And what on Earth would happen if Trump invaded Panama? Such an act would be an illegal war of aggression under international law. It would have as much justification as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Would the UK and Europe respond with full economic sanctions? Would they kick US forces out of Europe? Is that the end of NATO?
No, see Iraq etc
You presumably mean the second Gulf war. Good point. However, I note GW Bush’s administration spent time and effort building up an argument for a just war and establishing a plausible casus belli. There was a lot of sympathy for the US after 9/11. While many countries opposed the action, the US was joined by the UK, Australia, Spain, Poland, Japan, Italy, Turkey etc. (Indeed, I note the “coalition of the willing” included both Panama and Denmark, both currently threatened by Trump, although not Canada.)
US action against Panama is not going to have support from any of these additional countries. There is no jus ad bellum. It’s not comparable with the second Gulf war, the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Grenada or any other US action since WWII I can think of.
The only way to take the Panama Canal back is through investment to cure its lack of freshwater. Water levels in 2024 were at 110 year lows. This means the largest vessels are at risk of grounding.
It would be very Trumpian for Panama to be invaded - for an asset whose time has been and gone. Just the threa will likely spur attempts to build alternatives, such as through Nicaragua
or (perhaps less likely to be intimidated by threat of invasion), through Mexico's Interoceanic Corridor of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (CIIT). This is a much cheaper option (US $7.5 billion), by rather than building a canal that dries up, instead building rail links to transport cargo containers across this narrow point of Mexico.
There’s a nice sort of symmetry with our own Suez adventure here.
Panama = Suez Greenland = the Falklands
Both spelled disaster for the invading government.
I find it staggering that the Tory administration of 2010-2015 was so unprepared for all this.
Not only was Trump already in view in 2015 when the Referendum was called, but its campaign.was conducted in tandem with Trumpites. Now not only does Trump want to remove the last vestiges of British and French influence in North America and occupy an EU nation, but his sidekick also wants to take.more immediate control over Britain itself. It was the biggest British strategic blunder in 75 years.
I think we'll all chuckle if we hear Trump described as an 'isolationist' again. He's surely planning the greatest land conquests in US history.
Texas? Louisiana Purchase?
Canada, Panama, Greenland
and now a hint at the UK by his sidekick and he has mentioned invading Mexico not that long ago.
And he isn't in office yet. I think that wins on both area and population.
Look out Australia I think he is after you next.
Off course it will all come to nought. I expect his presidency will be a shambles of infighting, lots of noise and nothing will actually happen. I hope so anyway.
Is there any chance we can persuade him to take NI off our hands? “Our” in this context is probably the UK and the RoI….
Take Scotland pretty please
So Trumpian ownership is preferable to English ownership. I thought you were an advocate of independence rather than "a new boss who is the same as the old boss".
Independence would be best option, but being 51st state would be better than being in UK in my humble opinion.
Interesting. I thought you would be more pro-european than u.s.
I assume our Malc already has private health insurance.
Denmark is "open to dialogue" about Greenland, it says.
Trump will love that, and Musk may push him on to taking a tougher line with Canada.
Oh Denmark, Denmark. What works in the EU (start a dialogue in order to kick the issue into the long grass) isn't going to work with Trump. The right answer would have been to threaten to ban the export of Ozempic and LEGO to the USA.
Ed Conway @EdConwaySky · 2h Still plenty of appetite for UK debt among investors. Today's auction - £4.25bn of 5 year govt debt - was covered three times (eg three bids for each available bond). Perhaps that's to be expected with interest rates of 4.49%(!)
The US has alot of debt maturing in 2025 of which over half is in the first 3 months.
Stormy weather ahead ?
The incoming administration's tax plans - essentially rolling forward almost all of the TCJA cuts and adding in a few new ones while maintaining or increasing spending - herald a stepchange even over the massive deficit rises in both the 2016-2020 and 2020-2024 terms. The US does have the benefit of stronger GDP growth and a reserve currency to shield itself, but even so. Their deficit numbers make the UK look like the picture of fiscal rectitude.
To be fair, most of the G7's deficit numbers make the UK like the picture of fiscal rectitude, with the exception of that permanent picture of fiscal constipation Germany.
Rightly or wrongly, Trump largely got a pass for his extraordinary fiscal irresponsibility the first time around, because of Covid.
That seems to have been extended to him this time around, up until the point where people have to get to grips with the reality of his actually taking office.
It's an interesting test of global market appetite. The numbers are eye watering. Japan is able to fund its vast government debt because it borrows off its own savers. Americans don't save, so the US has to borrow internationally.
My guess is that the party goes on, until and unless the US suffers a growth shock. Trade war could deliver that, as might actual war. Or a drift towards crony capitalism and greater regulatory uncertainty for investors (see his comments on wind farms), which is a risk this time round.
Chunks of the US economy are doing very well. Tech sector is storming along, for example. Others not so much.
One thing you get told by climbers/hikers in Australia/California is that a wildfire can move at 15mph. Take the warnings seriously.
Actually it's much worse than that. In Australia the gum trees are full of super flammable sap so they literally explode when it gets hot enough, meaning fires can expand at the speed of these explosions, in a chain reaction. Some fires have been known to spread faster than a speeding car. Terrifying!
On topic. Here is my idea - Every 5 years, local authorities should be allowed to hold an auction for the de-listing of 2% of their Grade II listed buildings. This would re-generate urban areas and provide an income stream to the councils independent of central government.
Yet would not be worth it if it led to historic buildings being knocked down or altered beyond recognition
The historically worthwhile buildings are Grade I. I am thinking more of the current ludicrous cases where developers can basically build a new building, but have to keep the current facade.
We have a doubly ludicrous case where the facade was kept but encased in glass...
One thing you get told by climbers/hikers in Australia/California is that a wildfire can move at 15mph. Take the warnings seriously.
That is faster than I Can cycle on the flat when cycling to work, I can do around 12.5 MPH (I am nearly 60)
My brother in law is a Plod in South Australia and during the dry season regularly has to go out spotting to see if there are any fires. He has said when they get going they can be terrifying and very very quick.
On topic. Here is my idea - Every 5 years, local authorities should be allowed to hold an auction for the de-listing of 2% of their Grade II listed buildings. This would re-generate urban areas and provide an income stream to the councils independent of central government.
Yet would not be worth it if it led to historic buildings being knocked down or altered beyond recognition
The historically worthwhile buildings are Grade I. I am thinking more of the current ludicrous cases where developers can basically build a new building, but have to keep the current facade.
We have a doubly ludicrous case where the facade was kept but encased in glass...
On topic. Here is my idea - Every 5 years, local authorities should be allowed to hold an auction for the de-listing of 2% of their Grade II listed buildings. This would re-generate urban areas and provide an income stream to the councils independent of central government.
Yet would not be worth it if it led to historic buildings being knocked down or altered beyond recognition
The historically worthwhile buildings are Grade I. I am thinking more of the current ludicrous cases where developers can basically build a new building, but have to keep the current facade.
We have a doubly ludicrous case where the facade was kept but encased in glass...
This header reminded me of an odd bit from Ernie Pyle's "Brave Men", written shortly after D-Day: "A street scene in Cherbourg looks so much like the Hollywood sets of old European cities that the perspective is reversed and it seems that Cherbourg has been copied from an old movie set. It's the same with the Norman architecture. The houses aren't so smooth and regular and nice as California homes of Norman design. When I looked at them I felt, before catching myself, that they had copied our California Norman homes and not done too good a job." (p. 415) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_Pyle
On topic. Here is my idea - Every 5 years, local authorities should be allowed to hold an auction for the de-listing of 2% of their Grade II listed buildings. This would re-generate urban areas and provide an income stream to the councils independent of central government.
Yet would not be worth it if it led to historic buildings being knocked down or altered beyond recognition
The historically worthwhile buildings are Grade I. I am thinking more of the current ludicrous cases where developers can basically build a new building, but have to keep the current facade.
We have a doubly ludicrous case where the facade was kept but encased in glass...
And what on Earth would happen if Trump invaded Panama? Such an act would be an illegal war of aggression under international law. It would have as much justification as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Would the UK and Europe respond with full economic sanctions? Would they kick US forces out of Europe? Is that the end of NATO?
No, see Iraq etc
You presumably mean the second Gulf war. Good point. However, I note GW Bush’s administration spent time and effort building up an argument for a just war and establishing a plausible casus belli. There was a lot of sympathy for the US after 9/11. While many countries opposed the action, the US was joined by the UK, Australia, Spain, Poland, Japan, Italy, Turkey etc. (Indeed, I note the “coalition of the willing” included both Panama and Denmark, both currently threatened by Trump, although not Canada.)
US action against Panama is not going to have support from any of these additional countries. There is no jus ad bellum. It’s not comparable with the second Gulf war, the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Grenada or any other US action since WWII I can think of.
The only way to take the Panama Canal back is through investment to cure its lack of freshwater. Water levels in 2024 were at 110 year lows. This means the largest vessels are at risk of grounding.
It would be very Trumpian for Panama to be invaded - for an asset whose time has been and gone. Just the threa will likely spur attempts to build alternatives, such as through Nicaragua
or (perhaps less likely to be intimidated by threat of invasion), through Mexico's Interoceanic Corridor of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (CIIT). This is a much cheaper option (US $7.5 billion), by rather than building a canal that dries up, instead building rail links to transport cargo containers across this narrow point of Mexico.
There’s a nice sort of symmetry with our own Suez adventure here.
Panama = Suez Greenland = the Falklands
Both spelled disaster for the invading government.
I find it staggering that the Tory administration of 2010-2015 was so unprepared for all this.
Not only was Trump already in view in 2015 when the Referendum was called, but its campaign.was conducted in tandem with Trumpites. Now not only does Trump want to remove the last vestiges of British and French influence in North America and occupy an EU nation, but his sidekick also wants to take.more immediate control over Britain itself. It was the biggest British strategic blunder in 75 years.
I think we'll all chuckle if we hear Trump described as an 'isolationist' again. He's surely planning the greatest land conquests in US history.
Texas? Louisiana Purchase?
Canada, Panama, Greenland
and now a hint at the UK by his sidekick and he has mentioned invading Mexico not that long ago.
And he isn't in office yet. I think that wins on both area and population.
Look out Australia I think he is after you next.
Off course it will all come to nought. I expect his presidency will be a shambles of infighting, lots of noise and nothing will actually happen. I hope so anyway.
Is there any chance we can persuade him to take NI off our hands? “Our” in this context is probably the UK and the RoI….
Take Scotland pretty please
So Trumpian ownership is preferable to English ownership. I thought you were an advocate of independence rather than "a new boss who is the same as the old boss".
Independence would be best option, but being 51st state would be better than being in UK in my humble opinion.
Interesting. I thought you would be more pro-european than u.s.
I assume our Malc already has private health insurance.
I do indeed and Dental
What passes for health insurance in the U.K. is nearly always a long, long way from US insurance.
Bet yours doesn’t cover serious, long term hospital stays.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic British territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It shows us, more than any other story, the sort of people and institutions that Starmer is desperate, utterly utterly desperate to be liked by.
And what on Earth would happen if Trump invaded Panama? Such an act would be an illegal war of aggression under international law. It would have as much justification as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Would the UK and Europe respond with full economic sanctions? Would they kick US forces out of Europe? Is that the end of NATO?
No, see Iraq etc
You presumably mean the second Gulf war. Good point. However, I note GW Bush’s administration spent time and effort building up an argument for a just war and establishing a plausible casus belli. There was a lot of sympathy for the US after 9/11. While many countries opposed the action, the US was joined by the UK, Australia, Spain, Poland, Japan, Italy, Turkey etc. (Indeed, I note the “coalition of the willing” included both Panama and Denmark, both currently threatened by Trump, although not Canada.)
US action against Panama is not going to have support from any of these additional countries. There is no jus ad bellum. It’s not comparable with the second Gulf war, the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Grenada or any other US action since WWII I can think of.
The only way to take the Panama Canal back is through investment to cure its lack of freshwater. Water levels in 2024 were at 110 year lows. This means the largest vessels are at risk of grounding.
It would be very Trumpian for Panama to be invaded - for an asset whose time has been and gone. Just the threa will likely spur attempts to build alternatives, such as through Nicaragua
or (perhaps less likely to be intimidated by threat of invasion), through Mexico's Interoceanic Corridor of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (CIIT). This is a much cheaper option (US $7.5 billion), by rather than building a canal that dries up, instead building rail links to transport cargo containers across this narrow point of Mexico.
There’s a nice sort of symmetry with our own Suez adventure here.
Panama = Suez Greenland = the Falklands
Both spelled disaster for the invading government.
I find it staggering that the Tory administration of 2010-2015 was so unprepared for all this.
Not only was Trump already in view in 2015 when the Referendum was called, but its campaign.was conducted in tandem with Trumpites. Now not only does Trump want to remove the last vestiges of British and French influence in North America and occupy an EU nation, but his sidekick also wants to take.more immediate control over Britain itself. It was the biggest British strategic blunder in 75 years.
I think we'll all chuckle if we hear Trump described as an 'isolationist' again. He's surely planning the greatest land conquests in US history.
Texas? Louisiana Purchase?
Canada, Panama, Greenland
and now a hint at the UK by his sidekick and he has mentioned invading Mexico not that long ago.
And he isn't in office yet. I think that wins on both area and population.
Look out Australia I think he is after you next.
Off course it will all come to nought. I expect his presidency will be a shambles of infighting, lots of noise and nothing will actually happen. I hope so anyway.
Is there any chance we can persuade him to take NI off our hands? “Our” in this context is probably the UK and the RoI….
Take Scotland pretty please
So Trumpian ownership is preferable to English ownership. I thought you were an advocate of independence rather than "a new boss who is the same as the old boss".
Independence would be best option, but being 51st state would be better than being in UK in my humble opinion.
Interesting. I thought you would be more pro-european than u.s.
He literally doesn't care as long as Scotland is independent from England.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
I don't understand why the government is so desperate for a deal. If Mauritius won't play ball, they can hardly invade the place.
Starmer won't, Trump might though
An American invasion of Diego Garcia?
Errrrrrr….
WFH military conquest...
Just send an email.
Shortest invasion ever
12:00:00.00000 Start 12.00:00.00001 End. Medals and coffee
Apparently the Anglo-Zanzibar War was approx. 38-45 minutes long and was the shortest war in history. Perhaps the US wants to grab that record as well?
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
I don't understand why the government is so desperate for a deal. If Mauritius won't play ball, they can hardly invade the place.
Perhaps Sir Keir is playing 12D chess: fervently push for a deal that you secretly know is going to be rejected. That way we keep the Chagos Island, Sir Keir keeps his reputation as an internationalist and the Right have the wind taken out of their sails - Nigel and Kemi can hardly complain if he doesn't implement a deal that they wanted to strangle.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It was of course Truss who kicked off the negotiations as PM, surprising everyone.
One surprising outcome of Liz Truss’s brief and ill-fated period as UK Prime Minister was her decision to begin negotiations with Mauritius over the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands. Despite international pressure and various legal judgements, the UK has consistently refused to do this, and her decision surprised many people.
And what on Earth would happen if Trump invaded Panama? Such an act would be an illegal war of aggression under international law. It would have as much justification as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Would the UK and Europe respond with full economic sanctions? Would they kick US forces out of Europe? Is that the end of NATO?
No, see Iraq etc
You presumably mean the second Gulf war. Good point. However, I note GW Bush’s administration spent time and effort building up an argument for a just war and establishing a plausible casus belli. There was a lot of sympathy for the US after 9/11. While many countries opposed the action, the US was joined by the UK, Australia, Spain, Poland, Japan, Italy, Turkey etc. (Indeed, I note the “coalition of the willing” included both Panama and Denmark, both currently threatened by Trump, although not Canada.)
US action against Panama is not going to have support from any of these additional countries. There is no jus ad bellum. It’s not comparable with the second Gulf war, the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Grenada or any other US action since WWII I can think of.
The only way to take the Panama Canal back is through investment to cure its lack of freshwater. Water levels in 2024 were at 110 year lows. This means the largest vessels are at risk of grounding.
It would be very Trumpian for Panama to be invaded - for an asset whose time has been and gone. Just the threa will likely spur attempts to build alternatives, such as through Nicaragua
or (perhaps less likely to be intimidated by threat of invasion), through Mexico's Interoceanic Corridor of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (CIIT). This is a much cheaper option (US $7.5 billion), by rather than building a canal that dries up, instead building rail links to transport cargo containers across this narrow point of Mexico.
There’s a nice sort of symmetry with our own Suez adventure here.
Panama = Suez Greenland = the Falklands
Both spelled disaster for the invading government.
I find it staggering that the Tory administration of 2010-2015 was so unprepared for all this.
Not only was Trump already in view in 2015 when the Referendum was called, but its campaign.was conducted in tandem with Trumpites. Now not only does Trump want to remove the last vestiges of British and French influence in North America and occupy an EU nation, but his sidekick also wants to take.more immediate control over Britain itself. It was the biggest British strategic blunder in 75 years.
I think we'll all chuckle if we hear Trump described as an 'isolationist' again. He's surely planning the greatest land conquests in US history.
Texas? Louisiana Purchase?
Canada, Panama, Greenland
and now a hint at the UK by his sidekick and he has mentioned invading Mexico not that long ago.
And he isn't in office yet. I think that wins on both area and population.
Look out Australia I think he is after you next.
Off course it will all come to nought. I expect his presidency will be a shambles of infighting, lots of noise and nothing will actually happen. I hope so anyway.
Is there any chance we can persuade him to take NI off our hands? “Our” in this context is probably the UK and the RoI….
Take Scotland pretty please
So Trumpian ownership is preferable to English ownership. I thought you were an advocate of independence rather than "a new boss who is the same as the old boss".
Independence would be best option, but being 51st state would be better than being in UK in my humble opinion.
Interesting. I thought you would be more pro-european than u.s.
He literally doesn't care as long as Scotland is independent from England.
Just like any Scottish "nationalist".
Don’t care if the ultimate power is in Brussels or Washington, so long as it isn’t in “Westminster”.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It shows us, more than any other story, the sort of people and institutions that Starmer is desperate, utterly utterly desperate to be liked by.
I keep thinking my hatred for Starmer has reached a new and incendiary peak and then he manages to be even more contemptible
Who do they think they are kidding. The EU is weak and divided and Ukraine has shone this like a belisha beacon.
No-one believes this baloney. The EU would pop out a few statements and let the US do whatever it wants.
While the EU (or at least the huge majority of it) is under the US security umbrella the hard and cold truth of the matter is that it can’t do much in response to America dictating terms on anything. That is the cold, hard reality of the situation.
We all have gotten quite used to living in a world where we can believe in the rules based international order and that the US is nice and liberal and free and respectful of allies and doesn’t do bad things*, but since WWII we have essentially lived under the protection and dominance of a bigger and more powerful power. It’s just that they haven’t egregiously wielded that power against us**.
That may change, hence why Europe needs to start getting real about its own security.
* of course, it does, but we all conveniently forget these or rationalise them because there are actors out there who do worse. ** much.
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It shows us, more than any other story, the sort of people and institutions that Starmer is desperate, utterly utterly desperate to be liked by.
Are we not doing it under US orders for whatever reason?
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It was of course Truss who kicked off the negotiations as PM, surprising everyone.
One surprising outcome of Liz Truss’s brief and ill-fated period as UK Prime Minister was her decision to begin negotiations with Mauritius over the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands. Despite international pressure and various legal judgements, the UK has consistently refused to do this, and her decision surprised many people.
Perhaps she found her habit as international trade secretary - making crap deals with foreign countries that didn't remotely benefit Britain - difficult to shake off.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It shows us, more than any other story, the sort of people and institutions that Starmer is desperate, utterly utterly desperate to be liked by.
I keep thinking my hatred for Starmer has reached a new and incendiary peak and then he manages to be even more contemptible
I expect all the union leaders will be rubbing their hands together at how awful the Gov't is at negotiating too.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
I don't understand why the government is so desperate for a deal. If Mauritius won't play ball, they can hardly invade the place.
They think they have to obey "international law".
At a time when almost everyone involved in “international law” is now highly political and pushing a very specific anti-West agenda.
Everyone is complaining about Elon Musk getting involved in international politics, albeit with a loud megaphone rather than with money and meetings behind the scenes at Davos, yet never mention the likes of Goerge Soros and Bill Gates getting involved in international politics.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It shows us, more than any other story, the sort of people and institutions that Starmer is desperate, utterly utterly desperate to be liked by.
Are we not doing it under US orders for whatever reason?
Eh ? The US Gov't is about to change (dramatically !) in 12 days time ?
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It was of course Truss who kicked off the negotiations as PM, surprising everyone.
One surprising outcome of Liz Truss’s brief and ill-fated period as UK Prime Minister was her decision to begin negotiations with Mauritius over the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands. Despite international pressure and various legal judgements, the UK has consistently refused to do this, and her decision surprised many people.
Perhaps she found her habit as international trade secretary - making crap deals with foreign countries that didn't remotely benefit Britain - difficult to shake off.
It is perfectly possible to do non-crap deals. I can easily imagine one for the Chagos, for example.
Giving people hundreds of millions of pounds to take something that has value off your hands is not the only possible deal.
Who do they think they are kidding. The EU is weak and divided and Ukraine has shone this like a belisha beacon.
No-one believes this baloney. The EU would pop out a few statements and let the US do whatever it wants.
While the EU (or at least the huge majority of it) is under the US security umbrella the hard and cold truth of the matter is that it can’t do much in response to America dictating terms on anything. That is the cold, hard reality of the situation.
We all have gotten quite used to living in a world where we can believe in the rules based international order and that the US is nice and liberal and free and respectful of allies and doesn’t do bad things*, but since WWII we have essentially lived under the protection and dominance of a bigger and more powerful power. It’s just that they haven’t egregiously wielded that power against us**.
That may change, hence why Europe needs to start getting real about its own security.
* of course, it does, but we all conveniently forget these or rationalise them because there are actors out there who do worse. ** much.
Realpolitik works both ways. The US faces the unedifying prospect (for all of us) of driving Europe into the arms of China if it tries to take things too far. Soft power hasn’t completely disappeared.
We’re in danger of making the same assumptions of US invincibility that we used to make about the Soviet Union.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It shows us, more than any other story, the sort of people and institutions that Starmer is desperate, utterly utterly desperate to be liked by.
Are we not doing it under US orders for whatever reason?
Eh ? The US Gov't is about to change (dramatically !) in 12 days time ?
Yeah. The Biden administration seemed very keen and rumours were even insistent. It just makes more sense to me that Starmer et al are keen to be liked by the Biden administration and current US military establishment, than the people you have in mind. I could be wrong.
And what on Earth would happen if Trump invaded Panama? Such an act would be an illegal war of aggression under international law. It would have as much justification as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Would the UK and Europe respond with full economic sanctions? Would they kick US forces out of Europe? Is that the end of NATO?
No, see Iraq etc
You presumably mean the second Gulf war. Good point. However, I note GW Bush’s administration spent time and effort building up an argument for a just war and establishing a plausible casus belli. There was a lot of sympathy for the US after 9/11. While many countries opposed the action, the US was joined by the UK, Australia, Spain, Poland, Japan, Italy, Turkey etc. (Indeed, I note the “coalition of the willing” included both Panama and Denmark, both currently threatened by Trump, although not Canada.)
US action against Panama is not going to have support from any of these additional countries. There is no jus ad bellum. It’s not comparable with the second Gulf war, the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Grenada or any other US action since WWII I can think of.
The only way to take the Panama Canal back is through investment to cure its lack of freshwater. Water levels in 2024 were at 110 year lows. This means the largest vessels are at risk of grounding.
It would be very Trumpian for Panama to be invaded - for an asset whose time has been and gone. Just the threa will likely spur attempts to build alternatives, such as through Nicaragua
or (perhaps less likely to be intimidated by threat of invasion), through Mexico's Interoceanic Corridor of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (CIIT). This is a much cheaper option (US $7.5 billion), by rather than building a canal that dries up, instead building rail links to transport cargo containers across this narrow point of Mexico.
There’s a nice sort of symmetry with our own Suez adventure here.
Panama = Suez Greenland = the Falklands
Both spelled disaster for the invading government.
I find it staggering that the Tory administration of 2010-2015 was so unprepared for all this.
Not only was Trump already in view in 2015 when the Referendum was called, but its campaign.was conducted in tandem with Trumpites. Now not only does Trump want to remove the last vestiges of British and French influence in North America and occupy an EU nation, but his sidekick also wants to take.more immediate control over Britain itself. It was the biggest British strategic blunder in 75 years.
I think we'll all chuckle if we hear Trump described as an 'isolationist' again. He's surely planning the greatest land conquests in US history.
Texas? Louisiana Purchase?
Canada, Panama, Greenland
and now a hint at the UK by his sidekick and he has mentioned invading Mexico not that long ago.
And he isn't in office yet. I think that wins on both area and population.
Look out Australia I think he is after you next.
Off course it will all come to nought. I expect his presidency will be a shambles of infighting, lots of noise and nothing will actually happen. I hope so anyway.
Is there any chance we can persuade him to take NI off our hands? “Our” in this context is probably the UK and the RoI….
Take Scotland pretty please
So Trumpian ownership is preferable to English ownership. I thought you were an advocate of independence rather than "a new boss who is the same as the old boss".
Independence would be best option, but being 51st state would be better than being in UK in my humble opinion.
Interesting. I thought you would be more pro-european than u.s.
He literally doesn't care as long as Scotland is independent from England.
Just like any Scottish "nationalist".
Don’t care if the ultimate power is in Brussels or Washington, so long as it isn’t in “Westminster”.
Indeed. "Westminster", of course, always being understood as a metonym for "the English".
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
I don't understand why the government is so desperate for a deal. If Mauritius won't play ball, they can hardly invade the place.
Starmer won't, Trump might though
An American invasion of Diego Garcia?
Errrrrrr….
WFH military conquest...
Just send an email.
Shortest invasion ever
12:00:00.00000 Start 12.00:00.00001 End. Medals and coffee
Apparently the Anglo-Zanzibar War was approx. 38-45 minutes long and was the shortest war in history. Perhaps the US wants to grab that record as well?
I reduced one of my elder daughter's friends to incandescent fury over that one. She was pointing out the evils of colonialism, and bought it up. I pointed out the bit about the slavery. Apparently, that was a Bad Fact.
UK 10 year gilt prices just reached 4.724%. A few weeks before the budget, they were in the 3.7%'s.
Will be interesting to see where the cuts are going to come from, as the government runs out of fiscal headroom. Or what tax increases will be imposed, despite a promise not to. Not looking good.
A lot of that move reflects inflation and base rate expectations. We could really do with a downward move in inflation.
The frustrating thing is that we all know the long term will be deflationary, as global population ages and shrinks. Deflation will be a huge problem. Yet we have a short to medium term inflation bump to deal with.
Sky analysis referred to the huge debt piles worldwide and Trump's inflationary policies, but did also say that Reeves budget has made it worse for the UK by prioritising above inflation public sector wage rises
It is becoming fairly obvious that due to world events, and Reeves poor judgment, she will have no option but to reduce spending including pay awards and probably seek more tax rises
The stark truth is we are all living beyond our means, pain is coming down the line for everyone and those hoping for a boost for Labour are likely to see quite the opposite
Are we living beyond our means or is wealth being syphoned off by those that seek control of resources - whether it be Ukraine's food basket, or Greenland's minerals, or Taiwanese technology. Here's an idea...
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
And, thanks to his other policies, those habitable bits are increasing in size all the time!
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
Half the population of the Isle of Wight. Has Denmark shown them enough love over recent decades ?
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
And, thanks to his other policies, those habitable bits are increasing in size all the time!
Denmark doesn't have a terribly good record with the place, either.
Better than yet another Chinese belt and road mine project.
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
Half the population of the Isle of Wight. Has Denmark shown them enough love over recent decades ?
UK 10 year gilt prices just reached 4.724%. A few weeks before the budget, they were in the 3.7%'s.
Will be interesting to see where the cuts are going to come from, as the government runs out of fiscal headroom. Or what tax increases will be imposed, despite a promise not to. Not looking good.
A lot of that move reflects inflation and base rate expectations. We could really do with a downward move in inflation.
The frustrating thing is that we all know the long term will be deflationary, as global population ages and shrinks. Deflation will be a huge problem. Yet we have a short to medium term inflation bump to deal with.
Sky analysis referred to the huge debt piles worldwide and Trump's inflationary policies, but did also say that Reeves budget has made it worse for the UK by prioritising above inflation public sector wage rises
It is becoming fairly obvious that due to world events, and Reeves poor judgment, she will have no option but to reduce spending including pay awards and probably seek more tax rises
The stark truth is we are all living beyond our means, pain is coming down the line for everyone and those hoping for a boost for Labour are likely to see quite the opposite
Are we living beyond our means or is wealth being syphoned off by those that seek control of resources - whether it be Ukraine's food basket, or Greenland's minerals, or Taiwanese technology. Here's an idea...
Why Bezos, especially?
(That's his suborbital rocket)
The problem is not so much the billionaires, but the lack of interest in the state actually doing stuff.
If you want to run a country on a basis of having enquiries about enquiries about doing something... Now, you may believe that is Good Government. But in reality, you are vacating the functions of Government.
Don't be surprised if the result of a justice system that doesn't deliver justice, is private security. This happens in every country where the police and courts don't work
Don't be surprised if the result of a health care system that doesn't deliver is private healthcare.
Don't be surprised if the result of an education system that doesn't deliver is private education.
Don't be surprised if the result of a national space program is less and less - to the point of collapsing - is that private companies start delivering stuff to orbit.
Don't be surprised if the result of not building roads is that the wealthy start buying/building the new drone/automated electric helicopters. Watch them fly overhead - quite soon, now.
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
And, thanks to his other policies, those habitable bits are increasing in size all the time!
Denmark doesn't have a terribly good record with the place, either.
Better than yet another Chinese belt and road mine project.
Absolutely. Trump is crazy but he's not daft. Extending the Chinese hegemony on rare metals to Greenland's deposits would be a major strategic blow for the United States (and, indeed, us).
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
"President Franklin D. Roosevelt took a strong personal interest in Greenland's fate. On 9 April 1941, the anniversary of the German occupation, the Danish envoy Kauffmann, against the instructions of his government, signed an executive agreement with Secretary of State Cordell Hull, allowing the presence of American troops and making Greenland a de facto United States protectorate. The cryolite mine in Ivigtut was a unique asset that made it possible for Greenland to manage fairly well economically during the war. "
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
And, thanks to his other policies, those habitable bits are increasing in size all the time!
Denmark doesn't have a terribly good record with the place, either.
Better than yet another Chinese belt and road mine project.
That depends, because it might embolden Trump and Musk with Canada and even ourselves, as well.
The Danes sound like they're preparing for an independence referendum and a sale already.
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
I don't understand why the government is so desperate for a deal. If Mauritius won't play ball, they can hardly invade the place.
They think they have to obey "international law".
At a time when almost everyone involved in “international law” is now highly political and pushing a very specific anti-West agenda.
Everyone is complaining about Elon Musk getting involved in international politics, albeit with a loud megaphone rather than with money and meetings behind the scenes at Davos, yet never mention the likes of Goerge Soros and Bill Gates getting involved in international politics.
When you say "almost everyone involved in “international law” is now highly political and pushing a very specific anti-West agenda", what do you mean? There are 22 cases currently open before the International Court of Justice:
2 are about arguments with Iran (#189, #190) 2 could be characterised as pro-Palestine (#176 #192) 2 relate to the recent Azerbaijan/Armenia war (#180, #181) 1 relates to a minor spat between Hungary and Slovakia (#92) 1 is Guyana trying to stop Venezuela invading (#171) 1 is trying to stop possible genocide in Myanmar (#178) 1 is against the Russian invasion of Ukraine (#182) 1 is about climate change (#187) 1 is about the prior situation in Syria (#188) 3 relate to minor spats between two third world countries (#177, #179, #185) 3 relate to minor spats between an OECD member and a third world country (#184, #194, #195) 1 is about international labour rights (#191)
And I do not understand #183 between Germany and Italy.
Does this demonstrate an anti-West agenda?
The most recent rulings were #166 (basically a Ukrainian win against Russia), #154 (maritime border dispute between Colombia and Nicaragua) #175 (very old dispute over some money between Iran and the US: bit of a split decision, but mostly said Iran didn't have a case) and #164 (related Iran/US dispute over money; US won). Does this demonstrate an anti-West agenda?
As for Soros and Gates, have either called for the US to invade the UK? Or for the King to dissolve Parliament?
An excellent threader, thanks. One of my repeated themes on PB has been the need not just to build, but to build livable spaces and communities.
I'd like to make a few points though: "many of the brutalist buildings that were put up post war are already tired and being pulled down after only 70 years."
Yes, and many buildings built over the centuries lasted far shorter periods. What we have now is survivor bias: buildings that were generally built well enough to stay up, and still have a use - even if that use has evolved over the years.
I'd also say that we can rebuild old buildings, and perhaps should in some cases. But they need to have a genuine use, and many of the older buildings with small room sizes are unsuitable for modern office or shop use. And if you alter them too much, you end up with a pastiche.
And finally, we have hundreds of structures on the Heritage at Risk register. I'd argue that perhaps excess money spent rebuilding copies of buildings might better be spent preserving the genuine heritage we have. That does not mean we cannot build better new buildings though.
Many so-called Brutalist buildings' problems are a result of poor detailing and 50s/60s level of construction training and skills. It is often straightworward using modern materials and techniques to restore them and give them another 75-100 minimum years of life. An example I have recently worked on (in contrast to 600 year old castles):
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
And, thanks to his other policies, those habitable bits are increasing in size all the time!
Denmark doesn't have a terribly good record with the place, either.
Better than yet another Chinese belt and road mine project.
Absolutely. Trump is crazy but he's not daft. Extending the Chinese hegemony on rare metals to Greenland's deposits would be a major strategic blow for the United States (and, indeed, us).
It increasingly depends who you think us is, I think. Musk and Trump seem to want to run us, in which case a huge landmass quite near us going over to U.S. control, begins to have rather a different resonance.
In those circumstances, I think it may become harder and harder to avoid a zero-sum question of whether "us" is the U.S., or Europe. We're just too small to have our own sphere of influence, now.
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
For all Trump’s rhetoric, DT Jnr did actually turn up there yesterday and met with local leaders.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
And, thanks to his other policies, those habitable bits are increasing in size all the time!
Denmark doesn't have a terribly good record with the place, either.
Better than yet another Chinese belt and road mine project.
Absolutely. Trump is crazy but he's not daft. Extending the Chinese hegemony on rare metals to Greenland's deposits would be a major strategic blow for the United States (and, indeed, us).
Trump is crazy. Whether he is daft is yet to be demonstrated.
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
Well I'm the flesh baseline model, as my parents couldn't afford the upgrades. Given the genetic defects I don't think they could afford the warranty either...
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
I don't understand why the government is so desperate for a deal. If Mauritius won't play ball, they can hardly invade the place.
Starmer won't, Trump might though
An American invasion of Diego Garcia?
Errrrrrr….
WFH military conquest...
Just send an email.
Shortest invasion ever
12:00:00.00000 Start 12.00:00.00001 End. Medals and coffee
Don’t know what the U.S. rules are, but here you need to be in there for 30 days to get a medal usually, so the best plan would be to “phase” the invasion to last that long.
“Sorry sir, we won’t be able to take the final bit of coral for another week.”
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
The problem is equating MaxPB's fear with reality. We're not heading for a sovereign debt crisis.
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
Headcount.
If people in local govt can do the same work in 80% of the time,as they claim, then cull 20% of the workforce or give them 4 day weeks and cut their wages proportionally.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
This story beggars belief. A government which allows pensioners to freeze and allws farms to die for the sake of a few million is desperate to give eight billion quid to a tiny foreign government in hock to the Chinese to take strategic Britsh territory it has never owned and all to please some displaced islanders who, it turns out, don't want the deal and will not benefit from it
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
It was of course Truss who kicked off the negotiations as PM, surprising everyone.
One surprising outcome of Liz Truss’s brief and ill-fated period as UK Prime Minister was her decision to begin negotiations with Mauritius over the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands. Despite international pressure and various legal judgements, the UK has consistently refused to do this, and her decision surprised many people.
Perhaps she found her habit as international trade secretary - making crap deals with foreign countries that didn't remotely benefit Britain - difficult to shake off.
It is perfectly possible to do non-crap deals. I can easily imagine one for the Chagos, for example.
Giving people hundreds of millions of pounds to take something that has value off your hands is not the only possible deal.
I assumed the payment was for keeping the military base there, although it's de facto an American one, so I don't get why they aren't paying, unless it's simply to keep up the pretence that it's "British".
Having just read Krugman's latest piece, makes me wonder about Liz Truss spending so much time in the US and getting in with the MAGA crowd. Is a run on the dollar possible?
Consider? Large inflation and trade shock from tariffs. Large increase in the deficit following tax cuts and a failure to cut spending to match. Political and physical pressure on the Federal Reserve not to increase interest rates to control inflation. Loss of international confidence in the US and US institutions as a result of Trump foreign policy and interference in the Fed and other institutions (FAA, FDA, courts, etc) and general intimidation of any dissent.
Could this all accumulate to break through a psychological barrier and create a run on the dollar, and, if it did, how much damage would that do to the rest of the global economy?
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
The problem is equating MaxPB's fear with reality. We're not heading for a sovereign debt crisis.
Ah the commissar speaks. The government has no more fiscal headroom because yields have spiked and inflation is trending higher than the OBR anticipated. It means the chancellor will either be back for more money in the Spring which will push down economic growth, fudge the rules or cut spending. My guess is she'll fudge the rules and we get a Truss moment.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
I don't understand why the government is so desperate for a deal. If Mauritius won't play ball, they can hardly invade the place.
They think they have to obey "international law".
At a time when almost everyone involved in “international law” is now highly political and pushing a very specific anti-West agenda.
Everyone is complaining about Elon Musk getting involved in international politics, albeit with a loud megaphone rather than with money and meetings behind the scenes at Davos, yet never mention the likes of Goerge Soros and Bill Gates getting involved in international politics.
When you say "almost everyone involved in “international law” is now highly political and pushing a very specific anti-West agenda", what do you mean? There are 22 cases currently open before the International Court of Justice:
2 are about arguments with Iran (#189, #190) 2 could be characterised as pro-Palestine (#176 #192) 2 relate to the recent Azerbaijan/Armenia war (#180, #181) 1 relates to a minor spat between Hungary and Slovakia (#92) 1 is Guyana trying to stop Venezuela invading (#171) 1 is trying to stop possible genocide in Myanmar (#178) 1 is against the Russian invasion of Ukraine (#182) 1 is about climate change (#187) 1 is about the prior situation in Syria (#188) 3 relate to minor spats between two third world countries (#177, #179, #185) 3 relate to minor spats between an OECD member and a third world country (#184, #194, #195) 1 is about international labour rights (#191)
And I do not understand #183 between Germany and Italy.
Does this demonstrate an anti-West agenda?
The most recent rulings were #166 (basically a Ukrainian win against Russia), #154 (maritime border dispute between Colombia and Nicaragua) #175 (very old dispute over some money between Iran and the US: bit of a split decision, but mostly said Iran didn't have a case) and #164 (related Iran/US dispute over money; US won). Does this demonstrate an anti-West agenda?
As for Soros and Gates, have either called for the US to invade the UK? Or for the King to dissolve Parliament?
Most unfair to bring facts in to the discussion. Be aware this may cause distress.
"Indefinite industrial action is to be taken by thousands of civil servants working at the Land Registry in a dispute over office attendance.
Around 4,000 members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) based in 14 offices across England and Wales will take part in the action from 21 January.
The PCS is also campaigning for a four-day week for workers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government."
Having just read Krugman's latest piece, makes me wonder about Liz Truss spending so much time in the US and getting in with the MAGA crowd. Is a run on the dollar possible?
Consider? Large inflation and trade shock from tariffs. Large increase in the deficit following tax cuts and a failure to cut spending to match. Political and physical pressure on the Federal Reserve not to increase interest rates to control inflation. Loss of international confidence in the US and US institutions as a result of Trump foreign policy and interference in the Fed and other institutions (FAA, FDA, courts, etc) and general intimidation of any dissent.
Could this all accumulate to break through a psychological barrier and create a run on the dollar, and, if it did, how much damage would that do to the rest of the global economy?
Seems unlikely to me. I think very probable Trump policies will cause inflation and damage US economy. But he's inheriting a strong economy, the US is somewhat decentralised and has a number of unique advantages vs. anywhere in the world.
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
The problem is equating MaxPB's fear with reality. We're not heading for a sovereign debt crisis.
Why are you so confident?
The Truss Experience surely shows that Britain is close to the edge. Reeves' budget takes Britain a step closer to the edge, in that it increases the deficit and reduces growth.
That surely warrants a smidge of concern, does it not?
"Indefinite industrial action is to be taken by thousands of civil servants working at the Land Registry in a dispute over office attendance.
Around 4,000 members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) based in 14 offices across England and Wales will take part in the action from 21 January.
The PCS is also campaigning for a four-day week for workers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government."
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
The problem is equating MaxPB's fear with reality. We're not heading for a sovereign debt crisis.
Ah the commissar speaks. The government has no more fiscal headroom because yields have spiked and inflation is trending higher than the OBR anticipated. It means the chancellor will either be back for more money in the Spring which will push down economic growth, fudge the rules or cut spending. My guess is she'll fudge the rules and we get a Truss moment.
There’s another option. More theoretical and unrealistic cuts in future years she hopes she doesn’t have to implement because “something will turn up”.
My money is on that.
Oh and a better than expected defence settlement (which we do actually need) as cover for something on tax with a bit of popular support through fear.
"Indefinite industrial action is to be taken by thousands of civil servants working at the Land Registry in a dispute over office attendance.
Around 4,000 members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) based in 14 offices across England and Wales will take part in the action from 21 January.
The PCS is also campaigning for a four-day week for workers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government."
I fear we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis despite 3x cover on 5y bonds sold today. The government is going to have to get real about the national finances and cut spending.
The problem is what can be cut?
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
The problem is equating MaxPB's fear with reality. We're not heading for a sovereign debt crisis.
Why should we take your word for it over Max's ?
I mean I hope you are right but, as I say, what is your expertise compared to his knowledge ?
"Indefinite industrial action is to be taken by thousands of civil servants working at the Land Registry in a dispute over office attendance.
Around 4,000 members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) based in 14 offices across England and Wales will take part in the action from 21 January.
The PCS is also campaigning for a four-day week for workers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government."
Comments
https://maps.app.goo.gl/v8uqSGCgXqE8E88u9
My brother in law is a Plod in South Australia and during the dry season regularly has to go out spotting to see if there are any fires. He has said when they get going they can be terrifying and very very quick.
NEW: UK govt has offered to frontload a tranche of payments to Mauritius in a bid to finalise Chagos islands deal, acc to people familiar with talks
"A street scene in Cherbourg looks so much like the Hollywood sets of old European cities that the perspective is reversed and it seems that Cherbourg has been copied from an old movie set. It's the same with the Norman architecture. The houses aren't so smooth and regular and nice as California homes of Norman design. When I looked at them I felt, before catching myself, that they had copied our California Norman homes and not done too good a job." (p. 415)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_Pyle
(For the record: I think there is something to learn from places like Levittown and Columbia, Maryland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levittown,_New_York
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia,_Maryland )
As ever, it’s how/why it’s done, not the method itself.
Bet yours doesn’t cover serious, long term hospital stays.
Errrrrrr….
Make it make sense. It's worse than anything Truss did. Far worse
That’s going to go down about as well as Biden announcing $50m for domestic hurricane victims and $50bn in international aid on the same day.
12:00:00.00000 Start
12.00:00.00001 End. Medals and coffee
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/10/4/why-is-the-uk-handing-the-chagos-islands-back-to-mauritius
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg9gvg3452o
Who do they think they are kidding. The EU is weak and divided and Ukraine has shone this like a belisha beacon.
No-one believes this baloney. The EU would pop out a few statements and let the US do whatever it wants.
Just like any Scottish "nationalist".
What is the ugliest building you’ve ever seen?
https://x.com/archi_tradition/status/1868803094324429253
Boston City Hall, definitely.
Some amazingly ugly libraries in there.
https://fotbot.org/why-is-the-uk-negotiating-biot-sovereignty-with-mauritius
One surprising outcome of Liz Truss’s brief and ill-fated period as UK Prime Minister was her decision to begin negotiations with Mauritius over the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands. Despite international pressure and various legal judgements, the UK has consistently refused to do this, and her decision surprised many people.
We all have gotten quite used to living in a world where we can believe in the rules based international order and that the US is nice and liberal and free and respectful of allies and doesn’t do bad things*, but since WWII we have essentially lived under the protection and dominance of a bigger and more powerful power. It’s just that they haven’t egregiously wielded that power against us**.
That may change, hence why Europe needs to start getting real about its own security.
* of course, it does, but we all conveniently forget these or rationalise them because there are actors out there who do worse.
** much.
I am presuming that this is all to do with the finding of large rare earth deposits there? At the moment the licence to exploit these is held by a European based company who have until the end of the year to come up with proposals for exploitation. https://www.mining.com/critical-metals-licence-for-greenland-rare-earths-deposit-extended/
The solution Trump presumably wants is that the Americans get to play and have a source of the relevant metals outwith the control of China. Shouldn't be that hard.
Everyone is complaining about Elon Musk getting involved in international politics, albeit with a loud megaphone rather than with money and meetings behind the scenes at Davos, yet never mention the likes of Goerge Soros and Bill Gates getting involved in international politics.
Giving people hundreds of millions of pounds to take something that has value off your hands is not the only possible deal.
We’re in danger of making the same assumptions of US invincibility that we used to make about the Soviet Union.
Obviously he’s not going to send the US Navy in to take the place by force, no matter how much MSNBC commentators tell us that’s what he’s planning - but there’s potentially a deal to be done over mineral rights, military bases, and development of the inhabitable parts of the island.
Typical European disunity, which is why Trumpm will be emboldened.
I haven't seen the whole thing, but in the clips on X he looks rattled and defensive and she looks confident and assertive
Better than yet another Chinese belt and
roadmine project.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Danes_experiment
(That's his suborbital rocket)
The problem is not so much the billionaires, but the lack of interest in the state actually doing stuff.
If you want to run a country on a basis of having enquiries about enquiries about doing something... Now, you may believe that is Good Government. But in reality, you are vacating the functions of Government.
Don't be surprised if the result of a justice system that doesn't deliver justice, is private security. This happens in every country where the police and courts don't work
Don't be surprised if the result of a health care system that doesn't deliver is private healthcare.
Don't be surprised if the result of an education system that doesn't deliver is private education.
Don't be surprised if the result of a national space program is less and less - to the point of collapsing - is that private companies start delivering stuff to orbit.
Don't be surprised if the result of not building roads is that the wealthy start buying/building the new drone/automated electric helicopters. Watch them fly overhead - quite soon, now.
Don't be surprised. It's what you asked for.
"President Franklin D. Roosevelt took a strong personal interest in Greenland's fate. On 9 April 1941, the anniversary of the German occupation, the Danish envoy Kauffmann, against the instructions of his government, signed an executive agreement with Secretary of State Cordell Hull, allowing the presence of American troops and making Greenland a de facto United States protectorate. The cryolite mine in Ivigtut was a unique asset that made it possible for Greenland to manage fairly well economically during the war. "
The Danes sound like they're preparing for an independence referendum and a sale already.
2 are about arguments with Iran (#189, #190)
2 could be characterised as pro-Palestine (#176 #192)
2 relate to the recent Azerbaijan/Armenia war (#180, #181)
1 relates to a minor spat between Hungary and Slovakia (#92)
1 is Guyana trying to stop Venezuela invading (#171)
1 is trying to stop possible genocide in Myanmar (#178)
1 is against the Russian invasion of Ukraine (#182)
1 is about climate change (#187)
1 is about the prior situation in Syria (#188)
3 relate to minor spats between two third world countries (#177, #179, #185)
3 relate to minor spats between an OECD member and a third world country (#184, #194, #195)
1 is about international labour rights (#191)
And I do not understand #183 between Germany and Italy.
Does this demonstrate an anti-West agenda?
The most recent rulings were #166 (basically a Ukrainian win against Russia), #154 (maritime border dispute between Colombia and Nicaragua) #175 (very old dispute over some money between Iran and the US: bit of a split decision, but mostly said Iran didn't have a case) and #164 (related Iran/US dispute over money; US won). Does this demonstrate an anti-West agenda?
As for Soros and Gates, have either called for the US to invade the UK? Or for the King to dissolve Parliament?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-63426968
In those circumstances, I think it may become harder and harder to avoid a zero-sum question of whether "us" is the U.S., or Europe. We're just too small to have our own sphere of influence, now.
Total spending £135.8m
Adult social care £52.9m (39% of spending)
Children’s social care £37.2m (27% of spending)
So 66% of the whole budget is going on social care
For those that don’t know me, that’s Darlington council small unity authority of about 115,000 residents
For example as my post above shows local government is social care with other items optionally on top.
“Sorry sir, we won’t be able to take the final bit of coral for another week.”
Consider? Large inflation and trade shock from tariffs. Large increase in the deficit following tax cuts and a failure to cut spending to match. Political and physical pressure on the Federal Reserve not to increase interest rates to control inflation. Loss of international confidence in the US and US institutions as a result of Trump foreign policy and interference in the Fed and other institutions (FAA, FDA, courts, etc) and general intimidation of any dissent.
Could this all accumulate to break through a psychological barrier and create a run on the dollar, and, if it did, how much damage would that do to the rest of the global economy?
Typical public sector entitlement.
"Indefinite industrial action is to be taken by thousands of civil servants working at the Land Registry in a dispute over office attendance.
Around 4,000 members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) based in 14 offices across England and Wales will take part in the action from 21 January.
The PCS is also campaigning for a four-day week for workers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government."
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/civil-servants-to-take-indefinite-industrial-action-after-being-ordered-back-to-office/ar-AA1xaSsL?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=71fbf6997a0841a2a7c49afa892c9406&ei=9
The Truss Experience surely shows that Britain is close to the edge. Reeves' budget takes Britain a step closer to the edge, in that it increases the deficit and reduces growth.
That surely warrants a smidge of concern, does it not?
My money is on that.
Oh and a better than expected defence settlement (which we do actually need) as cover for something on tax with a bit of popular support through fear.
I mean I hope you are right but, as I say, what is your expertise compared to his knowledge ?
Most private firms would have long ago offloaded such jobs to India etc. Not an option for the government, though it might be with AI coming along.