To strike or not to strike? The big Iran question

Donald Trump promised Iranians on his Truth Social platform that help was on the way when thousands were being killed in the streets by a brutal, panicking regime. But did he mean regime-change by military force? Do the Iranian people want to get rid of the ayatollahs or do they just want a better economy so they can live a decent life? Trump things the regime is now weaker than ever, providing a perfect moment to strike hard and bring it down. But if this leads to a wider regional conflict, will the Iranian people be eternally grateful? Clearly not. No one in the region wants a wider war. Arab leaders have been appealing to Trump not to launch military action against Iran again. The last time, in June, the US and Israel did huge damage to the three nuclear facilities and it was all over very quickly, although Iran retaliated with limited ballistic-missile launches against Israel and Qatar and American bases in the region. This time,. if Trump goes ahead with an attack, using the recently-arrived USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group and other aircraft in the Gulf, Tehran has vowed to respond with a much bigger counter-attack. It might seem that Iran is in a weak position. Not just the nuclear sites are badly damaged, but persistent raids by Israel have decimated the country's air defences. But Iran still possesses a huge stock of ballistic missiles and, therefore, they pose a significant threat both to Israel and to American troops based in Iraq and elsewhere in the Gulf region. Also, if Tehran fears Trump's plan is to topple the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, then the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps which keeps him in power, will do everything it can to resist Trump's "armada" of warships sitting within targeting range. Trump has given Tehran an ultimatum: dismantle the whole nuclear programme, stop enriching uranium, hand over what has been enriched, and stop backing proxy militia (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis etc). If Tehran were to submit to these demands, it would be the greatest humiliation for the regime. So the chances of these ultimatums being met in total would seem to be unlikely. But Trump thinks now is the moment in histpry when the hateful, suppressive regime in Iran can be brought down. But Iran is not Venezuela. The likelihood of voluntary capitulation is remote. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER, SEQUEL TO SHADOW LIVES. SEE AMAZON, WATERSTONES AND ROWANVALE BOOKS.

Surrender Donbas or no US security guarantee? Really?

I know Donald Trump is desperate to get a settlement to end the war in Ukraine - nothing wrong with that - but can it really be true that he has told poor Volodymyr Zelensky that unless he agrees to give away the whole of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine to Russia, he won't get any American security guarantees to protect the country from future aggression? It sounds like the sort of ultimatum that the Trump administation might make, but the US has always stated, even under Trump, that Ukraine's sovereignty is a matter for Kyiv and its people and cannot be dictated by a third party. The story about the ultimatum in the Financial Times has been slammed by the White House as totally false. But I'm sure there are people in the US administration who have talked this sort of language. The question is, are these the people whose opinions have been accepted by Trump and have, therefore, become part of the Washington strategy for ending the war? There is no mention in Trump's 20-point plan for Kyiv to give up Donbas to Moscow. There IS a reference to the option of turning Donbas into a demilitarised zone which would mean the withdrawal of Ukrainian and Russian troops. But that is not the same as forcing Zelensky to surrender what Kyiv still controls in eastern Ukraine to the Russians, in return for a US blanket security guarantee for the future. What Zelensky wants is to get a security guarantee signed and sealed BEFORE he negotiates a settlement that might include some sort of concession over Donbas, but not, definitely not, giving Putin Donbas. But because all talks so far have failed to find a formula for ending the war because of the impasse over land, it might well be the case that some officials in Washington are beginning to think and say that the only possible solution is for Zelensky to give up Donbas. But is this the official line now adopted by Trump or just another controversial ingredient being played around with in Washington? Whatever it is, Zelensky's own political future rests upon him getting that US guarantee and NOT having to give up Donbas. So we are sort of back to square one.

Europe cannot defend itself without the US, says Mark Rutte

With all the hullabaloo about divisions between the US and Europe and the proliferation of commentaries about Europe needing to get on with defending itself and spending gazillions in order to do so, it is a relief to hear someone actually talking realistic sense. Mark Rutte, secretary general of Nato, has stated that Europe cannot defend itself without the might of American military power. He is right, never mind whatever so many so-called experts have been saying. Europe needs the US and the US needs Europe. Not just because there are US military bases all over Europe, including some with stored tactical nuclear weapons, but because the 77-year-old Nato alliance, with the US at its head, is the biggest deterrent to stop Russia and other potential malign nations from launching an attack on European nations. The US-led alliance is the only obstruction to adversaries such as Putin. Weaken the alliance, let alone, carve it up into little bits, would be disastrous for Europe and even more so for the future peace of the world. So, as Rutte says, there is no possibility that European governments can spend the sort of money required to stand up to a Russian invasion. They will for ever rely on the US. Europe of course should spend more on defence but it will never be the same without the American superpower. So, Nato has to survive and the US, under Donald Trump and whoever succeeds him, must always realise that we have to stand together. Talk of breaking away from the US and standing on our own feet here in Britain and elsewhere in Europe is an unrealistic and dangerous notion. BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER - AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES.

The axeing of China's top military leader is huge!

General Zhang Youxia was a favoured son in the eyes of President Xi Zinping. He was vice chairman of the Central Military Commission which is headed by Xi, a combat veteran and a man who, when visiting the West, gave the impression of being superlatively confident that whatever he said or did he had the backing of his leader. Aged 75, he was already well past retirement but Xi wanted him to stay on. Now out of the blue the favoured son is out, finished, under investigation for corruption and who knows what else. The Chinese military hierarchy has been beset with corruption and Xi has made a point of trying to eliminate it for years. But Zhang was never before under suspicion, even though at one point in his career he was in charge of weapons procurement, a golden opportunity for bribery and corruption. There are all kinds of stories doing the rounds about why Zhang has been axed, one of them, reported by The Wall Street Journal, that he passed confidential secrets about China's nuclear weapons to the Americans. This all adds to the drama of the story but it seems beyond belief that a trusted military adviser to Xi would spill nuclear secrets to the US. Indeed, Jake Sullivan, Joe Biden's national security adviser and a very smart guy, told The New York Times that Zhang never revealed anything he shouldn't when they met and nuclear weapons were discussed. He said it was always in very general, broad terms, no secrets divulged. So what is it really about? The obvious anmswer is that Xi has begun to worry that Zhang was surrounding himself with more power than was appropriate and that, therefore, he posed a potential threat to Xi's leadership. Perhaps Taiwan is at the heart of it. Xi wants to take control of Taiwan by 2027, by whatever means, and Zhang, being a combat veteran in the war between China and Vietnam, has maybe been warning a military operation could not be completed without huge risks. We will never know the full story because this is China which likes to keep its secrets secret. But the sacking and imminent charging of Zhang is a mighty blow to the stability of the Xi leadership regime. BUY AND READ AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. CHECK IT OUT ON AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS OR WATERSTONES

No Ukraine war breakthrough in Abu Dhabi

It was a week of realpolitik Trump-style. Greenland sorted (kind of), Gaza, peace-boarded, Venezuela already in the bag, and then it was the turn of Ukraine and Russia. The whirlwind of tough-talking diplomacy had switched from Davos to Moscow to Abu Dhabi. Donald Trump might be back in the US but his special envoys, armed with the president’s formula for ending the war in Ukraine, were under orders to get a deal fixed to stop the killing and destruction as soon as possible.As the envoys from the US, Russia and Ukraine opened the talks on Friday evening in the capital of the United Arab Emirates, none of the pre-signalling indicated that a breakthrough was in the offing, although two days hde been allotted for the meetings, in the expectation that it wouldn't just be a round-robin of all the same familiar arguments. After the first trilateral talks since the invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, ended on the first day, the chief negotiator from Kyiv sounded relatively satisfied with the progress. Rustem Umerov, formerly the minister of defence, said the first session had focused “on the parameters for ending Russia’s war”. The aim of the talks, he said, was to progress towards “a dignified and lasting peace”. The diplomatic language didn’t fool President Zelensky who said it was too early to draw any conclusions. “The key is that Russia must be ready to end the war it started,” he said in a statement in Kyiv. Despite the cautious reactions, there was one new ingredient, and, as a result, the timing of the trilateral session could not have been more apposite. The announcement that Vladimir Putin had been invited to join Trump’s Board of Peace for Gaza ws surely a subtle – not a word normally associated with the US president – hint to the Russian leader that the invitation to involve him as a chosen head of state should come with a quid pro quo: compromise over Ukraine and stop the war. Until now, Putin has shown absolutely no inclination to consider moving one inch from his territoriaL demands. He wants the whole of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine or there will be no ceasefire and no peace settlement. However, if this remains his position, Trump’s arm-twisting approach to diplomacy will suffer a serious setback. Abu Dhabi was not supposed to be just about “frank and useful” talking. Trump wanted it to be the start of proper deal-making. The presence of 64-year-old Admiral Igor Kostyukov, director of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Russian General Staff, (otherwise known as the GRU, responsible for some of the most outrageous assassination and sabotage operations overseas) woas ominous. However, the Trump factor at the talks was now more important than ever after the American president’s further attempt – in Davos - to bring Putin back into the international family of nations. Was Putin prepared for a quid pro quo? Steve Whitkoff, the all-action billionaire business friend of Trump’s, and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, spent hours on Thursday evening talking with Putin after flying to Moscow from Davos. Before he left Davos, Whitkoff commented: “We are at the end now.” Before then flying to Abu Dhabi, he sounded optimistic, summing up what was left to negotiate: “I think we’ve got it down to one issue, and we have discussed iterations of that issue, and that means it’s solvable.” The one issue, of course, is land. There is no obvious solution. Whitkoff’s use of the word “iteration” underlined the multiple attempts that have been made to find a territorial formula for the Donbas region which will satisfy both Putin and Zelensky. On the face of it, there is no possible solution when Putin wants the whole region to become Russian sovereignty, and Zelensky is desperate to hang onto the twelve per cent of Donbas still under the control of Ukrainian forces. Russia occupies almost all of Luhansk, one of two provinces in the region, and about three-quarters of Donetsk. In terms of real estate, Ukraine still controls and defends about 2,550 square miles of land in Donbas, including crucial stronghold, well-defended towns. The only solution to the land issue that has made sense is the idea that both parties would retreat from Donbas and turn the region into a demilitarised zone and convert it into a free economic area. It’s part of Trump’s revised 20-point plan for Ukraine. However, until now, Putin has stuck to his unmovable red line. He says Donbas must be handed to Russia, and he has rejected any thought of ordering his soldiers to withdraw from occupied territory, especially since his forces have made small but significant gains in recent months. As a consequence, Putin has more leverage than Zelensky. Which is why Putin’s negotiator in Abu Dhabi, the man from the GRU, arrived with no remit to offer Zelensky a white dove of peace. Sure enough, aftert the second day of talks, the only message that came out was "No breakthrough." PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER, SEQUEL TO SHADOW LIVES, BOTH STARRING THE AWESOME REBECCA STRONG. AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS AND WATERSTONES.

Could Iran be next on Trump's list - again?

After the exhausting diplomacy bashing in Davos, Donald Trump will be looking elsewhere for some more foreign policy goals, and high on his list seems to be Iran. Again. Having neutered Iran's nukes last summer, and threatened more military action if the security forces in Iran didn't stop killings protesters, there are preparations already underway to place a military strike force in the region for possible further action. The aircraft carrier, USS Abraham Lincoln, should be arriving any day, along with escort warships, and fighter aircraft are being repositioned in the Gulf. There's talk of regime-change. The problem is, the killing of protesters has stopped, for the moment. So it's difficult to see the justification for further attacks on Iran, other than the general dislike of the regime and the wish, for the Iranian people, to give them a better and more humane government. Whatever the motivation, there is no question that, as Trump himself said, there is a US armada on the way and it must be for something. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER. AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES.

Zelensky makes a big mistake

Volodymyr Zelensky, president of Ukraine, has demonstrated to the world that he is a brave and resourceful leader at a time when his country is facing annihilation by Russia. He has travelled non-stop to the capitals of the world to seek support for his battle with Vladimir Putin. He has largely succeeded, winning huge financial backing and deliveries of weapons and munitions from the United States and Europe. Ukraine has survived so far, largely, at least initially, thanks to the coalition of countries who have backed him all the way. However, now after nearly four years of war, Zelensky appears to be exhausted and has begun to turn on his western allies, accusing the Europeans of weakness and failing to stand up sufficiently to the dangers of Putin and his ambitions. He needs to step carefully. Europe, like the US, has been slow on occasions in sending arms to Kyiv. But the western coalition behind him and his countrymen has stood strong against Putin's aggression. All the leaders have warned that the fight in Ukraine is a fight for the security of Europe as a whole. Zelensky needs Europe and the US and if he starts complaining about them, he could find himself on his own. Then the only winner will be Putin. We will get a sense of that when the meeting takes place today in Abu Dhabi between the US, Russia and Ukraine for the first time, examining what might be possible to end this terrible war. This is not the time for Zelensky to criticise Europe. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH MY NEW SPY THRILLER. AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES.