Adam Boulton: Tories trying to open election divide over defence, but Sir Keir Starmer says he is not Jeremy ‘Stop the War’ Corbyn
We have been warned. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s pre-election pitch to voters this week was to place the nation on “war footing”.
On a lightning visit to Poland and Germany, countries redolent of bloody war in Europe, he announced “a completely funded plan” to raise annual UK defence spending to 2.5% of national income over the next five to six years.
Twenty-five years ago this week another UK prime minister also had war fighting on his mind.
Ukraine-Russia war latest: Kyiv moves US tanks away from frontlines after ‘hunter-killer drone’ attacks
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Fully funded’ defence plan
Tony Blair flew to the US to deliver one of the defining speeches of his 10 years in power. His immediate task was to persuade a reluctant President Bill Clinton to commit to NATO’s defence of Kosovo against Serbian aggression.
He set it in the context of a broader ideology which became known as “humanitarian” or “liberal interventionism”.
“We are all internationalists now, whether we like it or not,” he told the Chicago Economic Club gathered in a dingy hotel ballroom – and a global TV audience. “We cannot turn our backs on conflicts and the violation of human rights within other countries if we want still to be secure.”
The contrast in tone is stark between Mr Blair’s positive argument for the use of force in some circumstances and Mr Sunak’s urgent plea that “we must do more to defend our country, our interests and our values”.
The UK’s military options have darkened and narrowed since April 1999. A point encapsulated by Defence Secretary Grant Shapps when he observed our times have moved “from post-war to pre-war”.
Mr Blair was speaking during what some called the “unipolar moment” when the US was considered to be the only global superpower, 10 years before the Iron Curtain had come down, heralding the collapse of the Soviet Union.
China seemed to be anxious to join in the world order which had been established by the Western democracies since 1945. In what were essentially wars of choice, the UK had successfully projected its forces to liberate the Falkland Islands and Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi forces had been ejected from Kuwait.
Tony Blair and Bill Clinton. Pic: Reuters
Blair’s view not vindicated by subsequent events
Mr Blair’s Chicago speech celebrated that “our armed forces have been busier than ever – delivering humanitarian aid, deterring attacks on defenceless people, backing up UN resolutions and occasionally engaging in major wars”.
His view was shared by the then United Nations secretary general Kofi Annan who had suggested UN articles could be re-examined to permit more “interventions” in an interdependent world.
British troops in Afghanistan
British soldiers in Kuwait. Pics: PA
For many Mr Blair’s world view was not vindicated by subsequent events.
There was widespread support for the invasion of Afghanistan after the 9/11 terror attacks on America in 2001, but the UN did not endorse George W Bush and Mr Blair’s expansion of the war on terror to invade Iraq.
In both cases, the interventions did not achieve their long-term aims and left behind destabilised, undemocratic countries. In both Afghanistan and Iraq, British forces failed to fulfil the military objectives which had been set for them.
British soldiers patrol Helmand province in Afghanistan. Pic: Reuters
Tony Blair meets British troops in Basra, Iraq. Pic: PA
Scepticism about intervention
By 2010 there was no public support in the UK or US for “boots on the ground” when instability spread to Libya and Syria, although some aerial operations continued.
In 2013 scepticism about intervention was so great the House of Commons effectively vetoed a missile response to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons in the Syrian conflict.
When Mr Blair spoke in Chicago the so-called “peace dividend” had already been claimed.
Defence spending was down from the 4% of GNP (gross national product) it had been during the Falklands war and when the Berlin Wall fell. UK defence spending however was still comfortably above the 2% target expected of NATO members.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
PM: ‘We cannot be complacent’
Pessimism growing around UK’s ability to defend itself
Since the credit crunch of 2007/8, our defence spending has plunged close to that NATO minimum. Mr Sunak’s announcement would only increase defence spending to the level of the Blair years.
Overall since the year 2000, the number of people employed in the British military has been cut by 30%, heading from 134,000 to 72,000 next year. The army has not been this small since the Napoleonic Wars of the 1800s.
Pessimism has grown about the UK’s diminishing armed forces and our ability to defend ourselves.
In a major report this year MPs on the cross-party Defence and Security Committee reported: “The government risks being unable to build true warfighting and strategic readiness because of the sheer pace of operations, which could threaten the security of the UK. All three services have growing capability shortfalls.”
British troops take part in a NATO peacekeeping patrol along the Kosovo-Serbia border. Pic: Reuters
UK ‘no longer regarded as a top-level fighting force’
There was an outcry when the last defence secretary, Ben Wallace, revealed a senior US general told him this country “is no longer regarded as a top-level fighting force”.
He and his deputy, the armed forces minister James Heappey, have endorsed Mr Sunak’s plan but they are both quitting politics and believe spending should go up further than 2.5%.
Top generals claim the army is becoming too small to fulfil its functions. A former head of the British Army, Sir Patrick Sanders, has called for a significant expansion of civilian “reserve” forces.
Manpower is not everything. Advanced technology cuts the numbers needed and can enhance fighting capacity.
The UK is 29th in the world for the size of its military but rated sixth for its firepower, behind only the US, Russia, China, India and South Korea. Either way personnel and weapons cost money.
Rishi Sunak and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Pic: PA
Tories trying to open up election divide
The Conservatives are trying to open up an election dividing line with Labour over defence spending.
But Sir Keir Starmer has repeatedly stressed his patriotism and his commitment to the defence of the realm. He is not Jeremy “Stop the War” Corbyn.
The Labour leadership have said “we all want 2.5%” spending but they are refusing to confirm how and when it would be paid for unless and until they are in government.
Meanwhile, Mr Sunak’s spending plan has not convinced independent experts.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies doubts he could find the extra money for defence while still cutting taxes and without deep cuts in other spending.
Campaigning promises are perhaps easier to make when polling suggests the Conservatives are unlikely to have to pick up the pieces after winning the election.
George W Bush and Tony Blair. Pic: PA
Middle East events justify government choices about using armed forces
Convincing the electorate of the need to spend more on defence may not be too difficult for either Mr Sunak or Sir Keir.
In Chicago, Mr Blair seemed almost to be making a hypothetical case when he said: “We have learnt twice before in this century that appeasement does not work. If we let an evil dictator range unchallenged, we will have to spill infinitely more blood and treasure to stop him later.”
Awful as subsequent events have been in the Middle East, with hindsight they did justify indisputably the choices which UK governments made about using their armed forces.
Ukrainian soldiers during an exchange of prisoners of war
Ukrainian soldiers fire a mortar. Pics: Reuters
Being involved no longer a matter of choice
Now war has arrived again on European soil. Russia has launched an unprovoked attack on Ukraine and is issuing vicious threats against Ukraine’s allies including the UK.
As yet NATO members are holding back from joining in the fighting. Even so, military aid for Ukraine has placed significant demands on UK defence spending. Being involved is no longer a matter of choice.
Public opinion is preparing for the worst.
This year a majority of those questioned in this country, 53%, told YouGov they expect there will be another world war in the next five to 10 years.
An MP has told Sky News she was attacked online by the Tate brothers after she participated in a debate in the House of Commons about violence against women.
The controversial duo, Andrew and Tristan Tate, are facing charges of rape and human trafficking in the UK – all of which they deny.
But they are still very active online, and according to Sorcha Eastwood, the MP for Lagan Valley, are targeting her.
In a document seen by Sky News, Tristan Tate has highlighted one of the MP’s tweets and writes in private correspondence: “MP, nice target, can we sue her?”
Sorcha Eastwood says at first she thought the replies were from parody accounts and not the Tate brothers.
Her original tweet was about Elon Musk, not the Tate brothers. The MP said Musk’s tweets should be looked at through a counter-extremism lens.
“I was really concerned, I was concerned because to me that is a direct attack for want of a better phrase on me serving my constituents.
“I couldn’t believe that they decided to pick this random Northern Irish MP. The fact that it wasn’t even about them. This is something I didn’t go looking for.
“I think from my perspective, it’s a very, very sinister attempt to shut down important voices in public life, political discourse.”
It was only when she started noticing an uptick in abuse from other accounts she realised she had encountered some of the brothers’ followers.
“I had rape threats. I had death threats. I had people saying I should be hung from a lamppost. I had people saying I should be chopped into liver. I also had people then who were like we’ll waste 15 minutes raping Sorcha Eastwood.”
A representative for the Tate brothers told Sky News that there was no targeted campaign against Sorcha Eastwood
A representative for the Tate brothers told Sky News that there was no targeted campaign against her.
They said: “Ms Eastwood has a distorted view regarding social media if she believes one is required to ‘invite or ask’ people to interact.
“Tristan Tate is entitled to his view in relation to her tweet regarding Elon Musk.”
The self-styled “misogynist influencer” Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan have both been charged with human trafficking, face allegations of trafficking minors, sexual intercourse with a minor and money laundering in Romania.
There is also a European arrest warrant for them as they are facing separate, unrelated charges of rape and human trafficking in the UK. They deny all charges.
Ms Eastwood now worries for others who don’t have a platform like her and who may not feel like they can speak out.
“If this is what has happened to me I have absolutely no doubt that this has happened to others where they have been attempted to be silenced.”
Keir Starmer has previously commented on the Tate brothers’ case in the Commons saying it is “a live issue”, but adding that “the principle is absolutely clear” in relation to whether the brothers should face justice.
Sorcha Eastwood says she wants to see the government do much more to protect against abuse online.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Tate brothers deny wrongdoing
“I think ultimately the government has taken the wrong course on this. They need to step up.
“This should be an issue of national security as far as the radicalisation of young people online. It should be an issue in terms of the levels of misinformation, disinformation and the lack of trust that is had in our politics right across the UK and Europe.
“I want the government to help me, help every other person to crack down on this and get serious about it. And the only way they’ll be able to do that, is by hitting these tech companies in the only language which they understand, which is money and via robust legislation.”
A government spokesperson said: “Violence against women and girls is a scourge on our society which is why we have set out an unprecedented mission to halve these crimes within a decade.
“Tackling illegal abuse both online and offline is central to supporting victims and preventing harm in our communities and we will not hesitate to strengthen laws to deliver this mission.
“Last month, parts of the Online Safety Act came into force meaning companies must take action to protect users from illegal material including extreme sexual violence.
“Further protections from this summer will require platforms to protect children from harmful, misogynistic, and violent content.”
UK
‘It’s just nasty’: Birmingham residents ‘overwhelmed’ by foul stench and massive rats as bins strike rumbles on
In parts of Birmingham, the stench is overwhelming – enough to make you heave.
At a block of flats in Highgate, in Birmingham city centre, we find a mountain of bin liners full of rubbish spewing out of the cavernous bin store, which is normally locked.
Mickel comes out to speak to us, while all around bin liners lie open, with the contents for all to see, including used nappies and rotting food.
Mickel says they’ve had ‘foxes and rats, literally the size of cats’
Outside Mickel’s flat in Highgate, bin liners lie open, spewing out rubbish
We both find it hard to keep talking amid the awful smell.
“We’ve had foxes and rats, literally the size of cats, flies, it’s just nasty, something needs to be done,” he says.
Chris says the situation is ‘overwhelming’ as she’s ‘terrified of rats’
Around the corner, I meet Chris, in her dressing gown, popping the bins into her bin store beneath her flat before work.
She unlocks it, and although it isn’t bursting out on to the street yet, it is getting full.
She says the situation is “overwhelming” as she’s “terrified of rats”. But, even so, she has sympathy for the striking bin workers.
“It’s not an easy job; they must have a heart of gold to do that job,” she says.
“Pay them whatever they need, they deserve it.”
Striking bin workers at Lifford Lane tip, south of the city centre
There’s an awful smell coming from a mountain of bin liners outside Mickel’s flat in Highgate
At Lifford Lane tip, south of the city centre, Brigette has pulled up alongside picketing workers. The back seat of her car is full of rubbish.
She apologises for the terrible waft, mixed with air freshener.
Read more:
Pest controllers ‘feel like an emergency service’
Bin workers strike explained
“It’s very pungent, isn’t it? Not nice,” she admits.
“It’s unfortunate, I have some sympathies for all the parties, but, equally, we have a duty of care to stay clean and tidy.”
She says she has her rubbish and that of her elderly aunt and plans to make weekly trips to the tip until a resolution in this pay dispute between the council and the Unite union is found.
UK
‘US is our closest ally’, Jonathan Reynolds says in reaction to Trump tariffs – but ‘nothing off the table’
The US is “our closest ally” but “nothing is off the table” in response to Donald Trump’s 10% tariffs on imports from the UK, the business secretary has said.
In a statement following the US president’s nearly hour-long address to the world, Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: “We will always act in the best interests of UK businesses and consumers.
“That’s why, throughout the last few weeks, the government has been fully focused on negotiating an economic deal with the United States that strengthens our existing fair and balanced trading relationship.”
Follow the latest following Trump’s tariffs announcement
Mr Reynolds reiterated the statements from the prime minister and his cabinet over the past few days, saying the US is “our closest ally”, and the government’s approach is to “remain calm and committed to doing this deal, which we hope will mitigate the impact of what has been announced today”.
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds says “nothing is off the table” following the tariffs announcement. Pic: PA
But he continued: “We have a range of tools at our disposal, and we will not hesitate to act. We will continue to engage with UK businesses, including on their assessment of the impact of any further steps we take.
“Nobody wants a trade war, and our intention remains to secure a deal. But nothing is off the table, and the government will do everything necessary to defend the UK’s national interest.”
‘Get back round the negotiating table’, say Tories
The Conservative Party’s shadow business and trade secretary described the US president’s announcement as “disappointing news which will worry working families across the country”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Sky’s Ed Conway examines how economies across the world are impacted by tariffs
Andrew Griffith hit out at the government for having “failed to negotiate with President Trump’s team for too many months after the election, failed to keep our experienced top trade negotiator, and failed to get a deal to avoid the imposition of these tariffs by our closest trading partner”.
“The chancellor’s emergency budget of just a week ago with its inadequate headroom is now at risk, casting uncertainty about more taxes or spending cuts,” he continued. “Sadly, it is British businesses and workers who will pay the price for Labour’s failure.”
He called on ministers to “swallow their pride” and “get back round the negotiating table to agree a fair deal to protect jobs and consumers in both the UK and the US alike”.
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey has reacted furiously to Mr Trump’s announcement of a “destructive trade war”, and called on the government to stand up against “Trump’s attempts to divide and rule”.
“The prime minister should bring our Commonwealth and European partners together in a coalition of the willing against Trump’s tariffs, using retaliatory tariffs where necessary and signing new trade deals with each other where possible.”
Speaking on Wednesday evening at a White House event entitled ‘Make America Wealthy Again’, the US president unleashed sweeping tariffs across the globe.
Mr Trump held up a chart detailing the worst offenders – which also showed the new tariffs the US would be imposing.
The UK’s rate of 10% was perhaps a shot across the bow over the 20% VAT rate, though the president’s suggested a 10% tariff imbalance between the two nations. Nonetheless, tariffs of 10% could directly reduce UK GDP by between 0.01% and 0.06%, according to Capital Economics.
A 25% duty on all car imports from around the world is also being imposed from midnight in the US – 5am on Thursday, UK time.
Read more:
World reacts to Trump’s tariff announcement
Tariffs will have consequences for globalisation, the US economy and geopolitics
Trump’s tariffs explained
The UK government had been hoping to negotiate an economic deal with the US in a bid to avoid the tariffs, but to no avail. The government says negotiations will continue.
The Confederation of British Industry said “negotiating stronger trading relationships with all like-minded partners will be foundational to any success”.
The business secretary is expected to make a statement in the House of Commons on Thursday, and we are also expecting to hear from the prime minister.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway