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.

Israeli strikes on Iran a huge challenge for Trump

The series of airstrikes by Israeli military jets against Iran’s nuclear sites poses a huge challenge for President Trump. The president has made it clear he does not want the United States to be involved in any more wars, at least not ones which other nations should be able to prosecute themselves. He told Tehran that the US was not involved in any way with Israel’s decision to attack the nuclear sites, even though the devastating bombing raids were in the interests of the United States because Trump and his predecessors all said they would never allow Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb. The Israeli strikes will never completely eliminate the nuclear facilities because the most secret plants are about half a mile down beneath concrete and reinforced steel. The damage done by the Israeli raids will put back Iran’s nuclear programme by a significant amount, and that will suit the US and the Trump administration. However, if the intention is to destroy Iran’s whole nuclear project, then at some time it will require the US to be involved militarily, if diplomacy fails, because only the US has the weapons to penetrate that far down into the nuclear bunkers to destroy them. So what will Trump do? Will he join Israel in finally removing the nuclear threat posed by Iran? Or will he push ahead with diplomatic pressure? The answer is that Trump will probably do everything he can to avoid what could be a catastrophic war. The Middle East is in enough turmoil without having a full--scale war between Israel and Iran. And the US is the only country with the power and influence to stop the conflict from breaking out into a more serious conflagration. One can only hope that every ounce of US diplomatic effort is deployed to bring this latest crisis to an end. However, there is no question that it is in the interests of the whole Middle East region that Iran never succeeds in developing nuclear weapons. The prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran is so terrifying it is to be hoped that whatever the Israeli airstrikes achieve they will make Tehran and its leaders give up any ambition to go down this dangerous route. This is where the US can and will play a pivotal role, making it clear to Tehran that it will face future military strikes if it continues to develop the capability to build nuclear weapons. However, for the moment, the confrontation between Israel and Iran presents another major challenge for the Trump administration. Even though the president wants to avoid wars, it seems he can’t escape the consequences of conflicts waged by other countries, especially Israel which is one of the most important allies for the US. Whatever happens in the next few weeks, the US will want to protect Israel from retaliation by Iran and that means the US will be a participant in a war that could spread throughout the Middle East.

Are we about to face yet another Middle East war?

There seems to be an appetite for war wherever you look in the Middle East. If it's not enough that Israel is waging war in Gaza, the West Bank, Hezbollah/Lebanon and Syria, there is now every chance that within weeks or even days Israel will launch strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, with or without American help. The truth is that without the huge firepower which the US Air Force possesses, a conventional attack on Iran's deeply-buried nuke plants will make little difference. The most secret and sensitive sites are half a mile underground. Half a mile!! The only bomb which has even a sporting chance of reaching that far through earth and concrete is the US 30,000lb Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) which would be dropped by a B-2 stealth fighter. But could even that go all the to the very floor of the nuke facility and blow it all up? Israel doesn't have this bomb, so they would be forced to use less powerful bombs which would cause immense damage but not be able to surge through the concrete all that way. The International Atomic Energy Agency has now officially warned that Iran is violating its obligations under the nuke deal signed by Obama in 2015 and has developed hundreds of kilos of 60 per cent enriched uranium, which is way above the level required for peaceful, civilian use. Tehran wants the bomb and it looks like they could get it this year if the Supreme Leader gives his permission. So Israel has told Washington it's going to go ahead and strike. This is the biggest test for Donald Trump since he began his second term. He and Benjamin Netanyahu don't get on, and it could well be that the Israeli leader will give the go ahead for the strike with or without Trump's say-so. That would lead to a nmjor conflict between Israel and Iran. Then what?

Now the US Joint Chiefs chairman says he believes Putin will march on into Europe

It has become the view of the moment among the west's top military commanders to pontificate about what Putin will do next, after Ukraine, and all seem to be saying the same thing, that the Russian leader will march his troops on into Nato Europe and chance his arm in, say, Finland or Latvia or Poland. Of course they could all be right. So why do I remain so sceptical about these gloomy predictions? Principally because taking on Ukraine which Russia has totally failed to subjugate, is a helluva lot different from waging war of any kind with Nato, whether it be in Finland or Poland. Putin absolutely knows this. Any overt invasion of Poland, for example, would lead to a catastrophic counter-attack by Nato. Catastrophic for the Russians, that is. Again, Putin knows this, even if on some days he suspects Nato might not invoke Article 5 of the Nato Treaty. He may be building a war economy and producing more missiles and tanks, but he has lost so many in the war in Ukraine that he is desperate to fill the huge gaps in his arsenal. He won't have the ability to take on Nato in a conflict for years to come, probably never, so why on earth would he risk everything by charging around Europe trying to bite into Nato's alliance? It would be a huge mistake. He must know this. Even Trump is not going to turn his back on Poland or the Baltics and leave it to the Europeans. His legacy would be shot to pieces. Nato would stand firm against any Russian moves made against the alliance. So, all you top generals in the US and Europe, stop trying to scare us into believing that Putin is the next Hitler. Calm down the over-the-top rhetoric and stop showing us you're scared of Putin. It will only make him feel considerably taller than he is.

Trump sends for the Marines

It's the one-liner that all US presidents are tempted to use: send for the Marines. The US Marine Corps is the ultimate symbol of heavyweight fighting power. They have saved the day for America on so many occasions in history. Now, however, Trump is sending hundreds of Marines to Los Angeles to quell the protests that have erupted in the city for days over immigration raids. Sending for the Marines to fight American citizens on the streets of one of America's most famous cities is not what former presidents had in mind when they turned to the Marine Corps for help. It was always to fight overseas. But, having deployed the National Guards to the streets of LA now Trump wants hundreds of Marines to join them. LA citizens must be thinking it's another Hollywood movie in the making. But not under Trump. He has always thought it was constitutionally ok to use the military against protesting Americans. But now he has done it, I suspect there will be many Republicans who will see this as a step far too far. If Marines kill protesters, there will be an outcry. It's a potentially dangerous move for democracy in the US. Let's hope it all calms down and the Marines can return to their barracks.

Will Trump try again with Kim Jong Un?

Donald Trump probably has enough on his hands: the riots in LA where he has sent National Guard troops much to the anger of the California governor; the war in Ukraine which is still raging despite his promise to bring it to a close; the war in Gaza where there is no end to death and destruction; the tariff war with China, Europe and everywhere; his tempestuous break-up with Elon Musk; the continuing friction and argument over his Big, Beautiful Bill, to name just a few issues. So what about North Korea and his old one-time friend Kim Jong Un? Has Trump made any moves to reignite the charm offensive he launched in his first term in office, or is that a dead end issue? If all else is failing, perhaps Trump will turn his attention to Kim Jong Un, if only because the North Korean dictator has cemented his ties with Vladimir Putin and the two are thick as thieves, with North Korean troops having fought alongside Russian soldiers in the Kursk region in western Russia against Ukrainian forces. Not much has been heard of them in recent weeks. We don't know if Trump has tried to rekindle his efforts with Kim Jong Un but if he had he would probably have made it public on his Truth Social platform. But it seems strange that Trump has not even mentioned North Korea. Perhaps when he saw North Korea sink its latest warship by mistake when launching it made Trump think Kim Jong Un doesn't pose a threat at the moment.

Would massive new sanctions against Russia make any difference?

What is going to force Vladimir Putin to change his course with Ukraine? Total defeat is never going to happen, despite all the initial optimism around in the US and Europe when Putin's war faltered in the first few weeks. International sanctions have bitten into Russia's economy but Putin and his empire have survived and thrived. Now Senator Lindsay Graham, the influential supporter of Donald Trump, has come up with a staggeringly brutal new sanctions package which he hopes will finally cripple Russia's economy. He has put forward a bill which would impose a 500 per cent tariff on all countries which still trade with Russia. This is mainly aimed at China and India who have continued throughout the war in Ukraine to buy Russian oil and gas, but also Europe which still, amazingly, buys natural gas from Moscow. If this goes ahead and this extraordinary tariff is deployed, the huge sums Moscow is getting from exporting its oil and gas will be largely cut off. This would have a huge impact on the country's war economy and its ability to continue fighting Ukraine. But it would also cut a swathe through the economies of China, India and Europe. Putin will be calculating that the Trump administration will never go along with it. But it just might be the only option left to bring Putin to his senses. Russia is a country with huge natural resources and relies on other countries to buy its oil and gas to maintain the economy and the war in Ukraine. It will probably be one of those things which Trump will wave around as an option against Moscow but not actually do it.

Can Trump and Musk ever make up?

Right now the arguments and tirades and social media blastings going on between Donald Trump and Elon Musk make it near-impossible for there ever to be a reconciliation. But it all seems so pointless and silly and childish for these two individuals to carry on stamping their feet and vowing enmity etc etc. Children throw their toys out of the pram, adults are supposed to be more reasonable and wise and practical. So this massive battle between the two biggest egos in the United States has to come to an end at some point. Otherwise Musk is going to deploy all his money towards the Democratic party and disaffected Republicans in order to have Trump's big, beautiful bill thrown out. Could he do that? It sounds like he could. So, Musk has the potential to do almost as much damage to Trump as Trump can do to Musk. There's talk of Trump removing all government aid to the Tesla company. But that would undermine the economy, crash the job market and put efforts to go electric in the car business on the back burner. Everyone loses out. It's time the president of the United States and his ex-buddy, the richest man in the world (or was), to call a halt to all this stupidity and get back to being on the same page for the sake of the nation as a whole. But I doubt it will happen.

Goliath versus Goliath

There have been numerous examples in history of David v Goliath, with the smaller one winning against the big brute. But now we have two Goliaths going at each other, Donald Trump v Elon Musk.Two mighty beasts, one with more power than the other and the other with more money than the other. Musk is taller than Trump but he doesn't have a MAGA support base behind him and he hasn't been elected to anything. So, however this mighty clash of egos goes down, Musk will lose and will regret taking on the president. In fact, he could face ruin if he doesn't kiss and make up. So far there is no sign of that happening despite hints from Trump that he might have a call with Musk and sort it out. That all fell through when Trump declared he wasn't interested in talking or thinking about Musk. Musk is pissed off, seeing all his work on slashing budgets and sacking people to save money being washed down the sink with Trump's big, beautiful bill which will add more than $2 trillion dollars to the nation's defecit, undoing all his hard work to chop the federal budget into a meaningful size. Musk has left the White House and Washington and gone to save his company Tesla from collapse. He has already lost as much money as most Third World countries have in their coffers to last the year. It sounds like we need a moderator here to bring the Goliath v Goliath boxing bout to an end before things get totally out of hand.

Will Putin invade the Baltics?

Senior military types across Europe are warning that Putin will turn his attention to the Baltics once he has either crushed Ukraine or forced a surrender by Kyiv. If this is true, and it might be, then we are talking about a potential war between Nato and Russia in the next two to five years. Is this really realistic or are people now getting so jumpy about this crazy world that they have convinced themselves that Putin wants world domination and is hell bent on carving up Nato once and for all.? Again, it's a scenario that can't be dismissed. These military chiefs read the intelligence every day and should know what they're warning about. Or is it really about persuading their governments to spend a helluva lot more on defence, on the basis that deterrence prevents wars and our deterrence and Europe's deterrence is currently unimpressive? All of this foreboding, of course, has been brought on by the man in the White House, Donald Trump, who has not given the sort of assurances about defending Europe to which all his predecessors have been committed. So, a major incursion (not quite an invasion) by Russia against, say, Lithuania, should trigger Article 5 of the Nato Treaty and every member of the alliance then goes to its aid. Putin would be gambling that Nato will do no such thing because Trumpo might say to Europe, "You do it, we're not going to get involved because we have China to worry about." It's a gamble Putin might think worth taking. My view is that Putin has been so humiliated by the way Ukraine has fought back aginst his invasion army that I think he will hesitate to make the mistake of attacking any member of the Nato alliance. This hesitation will be doubled if every member of the alliance starts spending big money on defence, like the five per cent of GDP which Trump is demanding. Pete Hegseth, the US defence secretary, has claimed today at a Nato defence ministers' meeting that many alliance members are already showing enthusiasm for five per cent, but he didn't include the UK in his list. There is no way Keir Starmer is going to find the money to commit to five per cent of GDP on defence. He's struggling to commit to three per cent and won't get to 2.5 per cent until 2027. Putin will be watching and calculating.

Iran Supreme Leader rejects Trump's nuke proposal

This is not good news for Donald Trump. Very recently he indicated there would be a hig deal with Iran to stop them working on a nuclear weapon as if an announcement was imminent. But it never happened and now Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, has rejected outright the proposal from Trump that Iran gives up enriching uranium. Iran has always said that it has every right, like all countries in the world, to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes and that it will never give up this right. The trouble is Iran is rapidly pushing ahead with enriching uranium towards a weapons-grade level which means the ayatollah's talk of "peaceful purposes" doesn't hold much water. It looks, and has always looked, like Iran actually wants to build a nuclear bomb, whatever the ayatollah says, and he only has to give his say-so and within months they could be enriching uranium to the 90 per cent level required for fissile material for a weapon. So, there's a total impasse yet again, and no sign of a deal which is very bad news. Trump really hasn't yet had any sort of breakthrough foreign policy success. In fact, the opposite. The war in Ukraine is raging on. The war in Gaza is getting worse by the day. More deaths, more destruction. What's Trump going to do if Iran continues to block attempts to reach a diplomatic deal to end the nuke threat. That would be three foreign policy failures.

Britain's strategic defence review is a hollow plan without the right cash

The Labour government's ambitious strategic defence review publishd yesterday was full of bold talk and fancy phrases that when analysed sound like they were written by someone well-versed in the gobbledigook of Whitehallese lingo. For me, the stand-out fiugure was the promise by the government to increase the size of the regular army from its current figure of around 70,000 to 75,000 by 2034. That pretty much sums up the state of our armed forces today. An army of 75,000 in the next nine years is not going to put off people like Vladimir Putin or any foreign leader who fancies his chances to grab a bit of Britain's diminished empire around the globe. Ok, the review is also full of dreamy talk of drones and other unmanned vehicles and super hi-techness and a dozen nuclear-powered submarines. But where is the money going to come from? The hoped-for 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence won't be enough, not for the long term. The aspirational three per cent ain't going to happen for years and as for the Naop secretary general's wish for all alliance members to increase their spending to 3.5 per cent or even five per cent of GDP, how can the UK agree to that when it's struggling to reach 2.5 per cent? Of course, there is only way out and that's to increase income tax by one or two percentage points. But the Labour government "promised" in its manifesto that it wouldn't raise income tax. Ever. This promise will have to be cast aside, and very soon. Then the popularity of the governemnt is going to sink. It's a hard road ahead for this country and for this government. The strategic defence review could end up just being 140 odd pages of unfulfillable wish lists.

Ukraine's attack on Russian bombers is a massive turning-point in the war

Carried outwith precision and daring, Ukraine's security forces have damaged or destroyed dozens of Russia's strategic bombers inside Russia, depending on whether you believe Kyiv's claims or Moscow's downplaying statements. Whatever is the full truth, there is no question that Ukraine has dealt a huge blow to Russia's military and to Putin's confidence. In a covert operation codenamed Spider's Web, 117 drones were launched against Russian strategic bombers in five different bases, allegedly attacking 34 per cent of Moscow's long-range cruise-missile-armed aircraft. Not from a long range but from close up, with the drones fired automatically from trucks nearby. It's a staggering achievement and it will make Putin realise that all his treasured military aircraft parked in the open air on bases without hangers to keep them safe, will now be vulnerable to Ukrainian attack. It's a turning point so massive that I believe Putin will be forced to take drastic action to try and show that he is still winning the war. Could he use tactical nukes against Ukraine? He will be sorely tempted. If he does, then the war will spread to Nato. This is such a dire thought that I hardly dare put it into print. But far from seeking an end to the war, Putin is going to accelerate and expand the conflict. He has built a war economy and is producing so many tanks that he will want to use them. The promise by Sir Keir Starmer today to start converting Britain into war-readiness sounds bold but perhaps too late. Al the things he has promised, such as more nuclear weapons and nuclear-powered submarines, will take years. Putin might make his move well before then.

What does Pete Hegseth mean by "imminent"?

Talking to a bunch of top people in the foreign and security policy business in Singapore, Pete Hegseth, the Trumpite US defence secretary, warned that a Chinese attack on Taiwan was "imminent". What does he mean by "imminent"? The definition of imminent is "likely to happen at any moment" and is generally accepted to mean that whatever it is is on the very point of occurring. Like, a person's death is "imminent", ie he has hours to live. So is that what Hegseth meant? That China is literally poised to invade Taiwan, like tomorrow or the next day at the latest? Surely not. I don't think so. If it was true, there would be signs of a massive build-up of PLA warships, amphibious craft, fighter jets, ballistic missiles all turned in the direction of Taiwan and so on. But there is no sign or any intelligence of this going on. Nor do I think Beijing is actually ready for an invasion of Taiwan. Politically, Xi Zinping might just risk it in the belief that Trump won't bother to retaliate by defending Taiwan, but, militarily, the PLA needs more time for rehearsals. They've got until 2027 when Xi said Taiwan will be back under the Beijing fold whether by diplomacy or force. So, not imminent then, not tomorrow or next week or even next month. Hegseth was stirring it up, I guess, and he certainly did that with Beijing which warned him to stop interfering.