I've left the Whitehall DFLA protest now. There are groups of 30-50 fanning out across London. This was definitely NOT a breakthru for British fascism, despite dog whistle encouragement from right wing tabloids: same blokes, same drunken victim narrative... 1/
2/ I saw 2x Paratroop Regiment berets, 2x Royal Marines berets, 1x RIR all presumably worn by veterans. Meanwhile this guy has the "joke" Nazi Wehrmacht battle flag of "Kekistan" (see #ClearBrightFuture for explanation)...
3/ Almost all violence and animosity aimed at Met Police ...
4/ There were some groups of young football fans/suburban gangs ... but 90% male 40+ and on their third can of Stella by 12:00 - Stay Safe and #NoPasaran
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hegseth's Rammstein speech is a watershed moment for Europe. It means the USA is no longer a reliable ally, even if its democracy survives ... 1/ ... but Hegseth is right on one thing. We now have to spend a lot more on defence 🧵
2/ The FT reports HMG quibbling over 2.3% of GDP on defence and 2.6% - but that's now irrelevant... Trump is demanding 5% and may accept 3.5%... and it's clear what we need to spend it on...
3/ Without the USA as an ally primarily committed to European security, we need Europe to own strategic enablers. Satellites, heavy lift, AWACS, carriers and a reliably independent nuclear deterrent...
UK bond yield opens at 4.9% There is no “bond market crisis” - however, the high and rising yield on UK debt is the result of a long-term loss of confidence after the Truss fiasco and the poor fundamentals left by the Tories and Brexit 1/…🧵
2/ … what’s happening throws Reeves’ budget into a new light. She rightly did a “belt and braces” on fiscal credibility, raising NI to plug the massive gaps left by Hunt - but the bond markets still do not see a growth story. Why? …
3/ ...because key elements of Labour policy are at the design stage: industrial strategy, green energy, workforce... whilel growth is flatlining… and because we have a doom loop built into our policy architecture…
Every stunt Russia has pulled since the US election feels to me like a pre-programmed sequence: the cable cutting, the MRBM attack; destabilisation of Romania, Moldova and now Transnistria 1/ ... hard to know the purpose without intel...
2/ ... at baseline it creates uncertainty, shakes the tree, shows a range of options for escalation... but I keep coming back to Orban's taunt against Zelensky - "this is the most dangerous point of the conflict" - ie a warning of "escalate to de-escalate"...
3/ That was surely an echo of His Master's Voice... while Western governments are refusing to attribute RU blatant attacks. Why? Could be an agreed strategem; could be fear of domestic destabilisation. Either way, Finland has put a stop to that...
What a day! Assad fled. Saydnaya liberated. Russian power in the Middle East evaporating. Yes there's a vacuum, yes there are competing forces but Syrians now have a chance to shape their own future free of Russian/Iranian imperialism ... and Britain's response matters 1/ 🧵
2/ There is every chance that Syria fragments into three or four chaotic states. That's a function of the "multipolar world" the Putin/Xi acolytes on the far left are so fond of. Multipolarity = chaos is the theme of 2023-4. And Trump saying "stay out of it" is delusional...
3/ The P5 powers could - if Russia/China want to show an ounce of responsibility - work with Turkey, Israel and Lebanon to stabilise the situation. Because if Syria as a state falls apart - its currency, treasury and central bank evaporate - that will be a case study in chaos...
Labour's defence industrial strategy framework is meaty: it learns the lessons from dirigist countries and marks a break from DSIS2021 - some highlights: 1/ The trade unions are at the table - and so are regional employment objectives... unions will be on the sector council ... 🧵
2/ It is frank about what is wrong.
3/ It contains a - ahem - reminder to the fiscal authorities that not spending money on defence is a false economy ...
Jeremy and his merry bunch echoing Putin's talking points - so let's take them one by one: 🧵1/ it is Russia who has escalated. Firing ATACMs and Storm Shadows is both Ukraine's right; both have been used before and changing the targeting is incremental. Yet they make no criticism of Putin firing the IRBM. Why? ...
2/ There is no threat of "all out escalation" between NATO and Russia. NATO is not fighting Russia. Nor did NATO supply the missiles fired at Russia: Britain and USA and France did. This is not a semantic difference. NATO is a defensive alliance ...
3/ " The risk of a nuclear attack cannot be ruled out." Attack by whom? If there's a risk of Russia nuking Ukraine surely JC and the sectarians should protest this. Maybe write to a Russian newspaper? It is Putin's strategy to stoke nuclear fears and they are amplifying that...