Adam Boulton: Tories trying to open election divide over defence, but Sir Keir Starmer says he is not Jeremy ‘Stop the War’ Corbyn

Published

1 year ago

April 28, 2024

admin

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

UK

Prince William has had a lot to say this week – but is anyone listening?

Published

5 hours ago

June 28, 2025

admin

Prince William has had a lot to say this week - but is anyone listening?

Prince William has had a lot to say this week, attending three events about the environment as part of London Climate Action Week and giving three speeches.

But I wouldn’t be surprised if you haven’t really heard what he had to say. The eyes of the world have, understandably, been elsewhere.

Conflict, not the climate crisis, has been the primary focus of world leaders and continues to be – a problem you could say for William and all those trying to whip up momentum ahead of COP30 in Brazil, with only four months to go until the UN’s climate conference in November.

It was William and his team who specifically convened a meeting at St James’s Palace on Thursday with the Brazilian ministers in charge of the summit and indigenous leaders from other parts of the world.

With Ed Miliband, the secretary of state for energy security and net zero, just a few seats away, William made a call to action, saying: “We’ve made bold commitments: to halt deforestation, restore ecosystems, and protect 30% of land, sea, and water by 2030.

“But these goals will remain out of reach unless we move from promises to action – grounded in respect, equity, and shared responsibility.

“Looking ahead to COP30 in Belem and beyond, we must act with greater ambition and deeper collaboration. This is a moment for courage.”

When I put it to a palace source that maybe it all feels a bit futile in the current climate, with attentions firmly elsewhere, I was told there is “no change in course” – the prince always has and will continue “to use his platform to spotlight the need to restore the planet”.

In the past, we’ve been more used to his father being more vocal.

The King’s involvement in London Climate Week was more fleeting, albeit involving a handshake with a giant gorilla puppet, and a discussion with the Brazil delegation in which he hinted that he would love to attend the summit in November, saying: “It’s fitting it all in.”

Attendance by either the King or the Prince of Wales hasn’t been confirmed yet, although it’s looking likely William will go. He told one person this week: “I’ll be in the area”, with his Earthshot Prize being held in Rio in the days running up to the climate conference.

But in the coming months, we do now know that father and son will be meeting with one key player, who has certainly voiced very different views on the severity of the climate crisis.

This week, it was confirmed that Donald Trump’s full state visit to the UK will go ahead later this year, likely in September.

His potentially disruptive presence when it came to the climate debate was hinted at on Tuesday, in front of Prince William, during a speech by former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg.

Mr Bloomberg, a global adviser to Earthshot Prize, said: “There’s a good reason to be optimistic, lots of problems around the world, America has not been doing its share lately to make things better, I don’t think. Nevertheless, I’m very optimistic about the future.”

The King and Prince William have worked in this environmental sphere long enough to weather the frustrations of other distractions, a lack of interest or momentum.

I’ll never forget in 2015 ahead of COP21, when Islamic State and Syria were dominating the news agenda, Prince Charles told me very firmly that of course there was a link between the civil war in Syria and climate change.

He said there was “very good evidence indeed that one of the major reasons for this horror in Syria was a drought that lasted for about five or six years, which meant that huge numbers of people in the end had to leave the land”.

“It’s only in the last few years that the Pentagon have actually started to pay attention to this,” he added at the time. “I mean, it has a huge impact on what is happening.”

But as a family, they know how much their global profile and ability to get people in the room can help attract attention that others simply can’t.

It’s easy to be sniffy about that convening power, but as one delegate at an Earthshot event put it, they have an ability to “bring people together not around politics but purpose”. And in a currently noisy, fractured world, it feels like that is needed more than ever.

UK

Sunburn isn’t just red skin – here’s what’s happening underneath the burn

Published

5 hours ago

June 28, 2025

admin

Sunburn isn't just red skin - here's what's happening underneath the burn

The government is warning that the NHS will be under even more pressure this weekend as temperatures soar, so looking after yourself in the sunshine is crucial.

But how much do you know about the science behind sunburn… and how to prevent it?

What is sunburn?

While we all know what sunburned skin looks like – red and sore – it might not be so clear what is happening underneath the skin.

“Essentially, it’s inflammation,” said Dr Rachel Abbott, a consultant dermatologist who specialises in skin cancer for the Cardiff and Vale University health board.

“It’s triggered by ultraviolet radiation, primarily UVB but also by UVA.”

Ultraviolet radiation is carcinogenic and when it is allowed to penetrate the skin, it triggers an inflammatory reaction, said Dr Abbott.

Histamines – chemicals produced by the body’s immune system – and prostaglandins – compounds that help the body deal with injuries and illness – are released as your body begins reacting to the damage.

Although the inflamed, red, itchy skin will fade, those carcinogens will do permanent damage to your DNA, according to Dr Abbott.

“The redness and pain can be managed symptomatically, but that DNA damage is permanent,” she said.

“We’ve all got DNA repair mechanisms in our bodies. But this is why we’re seeing such a massive increase in skin cancer, because [as we get older], the battle between the DNA damage and the skin cells becomes more than the immune system can cope with.”

Since the early 1990s, the number of skin cancer cases in Britain has more than doubled and last year, the number of cases was predicted to hit an all-time high of 20,800, according to Cancer Research UK.

The cancer charity partially attributed the rise in cases to older groups of people knowing “less about the dangers of tanning in their youth”, who “may have taken advantage of the cheap package holiday boom from the 1960s”.

This would lead to increased sun exposure and more damaged DNA, increasing the risk of skin cancer further down the line.

The ‘most effective’ protection (and it isn’t suncream)

There is currently no conclusive treatment to deal with the DNA damage caused by sunburn – although Dr Abbott said there is “exciting” work being done in that area.

Instead, the way to stop yourself from sustaining long-term damage is to protect yourself from UV rays.

“A lot of people associate temperature with the heat of the sun, whereas actually it’s the UV index that’s the critical thing. And that usually peaks around midday,” said Dr Abbott.

Contrary to what some may think (or hope), suncream should be a last resort.

Shade “is the most effective thing”, she said, but if you have to be out in the sunshine, “obviously we recommend hats, clothing and then sunscreen”.

“It is a last resort for those areas that you can’t cover up with clothing and hats, and sunglasses.”

The cancer care charity Macmillan recommends a suncream with a sun protection factor (SPF) of 50, or at least 30, and to reapply it regularly.

“There is no such thing as a safe suntan,” advises the charity.

It also recommends using around six to eight teaspoons of suncream for an adult – one teaspoon for each limb, one for your chest, one for your back and one for your head and neck.

UK

Robbie Williams addresses Glastonbury rumours – as excitement builds for ‘secret’ sets

Published

5 hours ago

June 28, 2025

admin

Robbie Williams addresses Glastonbury rumours - as excitement builds for 'secret' sets

Pulp tried to quash the rumours, Robbie Williams was happy to fuel them – sharing a picture of a blue plaque in his name apparently slapped over a famous Glastonbury sign, before seemingly backtracking.

“30 years later…” he captioned his first social media post early on Friday morning – a reference to his headline-grabbing attendance in 1995.

This was the year Williams was famously pictured partying with Oasis‘s Liam and Noel Gallagher, shunning the boyband shackles with bleached-blonde hair and a blacked-out tooth. The writing was on the wall, and the announcement of his departure from Take That came just a few weeks later.

At Glastonbury this year, is the writing quite literally on the wall for a comeback?

Well, maybe not. A few hours after his post, Williams shared another, less cryptic message to say he would not be performing, along with his list of recommended acts to go and see – The 1975, Busta Rhymes, Charli XCX, Self Esteem and Reverend And The Makers, if you’re interested.

Is he bluffing? Double-bluffing? Who knows, but along with celeb spotting and mud, if there’s one topic of conversation that makes headlines when it comes to Glastonbury, it’s speculation about secret artists. Williams has got everybody talking.

Even before his posts, the Let Me Entertain You singer was among the artists rumoured to be performing secret sets this year, along with Pulp and Haim. Lewis Capaldi and Lorde too, with both “TBA” acts turning out to huge crowds on Friday.

In recent years, these surprise sets have turned into some of the event’s most memorable moments – think Foo Fighters as “The ChurnUps” in 2023, Pulp’s comeback in 2011, and Lady Gaga treating fans to a small performance in one of the festival’s after hours areas, Shangri-La, in 2009.

Franz Ferdinand, famous for hits including Take Me Out and Do You Want To in the mid-2000s, were the first to do it back in 2008. This was actually due to Pete Doherty’s band Babyshambles pulling out last-minute, but the approach to announcing the switch was, at the time, a novel one.

While officially, the act was “TBA”, frontman Alex Kapranos wasn’t great at keeping the secret, worried people might not turn up. He and bandmates handed out fliers, and word spread.

“We played on the Park Stage and we thought, ‘nobody’s going to know we’re playing’,” Kapranos told Sky News ahead of a return performance on Friday. “It actually ended up being one of the most amazing gigs we’ve ever played, people were so up for it and going crazy.

“We weren’t keeping it secret. We were walking about like, ‘we’re playing later on, check it out’. We’re a band from Glasgow called Franz Ferdinand.”

These now not-so-secret performances have become bigger and bigger as each festival rolls around, with leaks making headlines in the run-up to the event.

Providing handy tips and hints – and often eventually confirmation, just in time for fans to be in position – is the Secret Glasto team. They have no official ties to Glastonbury, but over the years have become a reliable source of information.

The account’s founder, who now works in a team of six, spoke to us on site – incognito, of course.

“We’ve got our own sources and we can start checking things because we’ve now had enough years that we can check in with several people,” he said. “And they trust us because we are quite sensible with when we time announcements, which I think is the key thing.”

Sometimes acts themselves will confirm, they said. Their success rate for predictions is “in the low 90%” – but dragged down mainly by inexperience in their first year, which was 2014.

Capaldi’s comeback yesterday, two years after struggling on stage at Glastonbury in 2023, was a special moment.

“It was really, really heartwarming to see him get back up,” Secret Glasto said. “There was such goodwill in the crowd and it was just magical. It’s just what secret sets should be about.”

On Saturday evening, a non-existent act called Patchwork have a pretty important billing just before Raye and then headliner Neil Young on the Pyramid Stage.

Pulp keyboard player Candida Doyle dampened rumours by reportedly saying in an interview earlier this month Glastonbury “weren’t interested” in booking the band.

But is this true?

“It happens a few times,” Secret Glasto said, of artists maybe telling little white lies to keep the secret for as long as possible. “They’ve got to keep the suspense somehow…

“Sources that we got for Pulp were really, really strong. It’s just so exciting for us, for the whole team. This is the most exciting secret set that Glastonbury’s ever done.”

It’s a fine balance – not spoiling the surprise but giving fans enough time to get where they want to be. When a festival is this big – home to around 200,000 people over the weekend – at a lot of stages, fans need to be in place early.

“The point is to always make sure people can get to the set if they wanted to.” But if a huge artist is going to surprise fans on a very small stage, sometimes they have to keep schtum for safety concerns over huge crowds. “Sometimes we’re like, we can’t print this.”

So, will Williams be playing? The rumour is that he could be joining his mate Rod Stewart, who is performing on the Pyramid Stage in the “legends” slot on Sunday.

“Robbie Williams entered this area without accreditation, authorisation, or alignment with prevailing taste,” according to the blue plaque in his social media tease, of his attendance in 1995. “His presence was uninvited, unofficial and ultimately inevitable.”

In his candid documentary series, and biopic Better Man, both released last year, Williams has been open about his struggles with fame and imposter syndrome, and how as an artist known for pop he craved respect from those seen as more credible at a time when indie music reigned.

Officially this year, there is no Robbie Williams on the line-up. Unofficially, who knows? But 30 years since his partying with the Gallaghers, pop music is embraced – and there would be a lot of love for the star if he did make an appearance now.