The invisible prime minister with the dullness dividend: Why Sunak’s keeping a low profile

Published

3 years ago

December 10, 2022

admin

He’s done it! It was a low bar to jump over but at least Rishi Sunak has lasted longer as prime minister than Liz Truss.

The nation can be reassured that there will not be a fourth prime minister this year, or even a general election before Christmas, as Boris Johnson subjected the country to in 2019.

This week Sunak passed the new shortest record set by Truss by serving in Number 10 for more than 44 days without resigning.

After the political turmoil brought on by two “disrupter” prime ministers, the public seems pleased by the period of calm which the diligent Sunak has brought with him. In opinion polls he is personally much more popular than his party and about on a par with the leader of the opposition, although Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour is way ahead of the Conservatives.

The people who seem least content, least respectful, and least inclined to give the new prime minister a break are on his own side. He is finding it next to impossible to please the country and the Conservatives at the same time.

Faced with these difficulties Sunak has opted to keep a low profile. Beyond a list of unmissable prime ministerial engagements at home and abroad, he has scarcely been seen in public or on social media. Tory voices have joined his opponents attacking him as an “invisible prime minister”.

Sunak’s ‘dullness dividend’

The circumstances in which he came to power meant that Sunak had no chance of a honeymoon period: a bold 100 days in which he could “hit the ground running” and “come up with fresh ideas”.

Liz Truss had just tried that and crashed the economy.

Sunak and Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor who had already been chosen for him, faced an immediate crisis and a repair job to restore confidence. On the financial front Sunak has achieved what was asked of him.

There has been a “dullness dividend”. Britain’s economic standing is now no worse than it was before the shock of the Truss/Kwarteng mini-budget, interest rate rises are similar to those in equivalent economies, and normal service has resumed on debt markets.

Sunak has kept his head down, moving surreptitiously, because many of his measures – such as putting up taxes and trying to maintain public spending – are “unTory”, according to critics on his own side.

But then Conservative activists never wanted him as leader – after all they rejected him this summer in favour of Truss when they had the chance to vote for him.

Sunak’s paid a price for becoming PM

Sunak was once the rising star of the party. Back then he hired experts to run a slick personal publicity campaign, including videos and postings of his activities as chancellor branded with his signature.

This self-promotion backfired as his relationship with the then prime minister Johnson soured and as their policy differences widened.

Earlier this year “Rishi” was tarnished by being fined along with Johnson for breaking COVID party rules. Around the same time his public image as a future UK prime minister was shattered when the media were pointed towards his wife’s non-dom tax status and his own possession of a US green card.

Tory MPs installed Sunak as party leader and prime minister because the wider public, rather than Tory activists, saw no credible alternative if a general election was to be avoided.

The MPs knew that they had to prevent another ballot of the party membership which would probably have re-imposed the disgraced Johnson on the nation.

Sunak also had to pay a price to get to the top. He was effectively blackmailed into giving key jobs in the cabinet to people who would otherwise have thrown their weight behind another membership ballot, which was the last thing the national interest needed and which he might have lost.

Suella Braverman and Gavin Williamson, who had both previously been sacked from government for misconduct, were the most prominent of these compromise appointments.

They have got in the way of Sunak delivering his promise that “the government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability”.

Williamson has already had to resign for bullying, Braverman is under investigation for similar offences, as is Dominic Raab, whose previous track record barely justified his reappointment as deputy prime minister.

Meanwhile Sunak was unable to find a place in government for his closest ally at Westminster, and former boss, Sajid Javid, who announced this week that he is standing down as an MP.

Beware the Tory man-eating tigers

Sunak has had to strike similar compromises with the broader range of Conservatives in parliament.

Tory MPs have tasted blood so often in ousting four PMs – Cameron, May, Johnson and Truss – that they are the political equivalent of man-eating tigers, unable to stop.

Some of them are already predicting that next spring’s local election results will be so bad that they will have a chance then to get rid of “Rishi” and perhaps replace him with “Boris”. Many have already abandoned hope that the Conservatives can win the next general election and are thinking only of their own skins.

For more than a dozen MPs so far that means not standing for re-election. Quitter Matt Hancock epitomized the prevalent mood of self-interest this week when he lectured the prime minister that he was going because “the Conservative Party must now reconnect with the public we serve.”

Others are trying to bend the government to policies which will go down well with voters in their constituencies even if they are not necessarily in the national interest.

Sunak has little appetite to fight ideological battles

In spite of the notional Conservative majority in the Commons, Sunak’s programme is constantly vulnerable to rebellion and potential defeat.

Shire Tories don’t want house building in their back yard, so this week Sunak U-turned on house building.

Landowners and the construction industry like on-shore wind farms so Sunak U-turned to favour them.

Campaigners in the North East want the jobs generated by a new coal mine in Cumbria, so the government has given it the green light, overruling its own environmental advisors.

Sunak has little appetite to fight ideological battles with his own side in parliament, continuing instead to concentrate on practical problems, away from parliamentary scrutiny where possible.

Business managers have dropped the Schools Bill, pleading pressure of parliamentary time, even though the House is actually sitting for fewer hours than usual, and often goes home at teatime on Wednesday.

Raab’s plans for a British Bill of Rights are set to be shelved, in favour of practical measures on strikes and small boat migrants.

The avoidance of hard hats

Chancellors of the Exchequer concentrate on one big thing, surfacing rarely to go public. Gordon Brown was shocked how constant the demands on him were when he became prime minister.

Former Chancellor Sunak is also finding out the hard way – as was shown by his initial decision, quickly reversed, not to attend the COP 27 meeting in Egypt. Since then he has only been out and about when he can’t avoid it, at the G20, Remembrance Day, and the Lord Mayor’s banquet.

Stung by missteps of his predecessors and his former self, Sunak has let it be known that he will not be donning hard hats and high vis jackets for what have become standard photo opportunities.

He will be hoping that trying to do the right thing, slowly and cautiously, will have political dividends over time, rather than being merely its own reward. As yet there is little sign that his low profile is paying off for the Conservatives.

Sunak’s absence of PR bluster has upset Tory cheerleaders who have come to expect the swagger of a Cameron, Johnson or Truss. But then, in the long run, such overconfident celebrity behaviour did neither them nor the UK much good.

World

EU warns Europe must start building ‘millions of drones’ to defend itself against possible Russian attacks

Published

4 hours ago

June 26, 2025

admin

EU warns Europe must start building 'millions of drones' to defend itself against possible Russian attacks

The EU’s defence commissioner has warned Europe must be capable of building a drone army in case Russia attacks.

Military intelligence has suggested Russian forces could be ready to strike a NATO country within the next five years.

In order to defend themselves, Andrius Kubilius says Europeans will require millions of drones and need to start preparing now.

“Russia can have around five million drones, so we need to have capacities bigger than those in order to prevail,” he told Sky News, warning that if President Putin ordered an attack, the target would face a “battle-tested” Russian army with the ability to use millions of drones”.

The 2022 invasion of Ukraine sparked a revolution in drone warfare.

Facing one of the world’s strongest militaries, the Ukrainians used the cheap, adaptable technology to their advantage.

It estimates its drone units are now responsible for 80% of Russian frontline losses.

Mr Kubilius has visited Ukraine to learn the lessons from the battlefield.

Along the 1200km (745 miles) front line is an area nicknamed “Death Valley”.

“Nothing can move. Everything is controlled by drones. A traditional tank in that zone survives six minutes,” he explained.

This year, Ukraine’s expected to produce more than four million drones.

Contemplating how many units other countries would need, the commissioner used the example of his home country of Lithuania.

The former Soviet republic shares a border of around 900km (559 miles) with Russia and Belarus.

“If Ukrainians need four million for 1200km, we need something like three million drones for one year if the war is starting, if ‘Day X’ is coming,” he said.

To try to stay ahead in the fight, both Russia and Ukraine are constantly updating their drone technology.

For this reason, the commissioner believes that rather than stockpiling drones now, which will go out of date, Europe should instead build up teams of pilots, engineers, and producers ready to scale up production should the time come.

“On the European continent, at the moment, there are only two armies battle-tested with the ability to use millions of drones: one is Russian, which is planning new aggressions; another one is Ukrainian,” said Mr Kubilius.

“We need to learn a lot from Ukraine… how to organise defences against millions of drones, and also how to make your defence industry innovative,” he added.

It’s a point many in the business agree with.

German start-up STARK has been testing loitering munitions or “attack drones” ready to supply to Kyiv.

“It’s all made for easy handling for soldiers, so you don’t have to use any tools on the front line, and you just plug in the rudders,” said STARK’s senior vice president, Josef Kranawetvogl, as he quickly clicked the unit’s tail together.

He spent 18 years in the German military before making the jump to weapons production.

He says staying ahead of the enemy requires tactics and technology to be frequently updated.

“Every day you have to adapt. You have such fast development cycles in Ukraine – two or three weeks, then there’s something new upcoming and you have to be prepared for this.”

Since the start of June, Russia has repeatedly used drone swarms to attack Ukraine.

It involves hundreds of drones hammering cities in one night.

I asked Josef whether he believes NATO’s European members are ready to defend against such an attack.

“I see quite a lot of European armies starting right now to develop or to purchase unmanned systems, and it’s a good development, but it’s all about time. How can we speed up?” he replied.

Close to the border with France, another German start-up, Alpine Eagle, is testing defence drone units for Ukraine.

“This is our interceptor drone,” explained the company’s CEO, Jan-Hendrik Boelens, holding up a prototype which looks a bit like a small black plane. The interceptor is carried underneath a large grey drone.

On-board radar means it can be fired at enemy drones up to 5km (3 miles) away.

Jan thinks that could be a game changer in an aerial battle as it means hostile units could be picked off before they get close.

And he believes NATO is unprepared if one of its countries was to be hit by a wave of drones like those in Ukraine.

“We are absolutely not ready in my view,” he said.

He explained that Ukraine produced around 1.3 million drones a year last year.

“I would be surprised if NATO even bought a thousand drones last year. I think Germany procured, I don’t know, 100, maybe 200. So now you do the math on what that means and how quickly you run out of drones.

“If Ukraine consumed 1.3 million drones per year, that’s 3,000 a day. So, if you have 100 in your inventory, that would not last an hour.”

A spokesperson from the German Defence Ministry said the numbers stated “do not closely reflect reality”.

“Drones are now part of everyday life for soldiers, they are omnipresent and are used extensively in service operations and training,” they added.

Drones are a key part of NATO’s defence plan.

The alliance’s leadership has repeatedly said producing, procuring, and protecting against drones is a priority.

At the NATO summit, members agreed to boost defence spending to 5% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035.

In addition to increasing training and development, NATO Chief Mark Rutte has said he wants more investment in drone technology as well as boosting air defences fivefold.

“We see Russia’s deadly terror from the skies over Ukraine every day, and we must be able to defend ourselves from such attacks,” he told an audience at the summit.

Lessons from Ukraine have prompted members to embrace unmanned technology in various ways.

Britain is one of the countries pledging to put drones front and centre of its new defence plan.

Earlier this month, the government’s Strategic Defence Review outlined a new way forward for British Army warfighting based around a drone-centric 20-40-40 strategy where uncrewed systems are deployed for first wave attacks, before tanks, attack helicopters and other manned platforms arrive on the battlefield.

In essence, the new weapons mix would be 20% traditional heavy platforms (like tanks), 40% single-use expendable drones and munitions, and the remaining 40% reusable, high-end drones.

It’s been confirmed that an extra £2bn will be spent on army drones this parliament.

Defence Secretary John Healey said Britain’s adversaries were working more in alliance and technology was changing how war was fought.

“Drones now kill more people than traditional artillery in the war in Ukraine and whoever gets new technology into the hands of their armed forces the quickest will win,” he said.

This week, the prime minister announced a deal with Ukraine to co-produce drones.

Germany and Denmark have made similar agreements with the German Ministry of Defence, telling Sky News that drones are a top priority.

In a drone showroom in central Berlin, we meet Sven Weizenegger, head of the German military’s cyber innovation hub.

He said they have noticed a boom in pitches from potential suppliers.

Every day, his department receives up to 20 enquiries from companies asking how their products could be used by the military.

He believes things need to move more quickly so soldiers get weapons faster.

“We are very advanced in the innovation process. That means we have a lot of ideas and many companies that are ready to deliver,” he explained. “Unfortunately, what we are not good at right now, due to our current processes, is getting these things into real operations, into frontline use. We need to fix that.”

Germany has promised to turbo-charge defence spending, with the Chancellor pledging to create the “strongest conventional army in Europe”.

Plans announced this week include boosting unmanned systems and air defences.

The German Ministry of Defence said it couldn’t reveal stock levels due to security, but a spokesperson confirmed the country is investing in a range of different units, including signing two contracts for attack drones.

“We are procuring not just a few but quite large quantities and testing them directly with the troops,” the spokesperson added.

However, they agreed with the EU defence commissioner that rather than stockpiling tech which would go out of date, it was better to have a system in place to allow for large quantities to be made quickly in the event of war.

In May, the EU approved a €150bn (£125bn) loan scheme to boost defence production across the bloc.

World

Why hastily declared ceasefires tend to be fragile

Published

2 days ago

June 24, 2025

admin

Why hastily declared ceasefires tend to be fragile

Ceasefires that are suddenly declared tend to be pretty fragile.

Stable ceasefires usually require a lot of preparation so that everyone on both sides knows what is supposed to happen, and – more importantly – when.

And they normally agree on how it will be monitored so one side cannot seize a quick advantage by breaking it suddenly.

Israel-Iran live updates: Trump swears live on camera as he rages at Israel and Iran

Without such preparations, and sometimes even with them, ceasefires will tend to be breached – perhaps by accident, perhaps because one side does not exercise full control over its own forces, perhaps as a result of false alarms, or even because a third party – a guerrilla group or a militia, say – choose that moment to launch an attack of their own.

The important question is whether a ceasefire breach is just random and unfortunate, or else deliberate and systemic – where someone is actively trying to break it.

Either way, ceasefires have to be politically reinforced all the time if they are to hold.

All sides may need to rededicate themselves to it at regular intervals, mainly because, as genuine enemies, they won’t trust each other and will remain naturally suspicious at every twitch and utterance from the other side.

This is where an external power like the United States plays a critical part.

If enemies like Israel and Iran naturally distrust each other and need little incentive to “hit back” in some way at every provocation, it will take US pressure to make them abide by a ceasefire that may be breaking down.

Appeals to good nature are hardly relevant in this respect. An external arbiter has to make the continuance of a ceasefire a matter of hard national interest to both sides.

And that often requires as much bullying as persuasion. It may be true that “blessed are the peacemakers”.

World

Five key takeaways from Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s interview with Sky News

Published

2 days ago

June 24, 2025

admin

Five key takeaways from Volodymyr Zelenskyy's interview with Sky News

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has given a wide-ranging interview to Sky News in which he was asked about the prospect of Russia attacking NATO, whether he would cede land as part of a peace deal and how to force Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table.

The Ukrainian president spoke to chief presenter Mark Austin.

Here are the five key takeaways from their discussion.

NATO ‘at risk of attack’

Mr Zelenskyy said plans for NATO members to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035 are “very slow” and warned Russia could attack a NATO country within five years to test the alliance.

“We believe that, starting from 2030, Putin can have significantly greater capabilities,” he said. “Today, Ukraine is holding him up, he has no time to drill the army.”

But while Mr Zelenskyy conceded his ambition to join NATO “isn’t possible now”, he asserted long term “NATO needs Ukrainians”.

US support ‘may be reduced’

Asked about his views on the Israel-Iran conflict, and the impact of a wider Middle East war on Ukraine, Mr Zelenskyy accepted the “political focus is changing”.

“This means that aid from partners, above all from the United States, may be reduced,” he said.

“He [Putin] will increase strikes against us to use this opportunity, to use the fact that America’s focus is changing over to the Middle East.”

On the subject of Mr Putin’s close relationship with Iran, which has supplied Russia with attack drones, Mr Zelenskyy said: “The Russians will feel the advantage on the battlefield and it will be difficult for us.”

Ukraine war latest: Kyiv launches attacks inside Russia

Trump and Putin ‘will never be friends’

Mr Zelenskyy was sceptical about Mr Putin’s relationship with Donald Trump.

“I truly don’t know what relationship Trump has with Putin… but I am confident that President Trump understands that Ukrainians are allies to America, and the real existential enemy of America is Russia.

“They may be short-term partners, but they will never be friends.”

On his relationship with Mr Trump, Mr Zelenskyy was asked about whether he felt bullied by the US president during their spat in the Oval Office.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

“I believe I conducted myself honestly. I really wanted America to be a strong partner… and to be honest, I was counting on that,” he said.

In a sign of potential frustration, the Ukrainian president added: “Indeed, there were things that don’t bring us closer to ending the war. There were some media… standing around us… talking about some small things like my suit. It’s not the main thing.”

Putin and peace talks

Mr Zelenskyy was clear he supported both a ceasefire and peace talks, adding that he would enter negotiations to understand “if real compromises are possible and if there is a real way to end the war”.

But he avoided directly saying whether he would be willing to surrender four annexed regions of Ukraine, as part of any peace deal.

“I don’t believe that he [Putin] is interested in these four regions. He wants to occupy Ukraine. Putin wants more,” he said.

“Putin is counting on a slow occupation of Ukraine, the reduction in European support and America standing back from this war completely… plus the removal of sanctions.

“But I think the strategy should be as follows: Pressure on Putin with political sanctions, with long-range weapons… to force him to the negotiating table.”

Russia ‘using UK tech for missiles’

On Monday, Mr Zelenskyy met Sir Keir Starmer and agreed to share battlefield technology, boosting Ukraine’s drone production, which Mr Zelenskyy described as a “strong step forward”.

But he also spoke about the failure to limit Russia’s access to crucial technology being used in military hardware.

He said “components for missiles and drones” from countries “including the UK” were being used by Russian companies who were not subject to sanctions.

“It is vitally important for us, and we’re handing these lists [of Russian companies] over to our partners and asking them to apply sanctions. Otherwise, the Russians will have missiles,” he added.