Deterrence isn't working any more

The sight of an American aircraft carrier battle group steaming offshore used to be a pretty credible deterrent to any state or militia planning to cause mayhem in a region. But no longer. The US Navy is in the eastern Mediterrranean and Red Sea in full glory, backed by a few other navies on a much smaller scale, including Britain's, but the rockets and missiles and drones keep coming. The Houthis in Yemen and the various other Iran-backed militia around the region operating under the umbrella of the so-called Axis of Resistance, armed and funded by Tehran, couldn't care less about the superpower on their doorstep. There has been retaliation by the US and Britain against Houthi missile sites and various leaders and foreign ministers, including Lord Cameron, the UK foreign secretary, have declared boldly that the strike-backs were intended to send a strong signal to Tehran. But Tehran and its proxy forces have just laughed in tbeir faces. Strong signal? What strong signal? It has made no difference. This is a seriously worrying moment for the US and its western coalition partners. If aircraft carriers and retaliatory strikes are not deterring these Islamic militia from carrying on with their deadly attacks, what else will? Sanctions have achieved very little in the past. Look at Russia, the West has sanctioned Moscow with everything since the invasion of Ukraine and yet the war goes on and Putin has the firepower to last for ever it seems. So it looks like the Axis of Resistance is going to ignore all the warnings from Washington, certainly while Israel is still at war with Hamas in Gaza.

Iran is anxious to avoid a war with the US

For all its bravado and outrageous aggression through its multiple proxy forces it likes to call the Axis of Resistance, Iran is in no position to fight a full war with the United States and knows it. This is why Tehran has been desperately pleading it had nothing to do with the drone strike on the US outpost in Jordan which killed three soldiers and injured more than 30 others. Whether the denial is true or just a plain lie, it shows the ayatollahs want to muddy the waters for Joe Biden, to make him decide aganst attacking Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps targets in Iran just in case they weren't behind the deaths. Basically, whether Iran actually plotted to kill American soldiers or not, their fingerprints are all over the drone attack. They provide the weapons for all these Islamic militia groups and are probably supplying the intelligence to make sure their proxy forces know what to hit. There's an Iranian warship in the Red Sea which has intelligence equipment on board. So Biden would be in his rights to conclude that Iran was to blame for the deaths of the three Americans and should be punished. But I seriously doubt he will authorise the launching of 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles at IRGC facilities in Iran, as someone in US Congress has been recommending. This is Joe Biden, not Donald Trump, although it is election year and the president will not want to be accused of being soft on Iran!

Middle East war spreading and spreading

Three US soldiers killed and 25 injured at a remote outpost on the Jordan/Syria border! The war in the region is spreading its tenctacles. The militia responsible for the kamikaze drone attack were backed by Iran. Is Iran deliberately trying to create a full-scale war in the Middle East? This is the first time US soldiers have been killed since Israel began its retaliatory war against Hamas in Gaza and it could provoke President Biden into ordering a strike on Iran itself. Iran is behind all the bad stuff happening right now across the Middle East and perhaps it's time to give them a lesson in return. They are getting away with too much, firing up and arming the Houthis in Yemen and doing the same with their own proxy militia in Iraq and Syria. The deaths of three US soldiers could be the turning point and a dangerous moment in the region. If Biden doesn't respond he will be seen as weak, if he overrreacts and there are strikes on Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps facilities in Iran, it could lead to the wider war which the president has been tring to avoid. Iran, on the other hand, has done everything it can to stir up a wider war. Now it seems almost inevitable.

Does Putin really want a world war?

A lot of important, well-qualified people mow seem to think that Vladimir Putin is planning to invade Europe and to take on Nato, probably in the next five to ten years. I assume that some of those making this warning, such as the head of the British army, General Sir Patrick Sanders, are basing their predictions on intelligence which reveals exactly what Putin is thinking and plotting. With no intention of being disrespectful to all these important experts, I seriously believe this to be alarmist nonsense. Putin invaded Ukraine nearly two years ago and is stuck, unable to claim any sort of victory. All the Russian troops have successfuly proved is that they are, eventually, good at building massive defences and firing long-range missiles from safe locations. They have not proved combat ability or logistical efficiency or even in many cases a willingness to fight. The British army is to be reduced to a mere 72,000 soldiers by 2026, and some of our warships have no crews, and the Royal Marines may be disbanded and our two aircraft carriers still have insufficient numbers of fighter aircraft on board. But that doesn't mean Russia is plotting to invade Poland or the Baltics, or, heaven forfend, the United Kingdom. We don't need a "citizens' army" to fight off invading Russian troops for goodness sake. Putin is stuck in Ukraine, losng tens of thousands of soldiers and ruining his economy with the need to build up production of missiles and tank shells. Dare I say it, it's almost in western interests for the war in Ukraine to carry on for ever because it will keep Putin out of mischief. But even so, there is no way Putin can believe he has a good chance of grabbing the Baltic countries. So all this talk of Russia attacking Nato is silly.

Kamala Harris needs to raise her profile by a magnitude of ten

If, as seems to be true, there's a growing disaffection among young voters in the US over the venerable age of the two most likely candidates for the November election, it should be encumbent on both Joe Biden and Donald Trump to focus much more on their chosen vice president running-mate. But, more specifically, Biden should be upping the profile of his running-mate Kamala Harris. If Biden wins the election but is forced for one reason or another to step down, say, half way through his presidency, voters are going to want to feel confident that his Number Two would be able to take over seemlessly and be a strong president. At the mment I doubt there are many Americans who feel like that about Kamala Harris, mostly because her political profile has been so low, almost limbo-low, that they don't really have much idea how good or effective she would be as a shoe-in president. I suspect that a lot of voters will have this in mind if they enter the polling booth with the intention of voting Democrat. With Trump it's not such a big issue. He's a few years younger than Biden and never has a photograph of him stumbling down the stairs from an airplane or wandering off a stage not knowing which way to go. He will choose someone younger than him as his running-mate but he won't even contemplate stepping down prematurely if he wins the White House and, say, falls ill. But for Biden, now in his 80s, age is always going to be a big issue So, step forward, Kamala and show the nation what you are made of.

Nikki Haley on a lonely path

She's right to keep going, provided her donors stick with her, but Nikki Haley is now going to get the full force of Donald Trump's sarcasm and bitter wit as he marches foward to the next primaries and caucuses. It's going to be a lonely path for her, as both Trump and Joe Biden settle down for the real race, a rerun of the 2020 election. She might win something along the way but statistically and realistically, her campaign for the White House is over. But as so many things could change that she believes it makes sense to fight on. Her winning the nomination because Trump falls at the last fence (conviction, prison, Supreme Court ban) would be like the horse that comes through the mist from the back of the field to win the Grand National at Aintree in Liverpool after every other horse has fallen over or lost their jockeys. The horse that famously did that was Foinavon who emerged through the mist to win the Grand National in 1967 at odds of 100-1 after the rest of the field fell by the wayside. Could Haley be the Foinavon of the 2024 election? Right now I'd put money on Trump winning the nomination and the election. But a few dollars/pounds on Haley at 100-1 just might be a gamble worth taking.

Will Joe Biden last the course?

The US newspapers are having a field day speculating about whether Joe Biden will stay the course and fight Trump for the presidency or step down and let a younger candidate try and stop the former president from returning to the White House. But we are only a few months away from nomination day for the Democratic party. Is it really possible or practical for Biden to decide at the last moment not to stand and let someone younger take over? I know US politics are crazy but I can't see Biden doing any such thing. So, even though a large number of American voters don't like the idea of a 2020 rerun with two old men in the race for the White House, that seems most likely to be the scenario facing the electorate later this year. Trump can't escape the "old" tag because recently he has made a few verbal slip-ups which have given his critics ammunition to cast doubt on his mental faculties. Like when he muddled up Nancy Pelosi with Nikki Haley. Several times. All the speculation is that Trump is going to choose a woman to be hs running-mate, so he'll have to make sure he gets her name right! Biden won't have this problem because he said right from the start that Kamala Harris would be his running-mate, and he sees her every day in the White House, so he sould be able to remember her name. Between now and November, watching out for slip-ups by both Biden and Trump is going to be the hottest game in town. He who makes the smallest number of gaffes will probably win the election.