroy Iran's nuke bunkers

There is only one weapon system, apart from nuclear warheads, that could destroy Iran’s underground stock of highly enriched uranium and nuclear bomb components. The United States has it, and Israel does not. The Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), which is 6m-long, weighs 30,000lb and has never been fired in anger, was developed to destroy bunkers that other weapons could not reach. Technically identified as the GBU-57F/B, it is approved as an operational payload to be launched only by the strategic B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, although tests have also been carried out with B-52s. President Trump has not joined Israel in taking military action against Iran, but there has been a build-up of warships, carriers and fighter aircraft in the Middle East, ready to carry out strikes. The clearest sign that Trump had decided to join Israel in trying to eliminate the threat of Iran developing nuclear bombs would be the arrival of B-2s at the British-owned Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. Six B-2s were sent there in April as a show of force to Tehran, although in the end they were involved in missions against Houthi targets in Yemen. No MOPs were deployed or used. Even this huge bunker-busting bomb would face a challenge to reach Iran’s deepest clandestine nuclear facilities, at least some of which are known to be about half a mile — or about 800m — down, beneath layers of reinforced concrete. The latest version of the MOP has been fitted with a smart fuse that delays detonation until the maximum penetration has been achieved, reported to be more than 60m of concrete. The explosion would have a chance of destroying what was beneath it. By comparison, Israel has GBU-28 bunker busters, which can penetrate only 6m of concrete. It has not been supplied with the MOP; the US air force is believed to have limited supplies, perhaps no more than 20. In preparation for a potential US strike against Iran, Trump has already approved the dispatch of a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East. The USS Carl Vinson battle group will soon be operating alongside the USS Nimitz with accompanying warships in the Red Sea and Eastern Mediterranean, after the Nimitz was redeployed from the South China Sea. The Carl Vinson has F-35C Lightning II stealth fighters on board. In its Operation Rising Lion, Israeli F-35s have succeeded in carving a relatively invulnerable aerial pathway towards Iran’s four nuclear facilities by targeting the country’s air defence systems with multiple raids. That same pathway could be used by the B-2 or other US aircraft to hit the plants suspected of developing Iranian nuclear warheads.

Netanyahu waited for the right president to come along

Donald Trump likes to see himself as the Great Negotiator but on this occasion Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, appeared to have all the cards and outplayed him. Since April, the Israeli leader had been pressurising Trump and his White House aides to give him the green light for a large-scale attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. While Netanyahu was reassured by his military advisers that Israel could go it alone to target Iran’s four nuclear sites, he wanted not just US backing but also American firepower to achieve what Trump and his predecessors all agreed on: that Iran must never be allowed to build a nuclear bomb. However, Trump entered the White House for his second term on a no-war ticket. He announced his intention to bring the war in Ukraine to an end and sent his special envoy and billionaire friend Steve Witkoff to pave the way and to divide up his spare time to sort out the war in Gaza, too. Neither of these objectives have yet to bear fruit. The nuclear challenge presented by Iran was also high on Trump’s list. But he made it clear his priority was to be a peacemaker. He wanted to avoid conflagration. This was a message that clearly didn’t go down well with Netanyahu who apparently told every American official who came to Jerusalem and in every phone call to the White House that this was the moment, the unique moment, when Iran’s nuclear sites could be bombed before it was too late. Netanyahu and his complex operational plan to attack Iran, codenamed Operation Rising Lion, which had taken months, if not years, to develop and hone, was ready to launch two months ago. But Trump demurred. He wanted Witkoff to keep going with diplomatic efforts. He made his case to Netanyahu earlier this week when he said he wanted Witkoff to complete his round of negotiations with the Iranians in Oman. One more meeting to give peace a chance had been set for Sunday. However, Trump was becoming increasingly aware that his appeals were falling on deaf ears. Operation Rising Lion was as good as set in stone. Mossad agents who had covertly entered Iran were in position to launch deadly drone attacks on the homes of the top hierarchy of Iranian generals and nuclear scientists. The call between Trump and Netanyahu on Thursday was, by the sound of it, a one-way declaration by the Israeli prime minister. Israel was going to bomb Iran, and he hoped Trump would not stand in his way. Trump came away from that conversation, knowing that within hours 200 Israeli jet fighters and bombers would be hitting pre-selected targets in Iran. It was a fait accompli. There was nothing Trump could have done. He had been out-negotiated. In one way, it was his fault, He had set a timetable of 60 days for Iran to reach a diplomatic deal to resolve the nuclear crisis. Thursday was the last day of Trump’s own timeline. It was a gift for Netanyahu. All he had to do was remind Trump of his own deadline and then push the button for Operation Rising Lion. There has been no transcript of the Thursday phone call. But Marco Rubio, secretary of state and acting national security adviser, confirmed that Washington had been notified of the imminent attack on Iran. After the attack began, a further statement was made which emphasised that the US played no role in the strikes. The challenge for Trump now is whether the US should switch from this non-participant position to being a full player. Only the US possesses the type of weapon system capable of penetrating the concrete and reinforced steel to reach the underground facilities where Iran carries out its most sensitive and critical nuclear research and development programmes. Even the US Air Force’s 30,000lb Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) dropped by B-2 stealth bombers would have difficulty detonating close enough to these facilities, some of which are half a mile down. However, MOP would have a better chance of actually reaching Tehran’s most secret underground plants. So far, Israel has caused extensive damage but largely to surface laboratory facilities., as well as Iran’s air defence systems. The greatest achievement of Operation Rising Lion so far has been the killing by Mossad of so many high-powered generals and nuclear scientists. That alone will set back Iran’s nuclear programme. The question for Trump is whether he has the appetite for taking on Iran once and for all. At present he has adopted a different line: warning Tehran to grab the diplomatic route before facing annihilation. However, if Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader, refuses to send his diplomats to meet with Witkoff in Oman and focuses only on military retaliation against Israel, Trump might find himself forced to do what Netanyahu has been urging on Washington for a long time: to join with Israel in totally destroying Iran’s nuclear programme. If that is what happens, Netanyahu will have achieved his greatest legacy: picking his moment and the right American president to end the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Israel and Iran set for long missile-attrition war

Is anyone actually trying to stop Israel and Iran from hurling missiles and drones at each other? This could go on for weeks or months and the death and destruction toll is going to climb steeply. There is a purpose to this war which is to stop Iran going nuclear. It's a purpose which every other country in the world is going to be grateful for, provided it succeeds and everything to do with Iran's clandestine nuclear bomb project is destroyed or long-term damaged. So, secretly, every country, including Britain under Keir Starmer who has been increasingly critical of Israel, will be saying:"Go, Israel, get it done." But Israel won't be able to destroy Iran's deeply buried nuclear facilities without a lot of help from the US, along with the full support of Britain, Europe and the whole Arab world. Will this happen? No. For uhderstandable reasons, all the focus right now is to try and stop the war. Britain and everyone else are calling for restraint. But the truth is, if Israel uses restraint it won't be able to finish the job of preventing Iran from going nuclear. If no one else is going to help, ie the US, then Israel must be allowed to go it alone and end Ira's nuclear dreams. But that means Israel and the Israeli people will have to suffer from Iranian retaliation. So, Israel is losing lives while doing the one job which every other country wants them do. This is a very weird paradox.