Britain, China, Defence, Government, Military, National Security, Politics, United Nations, United States

Chagos deal risks the UK’s nuclear deterrent

CHAGOS ISLANDS

BRITAIN’S nuclear deterrent would be at risk from Chinese interference if the Prime Minister capitulates over the Chagos Islands.

A covert satellite system used to direct British and US nuclear missiles would be compromised if Keir Starmer signs off a deal with China-friendly Mauritius, it is feared.

The UK is currently locked in negotiations, led by Attorney General Lord Hermer and National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell, over handing over the strategically important islands in the Indian Ocean following a UN ruling.

The archipelago, controlled by the UK for more than two centuries, is home to the joint UK-US Diego Garcia military base. Britain is set to pay billions to Mauritius to lease the base back for 99 years under the terms of the deal.

But concerns have been raised that the UK’s system for coordinating nuclear missiles relies on connection points on the Diego Garcia base. To function properly, these “nodes” require physical protection and British control of the island’s electromagnetic spectrum.

However, the deal includes a clause saying other countries could also use the spectrum, from which Mauritius could profit.

This could offer Beijing a gateway to jamming the highly classified Automated Digital Network System 3 (ADNS 3), which is shared by the Royal Navy and the US Navy, and, which crucially, is part of the “Nuclear Firing Chain” (NFC). The deal would enhance UK national security, but without it, Britain would lose access to the spectrum. The future operation of the base without a deal would clearly be at risk.

Nonetheless, critics suggest that the government’s arguments are totally fabricated. They say that the islands are far more important than just this and the potential threat to our operations from a no deal is a total fiction from the pen of the Cabinet Office – and, by extension, the human rights law firm, Leigh Day.

Lord Hermer was a go-to barrister for Leigh Day before his appointment as Attorney General last year and he has been accused of a deference to international law over domestic needs.

Leigh Day is currently representing asylum seekers who claim they were trapped on the Chagos Islands after being rescued at sea by the Royal Navy. In 2019, the International Court of Justice ruled that Britain’s continued administration of the islands was unlawful.

Despite the UK ignoring the ruling, it was subsequently ratified by the UN General Assembly, which found the islands rightfully belonged to Mauritius. Sir Ben Wallace, a former defence secretary, said: “Many of the UN judges who made the flawed ruling come from totalitarian states including China.

“Is the PM really going to put their opinions before that of Britain’s security? Diego Garcia is British and must remain so.”

And, MP Tom Tugendhat said that in his former role of security minister, he had seen the advice on the implications of the deal, but the version being presented to the public was “nonsense”.

The settlement could also mean that the Royal Navy could be prevented from entering a buffer zone which Mauritius intends to set up around the islands.

Without any protection from Western navies, there is heightened fear that China could get close enough to the sensitive military facilities.

It is known that ADNS 3 provides assured tactical wide area networking between ships and shore around the world to support full battlespace connectivity.

Britain’s nuclear threat is carried by the Royal Navy’s bomber submarines. Any breakdown of communications or hostile interception of messages which are part of the NFC, or any other breach, would mean Britain losing its nuclear deterrent.

This is a highly technical matter, involving a lot of classified systems, which, according to critics, is being overlooked by government lawyers.

This part of the world is key to China’s expansionist agenda, and any deal with the UK would appear to facilitate that. These systems rely on guarantees around the security of Diego Garcia.

Standard
Britain, China, Government, Intelligence, Middle East, Russia, Society, United States

Spy chiefs give joint-interview at Festival

US-UK INTELLIGENCE

IN a rare public appearance, Richard Moore, the head of MI6, has warned that Russia’s intelligence services have become “feral” and “reckless” in the way they are plotting attacks in Britain and across Europe.

In an historic joint interview with the head of the CIA, Mr Moore said Moscow is now using criminal gangs for state-sponsored terror attacks in Europe. The attacks are “more amateurish” and are endangering more lives.

His CIA counterpart William Burns said coordinated operations between UK and US intelligence services are thwarting the plots across the Continent and in mainland Britain. The intelligence chiefs were appearing before a Festival in north London, where they spoke of the long-standing relationship between MI6 and the CIA.

Mr Burns also revealed how the CIA feared Vladimir Putin was going to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine in the autumn of 2022, after falsely accusing Volodymyr Zelensky of amassing nuclear materials for such an attack against his troops.

The CIA chief also said 90 per cent of a new peace deal between Israel and Hamas is complete, adding that its details may be published in the “next few days”.

Mr Moore, known as C by his officers, spoke about how the two services often conduct intelligence operations together. “We will sometimes decide who is better-placed to go first – we call it the best athlete model. Whoever is best placed to do it, we work in a non-competitive way to get the result,” he said.

The MI6 boss said Russia’s intelligence services have conducted sabotage and criminal acts in Britain and in Europe, becoming “a lot more feral”. He added: “The fact they are using a criminal element shows they are becoming a bit desperate – they can’t use their own people. They’re happy to use criminals. It’s just a bit more reckless.”

Mr Moore referred to an arson attack in Leyton, east London, on a Ukraine-linked business, which is suspected of being directed by Moscow. Two men have since been charged for helping Russian intelligence after the Metropolitan Police used terrorism powers to investigate.

He also said the Salisbury poisoning in 2018 was “emblematic” of the recklessness of Russian agents.

“They left a large phial of a deadly poison lying around to be picked up,” he said. “It could have killed an entire school – in fact, it killed an innocent British civilian.”

Two Russian agents daubed Novichok nerve agent on the doorknob of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal, which nearly killed him and his daughter. But the perfume bottle with the poison in it was later picked up by a woman, who later died.

Speaking publicly for the first time about how the CIA feared Russia was close to using a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine months into the conflict, Mr Burns said: “There was a moment in the fall of 2022 that I think there was a genuine risk of potential use of tactical nuclear weapons. I felt we should not be intimidated by Putin.”

He was dispatched to the Turkish capital Ankara to tell the head of the FSB, Sergei Naryshkin, how the West would respond “militarily” if Russia used nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The CIA chief said: “We cannot afford to be intimidated by that sabre-rattling and bullying. The record shows the United States has provided enormous support to Ukraine, and I’m sure we’ll continue to.”

Mr Burns has been intimately involved in the difficult negotiations in the Middle East between Hamas and Israel, with Qatar and Egypt acting as intermediaries.

He said 90 per cent of a peace deal is complete, adding: “The last 10 per cent is the last 10 per cent for a reason… it’s the hardest part to do. But we will make this more detailed proposal, I hope in the next several days, then we’ll see.”

And he warned that Hamas cannot be entirely defeated. “You can severely degrade their military capabilities, but it is a movement and an idea, and the way you kill an idea is with a better idea.”

The intelligence chiefs – who gave a public interview to the editor of the Financial Times on the grounds of Kenwood House in Hampstead – said China was their main preoccupation, with 20 per cent of the CIA’s resources being devoted to the Beijing regime.

Standard
Books, China, Government, Politics, Russia, Society, United States

Book Review: Autocracy, Inc

LITERARY REVIEW

Intro: Standing up to the tyrants in the East

THERE isn’t a more rigorous and engaging analyst of the crimes of the erstwhile Soviet dictatorship than Anne Applebaum, the acclaimed author of the Pulitzer prize-winning history of the Gulag, and also of Red Famine: Stalin’s War On Ukraine.

For her gifts, the historian is also rooted in the present, as a fearsomely active journalist, and the writer’s latest work is an up-to-the moment examination of how modern-day autocracies, not just that of Russia’s President Putin, but also including China, North Korea, and Iran, act as a kind of informal bloc to challenge what they see as the West’s “hegemony”.

It’s unfortunate that the phrase “axis of evil” has already been taken, since that would be a befitting description. Alas, it was inappropriately used by George W. Bush in the wake of the 9/11 attacks to join together Iran, Iraq, and North Korea – which actually had no military or financial links at all.

Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran, do, however, connect in this way, accelerated by Moscow’s war on Ukraine.

The only minor criticism of Applebaum’s formidable book is that it never mentions the Iraq War of 2003–2011 or the later Western intervention in Libya. For these were the developments which not only gave fuel to the anti-Western agenda, but also convinced many – including in the West itself – that we had little moral authority to criticise the military escapades launched by the Kremlin.

Applebaum is especially adept, however, in setting out the remarkable success of modern Russian propaganda – beyond the scope that Stalin could ever have dreamed of – using the worldwide web, and of China’s ability both to control its own people through technology and to censor what was thought to be unstoppable.

At the dawn of the millennium the ever-optimistic U.S. President Bill Clinton proclaimed that the internet would liberalise China, by exposing its people to all the possibilities and opportunities the free world had to offer.

When arguing, on similar grounds, for China to be admitted to the World Trade Organisation, he gave an address in which he ridiculed the idea that Beijing could keep a lid on things.

“Now, there’s no question that China’s been trying to crack down on the internet,” he declared. At that point, as Applebaum records, Clinton gave a wry smile, adding: “Good luck!” – and his audience joined in the laughter.

They are not laughing now. The Great Firewall of China, and even more sophisticated tools than that, have allowed Beijing to succeed, keeping billions of its citizens in a form of intellectual slavery.

In a similar vein, the German political establishment had long believed in the doctrine known as Wandel durch Handel – “change through trade” – the idea that making nice with Moscow in terms of market access would inevitably lead to political and cultural liberalisation. This was most notable with pipelines taking Russian gas to Europe. That dream, or self-interest, in terms of the aspirations of German business, has also been shattered. The kleptocracy just got richer and far  more ruthless. 

As the deputy mayor of St Petersburg in 1992, and in his first public role, the former KGB officer Putin argued that “the entrepreneurial class should become the basis for the flourishing of our society as a whole”. That was music to the ears of Western investors, but Putin was then, already, creaming off vast sums for himself and his associates, via his control of local export licences for raw material.

As Applebaum notes, under Putin’s perpetually renewed presidency this ultimately developed into “a full-blown autocratic kleptocracy, a Mafia state built and managed entirely for the purpose of enriching its leadership”. It was for his leading role in exposing this that Alexei Navalny paid with his life.

Despite his apparent personal austerity and regular crackdowns on colossal financial corruption within the Chinese Communist Party – the inescapable consequence of permanent one-party rule – Xi Jinping is only too happy to make common cause with the multibillionaire plutocrat Putin.

Central, this is because they share a primordial terror of a popular uprising against their regimes: in this context, it was striking how in 2022 Xi suddenly abandoned his hitherto iron-cast Covid lockdown measures after a public revolt threatened to spread to the streets of Beijing and Shanghai.

And the “no limits” friendship which Xi entered into with Putin on February 4, 2022, was specifically designed to demonstrate a kind of solidarity among autocracies, against what they both constantly refer to as the West’s “attempts at hegemony”.

Their joint communiqué denounced “the abuse of democratic values and interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states”. Weeks later, Putin sent his tanks towards Kyiv.

There was a tantalising glimpse of a possible fracture in the relationship at that moment: it seems likley that Xi was not given a warning by Putin of what was about to happen and, some months later, Beijing made public its grave concern about the Kremlin’s threats to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

Nevertheless, as Anne Applebaum concludes, the challenge to “Autocracy, Inc” must come from within the West itself.

And, yet, if the forecasts are right, the American people seem likely to elect to the White House (again) their own version of Autocracy Inc: Donald J. Trump.

Standard