Britain, Government, Politics, Society

Sir Tony Blair

OPINION

THIS day was always going to come. Convention dictates that all British prime ministers eventually join the Order of the Garter – even the ones, like James Callaghan, that nobody actually voted for.

And let me make it clear that I have no loyalty or political affiliation to the Labour Party: in large part I’m a centrist who believe ministers should keep the ship of state afloat.

Certainly, like most people, there are aspects of Mr Blair’s behaviour that I find objectionable: his multi-billion money grubbing empire acquired from dodgy dictators after leaving office; his refusal to accept the Brexit result.

Despite that, though, there is also much to admire. He was the Labour leader who understood the concerns of Middle Britain, instead of dismissing them – as the Left so often does – with a sneer.

This open-minded, pluralistic approach allowed him to sell liberal policies to an essentially conservative nation.

The Labour of old redistributed wealth through vicious taxation, especially in the middle classes. New Labour under Tony Blair focused on growing the economy. Prosperity, this business-friendly party understood, increased revenue.

Instead of demonising aspiration, Blair openly celebrated it. He promised with political vigour to be “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”. Police numbers rose by twelve per cent during his premiership.

But equally he recognised that crime would never fall unless he also tackled deprivation and hopelessness.

Where Blair really stood out was in foreign policy. Few young people today understand how, before the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, the spectre of Irish republican terrorism hung over the streets of Belfast and London alike.

After 9/11, Blair saw Islamism for the threat to liberal democracy it was, cracked down on domestic extremists and asserted abroad the values of freedom, tolerance and the rule of law.

There are many that disagree with him on Iraq. I respect the principles these people hold but I continue to believe that Britain did the right thing in overthrowing Saddam Hussein. True leadership seldom wins friends.

More recently, too, he has been a voice of reason on the pandemic. He was an early advocate of mass-testing and for the vaccinated to be exempt from lockdown. Many lives – and businesses – might have been saved if ministers had listened.

Tony Blair created a fairer, more tolerant country at home and stood up for desperate people overseas. Whatever his flaws and mistakes, that is the legacy of a statesman. It is right that his achievements be so recognised.

Standard
China, Defence, Government, Politics, Society, United States

China’s hypersonic missiles and its threat to the West

HYPERSONIC MISSILES

UNTIL very recently, few people outside of the military, intelligence and security services and the defence industry, had heard of hypersonic missiles or had an inkling as to what they were or their significance.

The revelation that China has tested such a missile – and that it was nuclear-capable – has sent shock waves around the world. The fact that it missed its presumed target by up to 24 miles brings scant comfort.

While the US is continuing to develop its own hypersonic missile, Russia has already tested them and even North Korea has claimed to have test-fired one. China is not alone but it has shown it is far more advanced than the West suspected.

Washington and other world capitals are now waking up to the implications of Beijing possessing a missile that can circle the globe at five times the speed of sound – and can sneak under the radar of US anti-missile defences.

The missile, carried on a “hypersonic glide vehicle”, was launched into space by rocket boosters (like those that launch spacecraft) in August. When they run out of fuel – typically within minutes – the boosters detach and fall away, and the glide vehicle continues to orbit the Earth at nearly 4,000mph, under its own momentum.

Although slower than ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles fly at much lower trajectories – more like cruise missiles – so are easier to manoeuvre and harder to track. Such a weapon could help negate American defence systems. They are designed to destroy incoming ballistic missiles which soar high into space before descending on their target.

Certainly, China’s achievement is a game-changer in East-West relations. For a generation, the West has been used to China manufacturing more and more of what we buy as consumers. More than a quarter of manufactured goods, for example, bought in America are made in China. But when it came to high tech items, not least in the defence sector, the assumption was that the US still held a distinct edge over China.

In the space of just a few weeks that complacency has been rocked to its core. Even before the disclosure of the Chinese hypersonic test, the Pentagon had warned that Beijing was heading for global dominance because of its advances in artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning and cyber capabilities – and that gap was growing.

ANTI-BALLISTIC MISSILE SYSTEMS

THERE has been anger within the higher echelons of the Pentagon at the slow pace of technological transformation in the US military.

What the advent of hypersonic weapons does is shatter faith in anti-ballistic missile (ABM) systems because these are our guarantee against a surprise attack by a nuclear-armed rival. China’s new hypersonic missile launch puts the West on notice that its technological advantage is an illusion.

ABM defence systems, such as the American Patriot, point up at missiles incoming in a supersonic arc through outer space from launch pad to target. Targeting a low-flying hypersonic missile which harnesses AI to dodge defences is a vastly harder prospect.

Since the 1980s, America has invested billions in anti-missile defence. It was started by President Ronald Reagan who believed effective defence against ballistic missiles would reduce the risk of nuclear war – making disarmament and peace possible.

Sadly – as so often in history – scientists have found ways around apparently invulnerable defence systems. German tanks bypassed the incredibly sophisticated French fortifications that made up the Maginot Line in 1940 by diverting through Belgium. Now hypersonic missiles effectively undercut America’s anti-ballistic Maginot Line mentality.

CHINA’S UPSWING AND STRENGTH

BACK in the 1980s, the architect of China’s extraordinary economic upswing, leader Deng Xiaoping, advised future Chinese leaders to ensure their country rose “unobserved”. Deng recognised that China must bide its time until it reached full spectrum domination, from the military to the economic spheres. That meant avoiding antagonising rivals and neighbours.

Today’s leader, President Xi Jinping, is more inclined to exploit China’s new heavyweight standing. From border disputes with India to bullying breakaway Taiwan, Xi has been flexing his muscles. Indeed, Taiwan is the most likely flash point between the superpowers. President Xi is bent on reunifying the Chinese-speaking island democracy, while, after his humiliating retreat from Afghanistan, President Biden is determined not to look weak over Taiwan.

What if Beijing thinks American public resolve is just bluff and makes a land grab for the island? Miscalculation leads to world wars. In the 20th century, the democracies led by Britain and the US came out on top in two world wars. The Americans guided the West to a peaceful defeat of Soviet Communism in the Cold War.

But past glories do not guarantee future victories. Nor do decades of mutual nuclear deterrence between Washington and Moscow mean that the growing number of other nuclear-armed states will show the self-restraint of the Cold War era.

Any war between nuclear-armed states is too horrible to contemplate – or should be. But the development of hypersonic missiles and new AI weaponry raises the terrible spectre of Chinese Dr Strangeloves calculating the chances of emerging from their bunkers into a post-atomic desert as the world’s only superpower.

When Mao said that the Chinese would outnumber all the other survivors of any nuclear war 60 years ago, the then Soviet leaders thought he had gone mad and promptly cut nuclear cooperation with his regime.

Maybe today’s vastly more powerful and technologically sophisticated Communist China has escaped from Maoist thinking. But if it hasn’t, it is fast acquiring the futuristic weaponry to put its founder’s chilling words into practice.

Worst case scenarios are never certain. But planning for the best case is never wise. China’s military modernisation is going at hypersonic pace. The West will be worried. It must catch up – and fast.

Standard
Energy, Government, Politics, Scotland, Society

Energy crisis: Taking back control of our energy supplies?

ENERGY ALTERNATIVES

JUST seventeen years ago the UK produced enough gas for all its domestic needs, but we are now reliant on an international market and the whims of President Putin. But there are ample alternatives to imported gas that could put the energy market on a sustainable footing:

New North Sea Gas

PRODUCTION in the North Sea has dwindled because older gas fields have become too expensive to run, and new ones have taken a long time to come on stream.

Last year about 48% of UK gas came from the North Sea, down from 100% in 2004, and this is projected to keep falling.

If the Government does not subsidise investment, then by 2025 domestic gas will only meet around one third of UK demand, making the country even more reliant on global markets.

Refinitiv, a European Gas Research body, said there are untapped gas fields in the North Sea, but that more investment is needed. It says there are up to four new gas fields that will be starting early next year, but highlights the fact that, “we’ve seen falling investment in the last 18 months.”

Restart Fracking

The Government halted fracking in England at the end of November 2019 after a series of confrontations between shale gas companies and local communities.

Supporters claim there is enough shale gas in the UK to support the country’s needs for decades.

Fracking has boomed in the US, making the country a powerhouse in global oil and gas production, and securing its energy security. The technique, also known as hydraulic fracturing, involves pumping water and sand underground at high pressure to fracture the rock and release trapped oil and gas.

Fracking has effectively been banned in Scotland since 2015, with ministers announcing in 2019 that the moratorium would be extended indefinitely.

An active fracking site near Blackpool caused several earthquakes up to a magnitude of 2.9, which left houses in the local area shaking. Opponents of fracking also complain that sites require significant infrastructure and sand and water must be transported to and fro in large trucks leading to traffic, noise and disruption.

The Government took its decision after a scientific study found there would be “unacceptable” consequences for those living near fracking sites. But it said it could agree to new sites if there was “compelling new evidence” that fracking was safe.

More Gas Storage

The UK has around 18 times less gas storage than European nations such as Italy, Germany and France, making the country extremely vulnerable to volatile prices.

A focus on renewables and developing better connectivity with neighbours such as Norway, to enable the UK to import gas effectively, meant little new storage has been built.

In fact, the Rough storage facility off the Yorkshire coast, which accounted for two-thirds of our gas capacity, was retired in 2017. Experts said politicians believed that there was no need to spend vast sums on new storage plants because prices had been stable between the summer and winter for many years.

Shetland Oil Fields

The UK could look to new oil fields – at the risk of being accused of climate hypocrisy.

The area to the west of the Shetland Islands has been named as “the place to be” by energy experts advising firms on growing Britain’s oil output. Siccar Point Energy, backed by Shell, is preparing to start drilling in the Cambo oil field, situated 75 miles to the west of the Shetlands.

It is thought to contain 800 million barrels of oil, which will be released over the next 25 years. The company previously said: “The Cambo development supports the country’s energy transition, maintaining secure UK supply.” Such words appear prophetic against the recent wild swings in gas prices, but more licences to drill oil will enrage environmental campaigners.

It could also be against the law as the Government has created legislation committing the country to a 78 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2035, and a 100 per cent reduction by 2050.

Go Nuclear

LAST month, ministers said they were considering a “change of focus” towards nuclear power to find a more reliable source of green energy than wind and solar.

Industry leaders have lambasted the Government for failing to replace Britain’s ageing reactors sooner, despite repeated warnings.

Next year alone the country will lose more than a fifth of its nuclear power generation when plants in Dungeness, Kent, and Hunterston, in Ayrshire, are decommissioned. There is then a procession through the 2020s as plants in Hartlepool, in County Durham, Heysham in Lancashire, and Torness in East Lothian, are retired. Any investment in nuclear energy today will not provide energy until the 2030s and the UK will need at least two large reactors and ten small plants just to maintain current levels of energy production.

There is some hope. A consortium led by Rolls-Royce, which makes nuclear reactors for submarines, has just secured a £210million investment that will allow it to put its plans for mini reactors to regulators. It hopes it can build the smaller plants, which will require £2billion investment each, more quickly than traditional reactors, and hopes to build up to 16.

In its last energy policy, published in 2017, the Scottish Government opposed new nuclear power stations being constructed.

Standard