Author Archives: Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: Gaza

By Tom Arms | Sat 27th June 2026 - 10:33 am

While the world’s attention has been fixed on Iran, Lebanon and the Strait of Hormuz, Gaza has quietly slipped from the headlines. That is unfortunate, because the territory is settling into a dangerous and potentially permanent limbo.

Except for the occasional exchange of fire, fighting between Hamas and the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) has stopped. What has replaced conflict is an armed truce with a deep mutual distrust preventing any progress on last autumn’s peace plan.

The IDF still occupies more than 60 percent of Gaza with orders from Benjamin Netanyahu to increase that slice to 70 percent. The two million Gazans are crowded into a tent city on the beaches in the 30 percent which remains in Palestinian hands. There is chronic unemployment and the Gazans are totally dependent on aid for their survival.

The IDF occupation was—still is—billed as “temporary security buffers.” Nine months later, however, the ‘temporary’ zones contain fortified bases, permanent roads for armour, observation posts, logistics hubs and cleared fields of fire. They increasingly resemble the infrastructure of a long-term military occupation.

The IDF was meant to hand over control to a 20,000-strong International Stabilisation Force (ISF) which would oversee the final disarmament of Hamas and the training of a Palestinian Police. So far only 200 American soldiers have turned up, and they don’t appear to have a role. Several countries have been approached to contribute to the ISF, but all are frightened at being caught in the middle of an Israeli-Hamas crossfire.

The 15-member team of Palestinian technocrats who are supposed to run Gaza until elections can be organised has been appointed. It even has a chairman, former Palestinian Authority official Dr Ali Sha-ath. But the committee has yet to leave Cairo. They refuse to enter Gaza until the security situation improves. In their absence, Hamas continues to exercise political control.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged gaza | Leave a comment

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 21st June 2026 - 11:10 am

Iran

The Iran War has forced American motorists to reconsider long road trips. At the same time a farmer in Kenya is facing a drastic drop in his $2,200 income and a Sri Lankan construction worker in Dubai is worrying about how his wife and children would survive without his remittances. The Iran War has been little more than an inconvenience for most people in the West. For those in the developing world it was—still is – a matter of life and death.

The people in the developing world were already reeling from the effects of cuts in foreign aid, the covid pandemic and the Ukraine War before the Iran War closed the Strait of Hormuz.

Petrol prices rose by as much as 50 percent in the US. They rose by the same amount in Kenya. The difference is that the average household income in America is $80,000. In Kenya it is $2,200.

East Africa imports about 25 percent of its fertiliser supplies from the Gulf region. The start of the Iran War coincided with the start of the planting season. If a farmer is unable to afford fertiliser than he buys less. This means lower farm incomes, higher maize prices, higher prices for animal feed, higher meat and milk prices. Greater food insecurity.

In the United States, agriculture contributes approximately one percent to the country’s GDP. In East Africa it contributes about a quarter and employs half of the population. Roughly 70 percent of Africa’s 1.5 billion people are directly or indirectly employed in agriculture.

Remittances to developing countries are also suffering. The Gulf countries are not known for their enlightened labour practices. In fact, for many migrant workers, conditions have been described as akin to “modern slavery.”

Millions, however, leave their families in Africa and South Asia to live up to ten in a room while working on construction sites in the Gulf region. When the bombs started to fall many of those workers were laid off. For countries such as Nepal—where 25 percent of the economy is remittances—this meant financial ruin.

Families from Mombasa to Kathmandu suddenly faced the cruel arithmetic of paying more food and fuel with less money arriving from sons and daughters working in Dubai or Riyadh.

Americans and the rest of the world

Americans often struggle to understand the rest of the world. That is an over-generalisation. America has produced some of the world’s finest experts on China, Russia, Britain and the Middle East. But the average American has little need to look beyond his own borders.

Why should he? America spans a continent. It possesses almost every climate, every landscape and nearly every natural resource. Its entertainment industry dominates the globe. Most Americans spend their lives without needing another language and only about one in five owns a passport.

That self-sufficiency has bred a certain assumption: that what works in America should work everywhere. It is not unique. The British Empire convinced itself that imperial rule brought civilisation. Vladimir Putin appears to have believed that Ukrainians would greet Russian tanks with flowers. Great powers have always had a tendency to mistake their own preferences for universal truths.

The tragedy is that military and economic power can reinforce this misconception. If you are powerful enough, people often tell you what you want to hear. Success breeds confidence. Confidence breeds hubris.

Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Iran all share a common thread. Again and again, Washington has assumed that superior force could overcome history, culture and nationalism. Again and again, it has discovered that people usually prefer imperfect governments of their own choosing to enlightened rulers imposed from outside.

America’s problem is not that it is uniquely arrogant. It is that, like every great power before it, it has become convinced that its own experience is universal.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged iran and north korea | 3 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Surviving Iran

By Tom Arms | Sat 20th June 2026 - 9:23 am

America will survive the Iran War. It has survived worse. Israel may not be so fortunate. Superpowers can afford mistakes. Small countries living in dangerous neighbourhoods cannot.

People have been predicting the decline of American power since Vietnam. America lost in Vietnam, failed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and suffered humiliation in Somalia. Yet the United States remains the world’s dominant military and financial power. Superpowers can absorb defeats. They possess strategic depth.

Of course, the same may not be said about individual politicians. Donald Trump has been seriously weakened inside and outside MAGA world. So have the Republican politicians who have hitched themselves to the Trumpian star.

But in the case of Israel, there is more at stake than a few right-wing security-minded politician. Israel is a country of fewer than ten million in a hostile region. Its security rests on three pillars: military superiority, American support and deterrence—the belief among its enemies that resistance is futile.

If the Iran War has weakened any of those pillars, the consequences for Israel are potentially much greater than for the United States. America’s allies may doubt Washington’s judgment, but they are unlikely to abandon the dollar or NATO. Israel, by contrast faces increased diplomatic isolation; reduced confidence in US support; strengthened adversaries convinced that Israel’s power has limits; domestic political divisions and—most important of all—the end of the aura of invincibility that has been central to Israeli strategy since 1967.

In Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu thought he had found a kindred spirit who believed in solving problems through the barrel of a gun with a few dollars thrown in for good measure. In Gaza he humbled Hamas with American help. It cost 73,000 Palestinian lives and a great deal of international support. Americans, for the first time, began to question their unquestioning support for Israel.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged benjamin netanyahu, donald trump, iran and israel | 6 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 7th June 2026 - 10:04 am

AI

Sitting next to Pope Leo XIV when he launched his controversial encyclical on AI was Chris Olah—co-founder of the AI company Anthropic.

His presence was no accident. The Pope’s 235 page “Magnifica Humanitas” calls for regulation of technology to protect the dignity of humankind.

Olah’s position is the same and he has made a name for himself by refusing to allow the Trump Administration to use Anthropic for military and intelligence purposes.

Olah is on one side of a technologically-driven political divide in Silicon Valley. On the other side are figures such as Marc Andreesen, who has been involved with many of the tech industry’s leading brands and Peter Thiel, CEO of the AI company Palantir.

Thiel and Andreesen far-right libertarians who want to avoid regulation. They see technological development as essential and that the controllers of technology should also control the politics for the benefit of all. Both men are big contributors to Donald Trump and conservative causes.

The debate goes beyond Silicon Valley to the international political stage. The Trump Administration big concern is winning the AI race with China. Donald Trump recently signed an Executive Order allow government oversight to prevent cyber-attacks. But he did so reluctantly. He wants to keep regulation to a minimum; encourage private investment in AI and then use the product as an instrument of national power.

The EU wants AI to grow. It wants investment in European AI companies but they view government’s role as a partner and referee rather than spectator.

To put it simply: Trump wants to win the race. Brussels—and the pope-want to control AI. Britain wants to win the race safely.

The difficulty for Britain is that middle positions become harder to maintain as technologies mature. During the early nuclear age, Britain initially tried to bridge Washington and continental Europe. Eventually it had to choose where to place its strategic weight.

AI may force a similar decision. If the next decade brings increasingly powerful AI systems, the central geopolitical question may not be US versus China but whether the Western world adopts the American model of strategic competition or the European model of precautionary governance

Donald Trump and the liberal consensus

The Trump administration has always been an alliance of groups and people that oppose the so-called liberal consensus: the idea that the U.S. government should regulate business, provide social welfare programs, promote infrastructure projects, protect civil rights, and support a rules-based international order.

Since the 1980s Republicans accepted many of the institutional pillars of the post-war order—especially free trade, alliances and global leadership—even while seeking to reduce regulation and constrain the growth of government.

Trump upended that system, promising to dismantle the federal government built around the liberal consensus, the government his voters thought they hated because they thought its protection of equality before the law gave Black Americans, Brown Americans, women, and gender or religious minorities a leg up on white Christian men.

This racist lobby combined with a growing number concerned about immigration, cultural change, distrust of elites, de-industrialisation and globalisation. Or they thought funding for science wasted their money on the research that right-wing influencers mocked for wasting their money and intruding on their freedom. Or they thought the U.S. contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and U.S. participation in alliances did not put “America First.”

In 2024, Trump cobbled together enough groups who thought that way to win the White House, and as soon as he took power, he set out to destroy the liberal consensus government with the help of loyalists he installed in key positions.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged AI, donald trump and iran war | 1 Comment

Observations of an Expat: NATO Irony

By Tom Arms | Sat 6th June 2026 - 8:58 am

Marco Rubio says the next month’s NATO summit will be one of the most consequential in history. He is right—but not for the reasons he imagines.

President Trump has spent years demanding that Europe take responsibility for its own defence. The Europeans have finally agreed. The problem is that they have also concluded that they cannot rely entirely on Washington.

That realisation is likely to dominate the summit. The immediate result will be more defence spending. The long-term result may be the emergence of a European military-industrial complex capable of challenging America’s dominance of the global arms market.

If so, future historians may conclude that Donald Trump did more than persuade Europe to rearm. He persuaded it to compete.

It will not be a happy group when the 32 NATO leaders gather in Ankara on 7-8 July. The 30 European members are still angry about Donald Trump’s designs on Greenland; statements about “European civilisational decline” and his failure to consult allies before starting a war with Iran. Trump is angry that Denmark won’t handover Greenland; NATO restrictions on US airbases during the Iran War and the Alliance’s failure to join the Israeli-American war on Iran.

But at the top of the agenda will be the Ukraine War and European re-armament. The Trump Administration has successfully shifted the cost of arming Ukraine from American to European shoulders with the PURL (Prioritised Ukrainian Requirements List) programme. Trump plus the Ukraine War and the growing Russian threat has prompted Europe that it needs more weapons now. It takes time to build the factories and shipyards to make them so they are by buying more from America.

The Russian threat is bonanza for the US defence industry. Between 2021 and 2015 European arms imports increased 217 percent over the previous five-year period. The estimated amount is $220 billion. European NATO is rushing to fill its defence gaps with off-the-shelf F-35s, Patriot Missile Systems, HIMARS, Apache helicopters and munitions.

But while shelling out billions to America, Europeans are also building the factories and shipyards that will build the weapons that will in the long-term replace American imports.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged donald trump and NATO | 9 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 31st May 2026 - 9:30 am

Cuba

A $100 million would go a long way to alleviate the humanitarian crisis caused by the US blockade of Cuba.

The island’s communist government has already made big concessions on the economic front in an attempt to appease the Trump Administration.

It has legalised small and medium-sized private businesses; abolished Cuba’s dual currency; opened more than 2,000 additional occupations to private initiative and allowed exiled Cubans to invest in the island’s economy.

On the political front they have been less forthcoming. Only a handful of political prisoners have been released and there is no sign of the regime introducing freedom of expression or a reform of its judicial system.

There is also the additional problem of who distributes the aid should it be released. Havana says it will handle the distribution through established government channels. Washington says those channels are corrupt and the money must be distributed by the Catholic church.

Finally, there is the question of whether the $100 million carrot is a mere ruse. That the Trump Administration will settle for nothing less than complete regime change; the dismantlement of Cuba’s socialist state and the return to pre-1959 style American domination of the Caribbean island.

To achieve that, Washington may just have to invade the island. They increasingly appear prepared to do just that. The aircraft carrier USS Nimitz has been parked in the Caribbean. The Cuban president, 94-year-old Raul Castro, has been indicted for murder.

And finally, Cuban-American Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that the military option is more likely than the diplomatic.

Israel

Benjamin Netanyahu has proven himself a tough man. Since the October 7 attacks he has launched wars in Gaza, Lebanon and Iran, to say nothing of the continuing turmoil in the West Bank. Few Israeli leaders have confronted so many enemies on so many fronts.

But toughness alone will not win the forthcoming election. Opinion polls show his approval ratings at between 40 and 47 percent and Likud is trailing a coalition opposition. If Netanyahu is to survive politically, he must prove not only that he can start wars, but that he can end them—and win them.

In Gaza Hamas has been badly damaged but not destroyed. This week the government ordered the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to increase their occupation from 64 percent of the territory to 70 percent. Yet despite repeated declarations of imminent victory from both Jerusalem and Washington, there remains no clear political settlement and no obvious answer to the question of what happens to Gaza when the fighting finally ends.

The ceasefire in Lebanon is meant to be an integral element in the ceasefire in the Iran War. Yet Israel continues to fire missiles into Lebanon and has moved ground forces into the southern part of the country to create a security zone. Netanyahu says he sees no reason to “take his foot off the pedal.” For many Israelis, a security zone may look like a military necessity. For others, it looks suspiciously like another open-ended commitment.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged cuba, india and israel | 1 Comment

Observations of an Expat: The Elephant Returns

By Tom Arms | Sat 30th May 2026 - 9:24 am

For several years the Brexit elephant sat quietly in a corner of Westminster, ignored by politicians who hoped it would eventually wander away. Instead, it has stood up, stretched its legs and begun stomping through the corridors of power once again.

“Rejoin,” Brexit was a “catastrophic mistake,” declared wannabe prime minister Wes Streeting.

Not so fast, said other main contender Andy Burnham, he hoped Britain would rejoin “in my lifetime” (Burnham is 56), but feared that any sudden rush to rejoin would further divide an already divided country.

Former PM Tony Blair then entered the fray with his 6,000-word essay. The former staunch Remainer opposed a quick application to return to the European fold. Instead, Britain should concentrate on rebuilding its economy and repairing relations with Brussels.

The Liberal Democrats remain the most pro-European party. But even they are focused more on a gradual progression—a return to the Customs Union by the end of this decade and practical moves towards deeper cooperation and integration.

The Conservatives, Reform and the new far-right party Restore, are simply against anything that smacks of improved relations with Brussels.

But what about the Europeans? They opposed Britain leaving, but they do they want Britain back?

In many respects, Britain is quite a catch for the EU, especially as the Ukraine War and the rise of China has forced it to focus increasingly on security issues. Britain has Europe’s largest navy with 450,000 tons under the Union Jack. France is just behind but current UK defense plans will put it well ahead by 2040.

Then there is the fact that Britain is a nuclear power. President Emmanuel Macron has talked about extending the French nuclear umbrella to other European countries. Such pledges would be more effective if they included the British deterrent.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged brexit, european union and featured | 13 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 24th May 2026 - 10:23 am

The Thucydides Trap

There has been much talk recently about the “Thucydides Trap”. China’s President Xi Jinping is reported to have warned Donald Trump during his recent trip to Beijing that China and America were heading straight for the “Thucydides Trap.”

So what is it? It is a term coined by the diplomatic historian Graham Alison in his book “Destined for War.” Allison uses Thucydides’ history of the disastrous Peloponnesian War between Sparta (the established power) and Athens (the rising power) to argue that when one power becomes to challenge the hegemony of an existing power then war is inevitable.

It is not quite. In the 1920s the American military was drawing up plans for a war against Britain. The plan was called War Red. The plan involved a major land invasion across the border into Canada and a naval attack on British colonies in the Caribbean.

Britain had a counter-attack plan, but its plan was not as comprehensive. Fairly early on it realised that its war-ravaged economy could not win a war against the rising American industrial giant. There were other important factors. These included the two countries’ shared experience of World War I. There was also the fact that a 300-year-old shared cultural experience and perspective outweighed the competitive aspects of the relationship. The British increasingly saw themselves as the Greeks to America’s Rome, as Harold Macmillan later put it.

“War Plan Red was one of the rare cases where strategic rivalry did not culminate in war. Alison gives 12 examples of how countries became victims of the Thucydides Trap. They include the Crusades, the Franco-Prussian War, World War One and World War Two. War Red is listed—along with three others—as the exceptions that prove the rule.

Cultural links ensured that War Red did not become a disastrous reality. But China and America lack the deep cultural, linguistic and historical ties that softened the transfer of power from Britain to the United States.

Ebola

Ebola is a terrible disease. It attacks your internal organs. You bleed from the inside out. Death is painful and quick.

In much of Africa it is customary to wash the bodies of corpses before burial. The practice can be fatal as the disease is spread through contact with infected bodily fluids. They remain contagious long after death.

In the last outbreak, 2014-2016, 11,300 people died. The epidemic was contained to West Africa because Britain and America flooded the region with health workers and soldiers. The UK committed more than $500 million to fight the epidemic. America sent 3,000 people to fight the disease.

It worked. The doctors and nurses won. Not only that but systems were put in place to effectively detect and fight any further outbreaks. Then came Trump in America and Boris Johnson in Britain. Aid budgets were slashed. Three thousand staff were cut from America’s Centre for Disease Control. The biggest axe fell on the departments involved in fighting overseas epidemics. The situation was almost as bad in Britain.

The epidemic fighting network that was established a decade ago was badly weakened. Especially hard hit were the surveillance systems which are designed to detect the first signs of the disease, contain it and treat it. Britain has so far committed only $30 million to fighting the latest outbreak. America has made promises but little has materialised. Oxfam says that coordination meetings now produce “blank stares” when money is requested.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged china, donald trump and ebola | 7 Comments

Observations of an expat: Dangerous diplomatic chess

By Tom Arms | Sat 23rd May 2026 - 10:15 am

In the wake of his Beijing sojourn, Donald Trump is embarking on a dangerous and complex game of diplomatic chess with Taiwan as the piece most likely to be sacrificed for the greater American good.

While in China, Trump became convinced what the rest of the world has known for some time. China cannot be bullied. Threats of escalating tariffs and civilisational extinction just roll off the Chinese political back. They have been around a long time and have seen it all.

Next, China is as much of a superpower as the United States. And, if he is going to avoid an Armageddon-like nuclear war, he has to learn to live on the same planet with Beijing instead of baiting and containing it.

Finally, the American president is almost certainly convinced that Xi Jinping is sincere when he says that China wants Taiwan and any American attempt to block a Chinese takeover could easily lead to a Sino-American “clashes and even conflict.”

The three-way dilemma of China-US-Taiwan dates back to before President Nixon’s historic visit to China. It has been resolved with the famous “strategic ambiguity” which was designed to deter war by making the Chinese uncertain about US intervention.

Trump doesn’t do ambiguity. He does transactions. The Taiwan issue presents him with an opportunity to use his much-hyped negotiating skills to pull off one of the great transactions of all time. A tempting prospect which ego would find difficult to resist.

But with whom and how?

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged china and donald trump | 2 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 10th May 2026 - 8:52 am

In a fit of pique Donald Trump announced that he was withdrawing 5,000 troops from Germany. He also said that he was considering pulling soldiers out of Italy and Spain.

Why these three countries? Because their leaders had the temerity to criticise the US president.

Trump is cutting off Uncle Sam’s face to spite his nose while shooting him in the foot. In short, it is a stupid move. America needs Europe. For a start. Europe is the largest financial pillar outside the United States supporting the US defense industry—it spends more than $100 billion a year. And the US defense industry is five percent of America’s GDP.

American bases in Europe also enable the US to project power throughout Eurasia, Africa, the Middle East and the western end of the Indo-Pacific region. It has bases in Britain, Germany, the Baltic countries, Poland, Spain, Italy and even Greenland.

The US bases enable the Pentagon to pre-position equipment and fuel for rapid deployments; provide some of the world’s finest hospitals; repair centres; intelligence; command centres and deployment infrastructure. Europe is the foundational stone that makes global power projection possible.

Trump’s recently published National Security Strategy focused on “civilisational decline” in Europe and the need to focus on the Western Hemisphere. But it also said that Europe would “remain as a platform for US global operations.”

Given the above, it should follow that the US president should learn to be nicer to the people he needs.

Trump is off to China next week. To be exact, he is in Beijing next Thursday and Friday for talks with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

At the moment the US and China are in the middle of a trade truce. That is because the trade war that Trump launched last April proved disastrous to both countries. Trump raised tariffs to over 100 percent. China immediately cut off America’s access to the rare earth minerals. Trump retaliated by reducing Chinese access to American technology and financial instruments. The result was a Mexican stand-off.

Both sides backed away, lowered tariffs and resumed access to products. But the spate left a bad taste in the mouths of both leaders. They think that Sino-American cooperation will only benefit the other. In fact, the only thing keeping Trump and Xi talking to each other is the fear of the economic damage each can inflict on each other’s country.

This will upset US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent who has spent the first part of this year negotiated a set of trade deals which he hopes will be signed in Beijing. According to diplomatic sources, it is more likely that the best result will be a pair of fixed smiles and a handshake.

May should be an interesting diplomatic month for India. It will have to perform a delicate balancing act between the American-dominated West and the Chinese-dominated East and South.

Posted in Europe / International and Op-eds | Tagged tom arms world review | 3 Comments

Observations of an ex-pat: War’s end?

By Tom Arms | Sat 9th May 2026 - 12:17 pm

The Gulf region is on the cusp of peace. That is according to President Donald Trump who issues more lies and obfuscations than my dog Bear barks in any given day.

Having said that, both Axios and Reuters report that there is now a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which indicates Iranian willingness to discuss suspending uranium enrichment, a partial lifting of US sanctions against Iran and unfreezing of assets and some sort of return to normality in the Strait of Hormuz.

It should be stressed, however, that an MOU is not a peace deal. It is merely an agreement on talking points.

But According to Trump the MOU was enough for him to suspend “Operation Freedom”—a major US naval effort to throw a “red, white and blue protective umbrella” over shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Wrong. The real reason for its suspension was the Saudis fear that Iran would fire on the protective convoy. The convoy would fire back. Trump would order renewed missile attacks, and the war would again spread throughout the Gulf.

Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff may be the two Americans meeting with Iranian (and/or Pakistani) officials in Geneva and Islamabad, but behind the scenes America’s junior partners in the Iran War are calling at least some of the shots. These are Israel, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE.

Israel is more like full partner than junior partner. Its Government is certainly the most hawkish. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu played a key role in dragging Trump into the Iran War and according to him is in “almost daily contact” with the president. The Israeli security establishment views Iran as an “existential threat” to Israel. It wants to overthrow the theocratic regime and replace it with a pro-Israeli secular government that will end support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.

Netanyahu has the support of Israeli public opinion. It is starting to drop, but is still pro-war. At the start of March, 80 percent of Israelis supported the war. This had dropped to 54 percent by the end of April. 61 percent are opposed to the ceasefire.

Another factor in Israeli thinking is that they are totally unaffected by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. None of their energy or fertiliser supplies come from the Gulf Region.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged observations of an ex pat | 4 Comments

Tom Arm’s World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 3rd May 2026 - 9:46 am

Ukraine

Robots are the future face of war. And Ukraine’s dominance in the production of drones and unmanned boats and ground vehicles means that it is well on its way to becoming a defense industry superpower.

Drone production is up from 800,000 a year three years ago to seven million in 2025. They enjoy a three to one advantage over the Russians over the top of the range First Person View (FPV) drones. These are drones fitted with a camera which allows the operator to see in real time everything the drone sees. Ukraine is also producing 1,000 fixed wing drones a day. These can travel up to 1,500 miles into Russian territory.

Ukraine’s success with unmanned boats and submarines has given it dominance in the Black Sea. But its latest success has been with a variety of Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs). They are used primarily to deliver supplies to front line troops, but they have also been used to lay mines and rescue soldiers trapped behind enemy lines. The latest versions are also used as launching pads for armed drones.

Ukraine has 2,500 companies involved in the development and production of drones and unmanned vehicles which, according to President Volodomyr Zelensky, have conducted 22,000 missions in the first three months of this year.

Russia is, of course, also stepping up production of drones and unmanned vehicles. Early in the war Moscow had the advantage. But Ukraine adopted an entrepreneurial approach to production which has overtaken and streaked ahead of Russian manufacturing whose rigid production base is heavily centralised Soviet-style.

Which brings us to Ukraine’s future as a defense industry superpower. Most of the country’s unmanned weaponry is fully utilised fighting the Russian behemoth. But Ukrainians are starting to sell to other countries a limited surplus and—more importantly their expertise– to help pay for the war. And when the fighting finally stops, Ukraine’s lead in the field will play a major part in financing the country’s reconstruction.

Recently President Volodomyr Zelensky made an unscheduled trip to the United Arab Emirates to talk to them about drone defenses for protection against Iranian missiles. The Gulf States are already well-equipped with American-made Patriot missiles and THAAD (The High-Altitude Air Defense) systems. But these cost up to a $1million per fired missiles whereas Ukrainian drones range from $2,500 to $25,000.

So far Kyiv has concluded deals—or is the final stages of negotiations with the following countries: Germany, Britain, Norway, the Netherlands, Romania, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Japan, Turkey, Azerbaijan and Syria. Defense experts estimate that sales of equipment and know could be worth $8billion this year, rising to $22 billion-plus in 2028. This means a substantial contribution to Ukraine’s defense budget of $80 billion. However, it is a drop in the ocean when one considers the estimated $500 billion in reconstruction costs.

The success of Ukraine’s drone industry has a wider financial impact than immediate cash revenue. It enables the country to project itself as an industrial power for decades to come which improves its ability to borrow on the international bond markets to pay for both the war and reconstruction.

The King and Trump

One does not discuss private conversations with the monarch. That is the convention—in fact, the rule—when talking with the British king.

There is an exceptionally good reason for this rule/convention. The king must be seen to be above politics. He must be to appoint prime ministers based on the wishes of the electorate rather than his own personal prejudices.

That does not mean that the king cannot discuss politics with politicians. And because he has been involved at the top end of the political process his entire life, he is well-placed to give advice. And he does. To political leaders around the world. He just does it PRIVATELY.

That is why eyebrows were raised when Trump revealed the contents of a private Oval Office conversation with King Charles when he told the world that the king is opposed to Iran having nuclear weapons. “Even more than I do,” he quipped.

The president’s comment was no great revelation. Of course, King Charles III is opposed to nuclear proliferation as Buckingham Palace made clear with a slightly raised eyebrow. That is the British government position, and the king supports the government of the day.

The king’s views on the subject are less important than the fact that – once again—Donald Trump has proven that he cannot be trusted to abide by the normal rules and conventions.

Iran

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged donald trump, iran, King Charles III and ukraine | 2 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Special Relationship

By Tom Arms | Sat 2nd May 2026 - 9:39 am

The phrase “Special Relationship” was coined by Winston Churchill in postwar triumph. It survives today in strain.

The call for Britain and America to continue their wartime alliance was a clarion call to defend against Soviet aggression.

It worked. The West won the Cold War and in the post-Cold War years the two countries have seen advantage – Britain more than the US—in continuing to cooperate in military and intelligence matters to counter terrorism and rogue states such as Afghanistan.

Of course, over 80 years, the “Special Relationship” has had its ups and downs. At the moment, it is having a serious down. King Charles’s successful visit has done little more than apply a sticking plaster to the widening transatlantic gulf.

However, the ties between Britain and the United States are more than political. As I make clear in my book “America Made in Britain” (note subtle plug), they cover the entire gamut of human relations and include language, trade, finance, philosophy, religion, law, sport, theatre, publishing…. The fact is that the two countries are joined at the historical hip and not even Donald Trump or JD Vance can change the past.

The political, military and intelligence ties that politicians call “The Special Relationship” would not be possible without our shared history.

Let us start with the law—the bedrock on which every nation is built. Every American state’s legal system is based on English common law. There is one exception—Louisiana’s French history means its legal system is based on the French. The federal courts and the Supreme Court use English common law and regularly refer to the Magna Carta medieval English court cases in their judgements.

Almost all the major American religious organisations—Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Quakers, Unitarians, Congregationalists, and Baptists—started in Britain before crossing the Atlantic. Roman Catholics secured their foothold in Maryland which was designated as a haven for Britain’s Catholics.

Britain and America are each other’s biggest foreign investor. American investment in Britain is $900 billion and creates 1.6 million jobs. Britain has $800 billion invested in the US and creates 1.4 million jobs.

America’s Declaration of Independence and constitution are the political expression of the English Age of Enlightenment. Sir Isaac Newton laid the foundations of the enlightenment in his 1687 “Principia” when he shifted the balance of society so that it was no longer based on faith and belief but on scientific observation and logically determined mathematical formulae.

Newton was followed in 1698 by John Locke who echoed the future words of Thomas Jefferson when he wrote in his “Two Treatises of Government that under “natural law” all people have the right to “life, liberty and property.” He further argued that that the governed have the right to overthrow incompetent rulers.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged special relationship | 22 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 26th April 2026 - 10:30 am

United States

Mid-term election fever is starting to grip America. And it comes at a time when American’s trust in their electoral system – the cornerstone of any democratic state – is plummeting.

It is still six months before Americans troop to the polls to elect a third of their senators and all the members of the House of Representatives. But the candidates are busy at the hustings. This is mainly because American elections are a two-stage affair. Stage one the parties vote to decide who will be their candidate and in stage two the winners of the “primaries” compete for the main prize.

But will the elections be free and fair? Only 20 percent of Republicans think they will be, 25 percent of Democrats and 22 percent of Independents.

For this lack of trust, we can thank the current resident of the White House. His never-ending allegation that the 2020 presidential elections were stolen and claims that the current mid-term elections are likely to suffer the same fate have encouraged his MAGA base—and others to deny the veracity of any election result.

Actually, polls show that distrust in Americans started at the turn of the century with the Gore v. Bush presidential election. It recovered under Obama but then took a major beating when Trump came along. Basically, his assertion is that it is inconceivable that people would vote against him. Therefore, it is impossible for Donald Trump – or anyone he supports – to lose an election.

Democrats claim that to ensure that he wins, Trump will go to any length, including creating conditions that allow him to declare martial law to prevent elections being held. They also fear that he could send armed ICE agents to key voting districts to intimidate African American and Latino voters from turning up to vote or simply declare some votes invalid.

All of those measures would be illegal and would be quickly challenged and reversed in the courts. But then the courts themselves could be used by both parties to challenge results with which they disagree. This could result in delaying the seating of elected representatives and bring the electoral process into further disrepute.

Republicans fear that the Democrats will flood the voting booths with illegal immigrants and claim this has been a feature of past elections. It is true that some illegal immigrants have voted and that they voted Democrat. But the issue is a major red herring. In 2024, Michigan recorded the largest number of attempted votes by illegal immigrants – 15 out of 5.7 million votes cast. Other states recorded either single digits or no cases at all.

The House of Representatives Committee on House Administration is tasked with the job of adjudicating any disputed elections to the US House of Representatives. To try and head off any Trumpian-backed disputes, committee member Joe Morelle has produced a list of 150 ways that Trump may try to unfairly influence or block elections.

These have all been discussed with state election officials who are responsible for organising and monitoring elections (the federal government is expressly forbidden from involvement in elections). Whether that is enough remains to be seen. Certainly, the stakes are high in November. A Republican victory would mean two more years of Trump unfettered. A Democratic landslide—which is widely predicted– could lead to a third impeachment or, at the very least, a Trump White House encumbered by endless congressional investigations.

Iran

Chaos, chaos everywhere, with no end to the Iran War in sight.

Both Tehran and Washington are hotbeds of infighting and backstabbing without the sign of any clear leadership which is a prerequisite to end the war.

In the Pentagon this week, Secretary of Defense/War Pete Hegseth fired John Phelan, who as Secretary of the Navy was responsible for organising the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian ports.

No reason was given for the “immediate” sacking of Phelan, but it has been widely reported, that Hegseth was annoyed with Phelan going behind his back to speak directly with the president.

Since the fighting began, Hegseth has also fired Army Chief of Staff General Randy George, and Jacqueline Smith, editor of the editorially independent Pentagon newspaper “Stars and Stripes.” Since taking office, the former TV presenter has sacked more than a dozen senior generals and admirals.

As for Trump himself, his strategy appears to consist of a series of rolling ultimatums as he goes from calling on the Iranian people to rise up; to bombing Iran into the “stone age;” to joint management of the Strait of Hormuz to naval blockade….

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged gulf states, iran and us mid-term elections 2026 | 6 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Energy Security

By Tom Arms | Sat 25th April 2026 - 9:20 am

Energy Security. The Ukraine War made it a hot topic for a Europe dependent on Russian oil and gas. The Iran War – alongside the climate change debate – has revived the issue for the rest of the world.

The world’s main fossil fuel production centres are unstable. As a result, demand is growing to replace oil and gas with renewable energy. Furthermore, the renewable energy should be produced in areas which the consuming countries control. Many countries are already doing just that. Some better than others.

Surprisingly, Trump’s “drill, baby, drill” America does well when it comes to renewable sources of …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged energy security | 3 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 19th April 2026 - 11:44 am

China

The invisible hand of Beijing has been busily pulling the backstage strings to try and organise Iran War peace talks.

Pakistan—which has been the lead country in mediation country—is a close ally of China and is clearly coordinating Its honest broker activities with Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi who prefers to remain in the shadows.

Economically China desperately needs an end to Trump’s War. Ninety percent of its oil comes from Iran and, as the world’s second largest economy, China needs global stability to maintain growth.

At the same time, Chinese President Xi Jinping must be smiling to himself as Donald Trump entangles himself in a needless Middle East war which distracts him away from the Chinese priorities of Taiwan, the Philippines and the South China Sea. It also enables him to project China as a nation of calm reasonableness compared to an America run by an erratic president committed to riding roughshod over international law and conventions.

But what China does not want to do is be seen to be actively involved in discussions about the Iran War. This week a host of visitors including the Spanish prime minister and the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi visited Beijing to try to persuade Xi Jinping to offer direct mediation.

Tehran, for its part, has called on China to guarantee its security. The Chinese have the facilities to do the job. They have a naval base around the corner in Djibouti on the Red Sea. Even closer is their port of Gwadar near in Pakistan near the Iranian border. It is currently used exclusively for commercial purposes, but it could be quickly adapted to military use.

But China’s rulers have looked at the sad experiences of the US and concluded that they have little desire to commit their military to the risk of being dragged into a costly war that will undermine their own strength and brand.

Behind the scenes, backstage, quiet diplomacy—yes. Anything more, No, for fear of being blamed for any failure. And where the Middle East is concerned, failure is the name of the game.

Hungary

It is now time for the big Hungarian clean-up. The new prime minister, Peter Magyar has promised just that, and he has a comfortable super majority to achieve it.

But it will not be easy, Orban has packed the media, industry and academia with his cronies. They have all said they would construct legal obstacles to dislodge them, and the courts have also been filled with Fidesz supporters.

From a foreign perspective Magyar’s biggest challenge will be clawing back funding for the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC). The MCC poses as an educational institute but in reality, is the main financial vehicle for funding an international far-right network of institutions, political parties, pressure groups and think tanks.

The funds for MCC come from shares in Hungary’s massive state-owned energy company MOL. Orban organised a transfer of a large bloc of MOL shares to MCC. They in turn have sent funds to the Reform Party in UK, AfD in Germany, the National Rally in France and Vox in Spain. MCC also helps to finance the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC)

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged china, donald trump, hungary, pope leo xiv and the vatican | 1 Comment

Observations of an Expat: The Cost

By Tom Arms | Sat 18th April 2026 - 9:43 am

Trump’s War against Iran has upended the world economy. And it has only just begun. As one economist said: “At the moment things are bad. They are going to get worse and they could become catastrophic.”

At the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) spring meeting of world finance ministers the IMF revised down world economic growth for 2026 from 3.3 percent to 3.1 percent. It then went on to warn that if the Iran War continued much longer there was a real risk of a global recession.

Of the world’s advanced economies, the UK is the hardest hit according to both the IMF and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Predicted growth in the UK is 0.8 percent for 2026, down from 1.3 percent.

Even harder hit are the Asia Pacific countries who are dependent on the Persian Gulf for their gas and oil-based energy. Asia is also the most populous continent and accounts for more than half of global manufacturing which means that economic hits to that region have major global impact. The UN Development Programme (UNDP) reckons that the war has already cost Asia-Pacific countries $300 billion.

Fossil fuels are not the only vital commodity exported from the Persian Gulf. The region is the world’s major source of urea which is a derivative of natural gas and a major component of fertiliser. There is a real danger that the lack of fertiliser will hit global crop yields.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has warned that forty-five million people could be pushed into “food insecurity” and that food shortages could reach “catastrophic levels.”

The Eurozone has also been hit. IMF growth predictions for the Eurozone have been revised down from 1.3 percent to 1.1 percent and inflation is expected to go up from 2.1 percent to 2.6 percent. Trump’s war has made it unlikely that the European Central Bank can cut interest rates. In fact, they may have to raise them. This view is being echoed by central banks around the world.

Germany is the hardest hit of the Eurozone countries. This is because its economy is heavily geared towards manufacturing which in turn is fuelled by oil and gas. Because France derives a large part of its energy from nuclear power plants it will escape a lot of the pain, but the French finance minister has warned about inflation and supply chain risks.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged donald trump and iran | 9 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 12th April 2026 - 10:04 am

UK and Russia

UK-Russian tensions have been ratcheted up several notches this week. It started when Vladimir Putin sent a Russian frigate to escort two shadow fleet oil tankers through the English Channel.

The move was a response to Sir Keir Starmer’s threat to board and impound any of the sanctioned tankers moving through British waters. Result: stand- off.

The tankers issue was followed by a press conference at which Defence Secretary John Healey announced that British forces—in cooperation with Norway—had foiled a Russian attempt to cut a key undersea cable north of the UK.

Not revealed at the press conference was that the cable in question is the FARICE-1 undersea cable which goes through the Faroe Islands to Iceland and then along the west coast of Greenland into the Canadian Arctic. It is the only cable in the region and is used extensively for military communications in the Arctic where the Russians have established military superiority.

NATO has recently awakened to the Arctic. Trump’s move on Greenland is part of that awakening. Another part is Britain’s decision to this summer send a carrier group to the “Far North.”

The Russian cable-cutting attempt by three Russian submarines was a clear bid to disrupt communications between the carrier group and its command headquarters. If the submarines had been successful, then the British force would have had to rely on satellite communications. These are highly sophisticated but more susceptible to jamming and cyber-attacks than communications through an undersea cable.

Britain should expect more Russian attempts to cut seabed communication cables. The UK is a global hub for undersea communications. Seventy cables run in and out of Britain. They carry normal internet traffic, trillions in financial data and military comms. To cut these cables the Russians have developed a new Gugi and Akula class of submarines that can operate deep undersea levels.

To counter this Defence Secretary Healey this week’s press conference to announce that he is investing $137 million in RAF sub hunters. The government is also increasing the overall defense budget to $350 billion—or 2.5 percent of GDP—by the end of next year.

Germany

Germany is also upping its defenses. But it is created domestic problems on the way.

In January, the government launched its Military Service Modernisation Act. This requires that all men—when they turn 18—complete a government questionnaire about their suitability and willingness to serve in the military. Women can also volunteer to complete the questionnaire.

The aim is to build a database of people who can be called upon to voluntarily serve in the military if there is a sudden increase in tensions.

Many however, fear that the act is a step towards conscription. Their fears seemed to be justified by a clause in the act that all men—regardless of their willingness to serve or not—must notify the Bundeswehr (the German army) before leaving the country for more than three months.

This week Defense Secretary Boris Pistorius tried to allay conscription fears by announcing that men would NOT have to reveal that they were leaving the country for more than three months.

However, fears remain, that Germany’s Military Modernisation Act is a back door to a return to conscription.

Hungary

It has been a long-established diplomatic convention that governments do not interfere in other countries domestic affairs—especially elections.

The Trump Administration is no respected of conventions and this week they proved it by dispatching Vice President JD Vance to Hungary to campaign for incumbent “illiberal” prime minister Viktor Orban.

Vance claimed that his appearance did not really constitute interference in Hungarian elections. He went on to say that he was not telling people whom to vote for “but what I am telling you is that the bureaucrats in Brussels…should not be listened to.” He added the clarion cry: “Go to the polls… stand with Viktor Orban because he stands for you.”

To counter any claims that he was not interfering in the Hungarian electoral process, Vance said that he was in Hungary to counter interference in the elections by the European Commission.

The truth of the matter is that Brussels has carefully refrained from making any comment for fear that they would be accused of interference. Orban and Vance submit that this silence is a form of interference.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged germany, hungary, russia and united kingdom | Leave a comment

Observations of an Expat: Two-State Solution

By Tom Arms | Sat 11th April 2026 - 9:59 am

TWO-STATE SOLUTION. That is the only answer to the Palestinian conundrum; the Arab-Israeli problem and now, the Iran War.

Neither the US nor Israel can bomb the Palestinian issue out of existence. It only creates recruiting sergeants for future generations.

Hitler tried it with his Final Solution. Even though six million Jews died in horrific circumstances he failed. The Jewish state rose from the ashes of the Holocaust with a determination that they will never again face extermination and that the land of Israel is theirs by right of God’s promise to Abraham.

Problem was that the Biblical land was occupied by other people who called themselves Palestinians. They were not a state. They were more like a tribe within the Ottoman Empire and later the British Mandate. They had land. That land was taken from them by the Jewish state in wars in 1948, 1956 and 1967.

But Israel’s religious right-wingers demand the Biblical lands of Eretz Israel and the entire country fears that a Palestinian state on their borders will create a permanently hostile nation as their next-door neighbour.

Wake up Israel, a permanently hostile neighbour is exactly what you have created with decades of on-off bombing campaigns and land attacks. The only answer is a two-state solution which recognises that both sides have more to gain from peace than war.

It will not be easy. It will take years of carefully crafted negotiations, and both sides will need to keep the goal firmly in sight. It will start with confidence-building measures. They can be trivial things which create an obvious benefit to both sides. Once those are in place and creating results than it will be more difficult to return to war because it will mean giving up the gains achieved with the confidence building measures.

This has been done before. The best formerly intractable example is Northern Ireland. In the 1970s no one could envisage an end to the Troubles in the province. The IRA and Ulster paramilitaries were busy shooting each other and the British army and government was caught in the political and military crossfire.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged palestine and two state solution | 8 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 5th April 2026 - 10:07 am

Sir Keir Starmer should be Britain’s Foreign Secretary. His handling of foreign policy is first-class.

Unfortunately, for a country’s foreign policy to be effective, it needs a strong economic and political base and Sir Keir — as Prime Minister — has failed to produce that.

But the world economic crisis created by Trump’s attack on Iran and Iran’s closure of the Straits of Hormuz means that the British Prime Minister now must focus on world affairs.

He has decided that he — along with French President Emmanuel Macron — should take the lead in trying to find a diplomatic solution that would re-open the Straits of Hormuz.

This is right. Britain and France are — after the United States — the two biggest Western powers in the Gulf Region. But it is difficult to see how they can achieve their goal.

For a start there is a war and Trump could escalate or declare victory and suddenly pull out. It is almost impossible to predict what this mercurial Sir Keir Starmer should be Britain’s Foreign Secretary. His handling of foreign policy is first-class.

Unfortunately, for a country’s foreign policy to be effective it needs a strong economic and political base and Sir Keir—as prime minister—has failed to produce that.

But the world economic crisis created by Trump’s attack on Iran and Iran’s closure of the Straits of Hormuz means that the British Prime Minister now must focus on world affairs.

He has decided that he—along with French President Emmanuel Macron—should take the lead in trying to find a diplomatic solution that would re-open the Straits of Hormuz.

This is right. Britain and France are—after the United States—the two biggest Western powers in the Gulf Region. But it is difficult to see how they can achieve their goal.

For a start there is a war and Trump could escalate or declare victory and suddenly pull out. It is almost impossible to predict what this mercurial President will do next.

Next, in the closure of the Straits of Hormuz, Iran has discovered a new political weapon with which to beat the West and at the same time create an attractive revenue stream. It has declared the 20-mile-wide maritime chokepoint Iranian waters and says it will close it at will and/or levy toll charges on the oil tankers that pass through every day.

To prevent such a move Sir Keir and President Macron are talking about sanctions and everything short of Trump’s insistence that other western powers despatch warships to replace the American Navy and take control of the Straits of Hormuz.

Posted in Europe / International | Tagged birthright citizenship, donald trump, hungarian election 2026, us attack on iran and Viktor Orban | 15 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Nuclear Questions

By Tom Arms | Sat 4th April 2026 - 9:55 am

The nuclear deterrent must be at the centre of Europe’s security policy. For nearly 80 years that deterrent has been in the hands of the US through its membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).

Britain and France have also had nuclear arsenals. But they do not come close to countering the stockpile of Russian weapons. Their purpose is to give heft to the political power of the two former European colonial powers.

That is changing. It must change. Trump’s repeated threats to withdraw have made it necessary. The most recent is the most worrying. The US president went to war without consulting his NATO allies and without a clear goal or exit strategy. He inevitably ran into difficulties and called upon his NATO allies to extricate him from what looks like an unwinnable conflict. Not wanting to be dragged into a “forever war” in the powder keg Middle East, the NATO allies refused. Trump responded by heaping insult on insult and issuing his clearest threat yet to withdraw from the “most successful military alliance in world history.”

Of course, a Trumpian withdrawal from NATO would not be a simple matter of signing an Executive Order. Marco Rubio saw to that shortly before he was appointed Trump’s Secretary of State. While still in the Senate he co-sponsored a bill which requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate for US withdrawal from the NATO Treaty.

Trump has a one-seat majority in the Senate. But even if it were larger, it is unlikely that he could twist enough Senate arms to secure a two-thirds majority. Fourteen Republican senators — including his sycophantic ally Lindsey Graham — have said they would vote to stay in the alliance. So that route appears blocked.

But the president could still severely damage the alliance. As commander-in-chief he has operational control over all military units so he could simply order the 70,000 US troops in Europe to come home. It would be a stupid move and put him on a collision course with his party in the Senate, but it is just the sort of thing Trump would do.

Such a move would immediately put a big question mark over whether America’s nuclear umbrella would stay in place. Which is why the European members of the alliance are discussing how they could replace the American deterrent.

Posted in Europe / International | Tagged donald trump, NATO and nuclear deterrent | 23 Comments

Observations of an Expat: War Powers

By Tom Arms | Sat 28th March 2026 - 9:37 am

America’s NATO allies are—according to Donald Trump—”cowards” for failing to join his war in Iran. He later added that the US would “never forget” the position of the Europeans at this “critical juncture” in world history.

Trump’s anti- NATO rants reveal an astonishing ignorance of the legal and political obstacles facing other world leaders who want to wage an ill- conceived and poorly executed war which threatens to escalate and plunge the world into economic depression.

It is not entirely clear how, but Trump alone of the world’s democracies appears to ride roughshod over international and domestic laws to wage a dangerous war.

America’s Founding Fathers foresaw the possibility that a dangerously hubristic individual might one day occupy the White House. That is why Article One of the US constitution gives Congress – not the president—the power to declare war.

There are, however, get-outs for a belligerent president to respond quickly to sudden attacks. For a start the Founding Fathers changed the wording of Article One from “make war” to “declare war.” The change was meant to allow the president to respond to a sudden attack—but not to initiate.

In the wake of the Vietnam War, the president’s war powers were restricted further with the 1973 War Powers Act. This legislation instructs the president to inform Congress within 48 hours of the start of military action. If Congress fails to approve the action then troops have to be withdrawn 60 days. There is room for a further 30-day extension if required—but that’s it.

Congress also has the power of the purse which means that it can simply refuse funds to finance the fighting. The Iran War is costing $1 billion a day which is coming out of the existing defense budget. Tump, however, is said to be planning to ask Congress for an additional $200 billion.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged donald trump, iran and observations of an ex pat | 4 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 8th March 2026 - 8:28 am

Texas is a bright red, far-right Republican, conservative state. It has not elected a Democrat to the US Senate for 37 years. That may be about to change. And if it does the repercussions will rock the White House.

Primary elections for one of the Lone Star state’s two Senate seats were held by both the Democrat and Republican parties this week. One of the recognised barometers of political success is the size of the voter turnout. The turnout for the Democrat primary was highest in the state’s history.

The winner was Texas State Representative James Talerico. A middle-of-the-road Democrat with a strong Christian background. The latter is important in bible belt Texas. Talerico won with 52.8 percent. Runner-up Jasmine Crockett (46.9 percent of the vote) conceded gracefully and immediately called on voters to support Talerico.

The Republican primary, in contrast, was a bitter contest, had a low turnout and none of the candidates won the overall majority required to win their party’s nomination. Incumbent Senator John Cornyn won 41.9 percent of the vote and state Attorney General Ken Paxton secured 40.7 percent.

There will be a run-off between the top two candidates on 26 May. Democrats hope that Paxton wins. He is an ultra-conservative MAGA man. He was a key figure in Trump’s campaign to overturn the 2020 election. He is being divorced by his wife on the grounds of desertion and has been accused of corruption, bribery, fraud, abuse of office, obstruction of justice and perjury. The Texas lower house voted to impeach Paxton, but the Senate narrowly voted to acquit, 14 to 16.

Elsewhere in America, the Democrats have flipped nine seats in state special elections (by-elections) since Trump took office. The Republicans have flipped none. The latest Democrat win was in Arkansas. Other wins have been in Georgia, Iowa, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and Texas.

Trump’s Department of Homeland Security has become synonymous with repression. Now the cabinet minister responsible for the department is no more. Kristi Noem has been sacked.

Ms Noem is the first senior figure to be sacked by President Trump in his second term. At this stage in Trump’s first term, 37 people had either been fired or had resigned.

In many ways Ms Noem was perfect for the job at Homeland Security. The former Governor of South Dakota is MAGA to her fingertips and her job involved enforcing the signature policy of the Trump Administration—deportations. Noem grasped the nettle with relish. In less than a year she has overseen a record 675,000 deportations.

Posted in Op-eds | Leave a comment

Observations of an ex pat: Iran

By Tom Arms | Sat 7th March 2026 - 7:20 pm

Iran and the US have been on a collision course since 1979 when the radical Islamic state was founded and 44 US diplomats were taken hostage.

But why now? But also, what are the who’s, what’s, how’s, when’s and where’s of the current car crash and its regional, national and global repercussions.

Who first—the US and Israel. America did not call on its traditional NATO allies. It did not go to the United Nations to seek legal sanctions. The United States did not even bother to inform the G7 countries. The United States acted unilaterally. In fact, Donald Trump acted unilaterally within the US government machine because he did not bother to consult members of Congress let alone seek congressional approval.

The only country that America allied itself with was Israel. It should be noted that this was the first time (other than the air attack in June) that US and Israeli troops have fought together. In the first and second Gulf Wars the US refused Israeli help and there was no Israeli participation in Afghanistan.

There was a very good reason for this. Arab governments may be prepared to accept Israel, but most of their populations remain implacably opposed to the existence of the state of the Jewish state. When Israeli and US forces fight side by side it alienates America from Arab public opinion and shakes the thrones of the Arab monarchies. Iran is unpopular with Arabs, but Israel is reprehensible.

The why and when are linked. Iran is the weakest it has been since the Islamic revolutionary government came to power 47 years ago. Years of sanctions have significantly weakened the economy. Economic hardship coupled with political repression has created waves of riots. Only weeks ago Iranian government shot tens of thousands of protesters demanding an end to the theocratic regime. And finally, the Iranian military has been weakened by the Gaza War and Operation Midnight Hammer which damaged—but clearly did not “obliterate” – Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged iran and observations of an ex pat | 9 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 1st March 2026 - 10:55 am

State of the Union

What a politician omits to say is often more important than what he says. There were two significant omissions during President Trump’s record-breaking State of the Union address on Tuesday night.

The first concerned Ukraine and the second Iran. Tuesday was also the day that Ukraine marked the fourth anniversary of the Russian invasion of their country. Notables from around the world gathered in Kyiv’s Maidan square to mark the occasion. Every Western country was represented – except the United States.

There was no American diplomat, politician or Trump-appointed delegate at this important and moving ceremony. The United States was conspicuous by its absence.

The Ukrainians were also hoping that somewhere in Trump’s speech there would be some mention of support for the Ukrainian cause. There was none. The only mention of Ukraine was in the context of negotiations which repeatedly fail because Trump insists on backing Russian proposals. These include the resignation of Volodomyr Zalensky; the ceding to Russia of all land that Russia currently occupies and more; the neutering of the Ukrainian military and a pledge that Ukraine never join NATO. In short, total surrender.

Iran was mentioned in Tump’s nearly two-hour speech. But what was not mentioned was Trump’s intentions towards Iran. At the moment the largest concentration of US naval firepower since the 2003 Iraq War is gathered off the coast of Iran. It includes two aircraft carrier groups which are comprised of two aircraft carriers, each with 75 fighter bombers and a complement of 7,000 personnel. Each aircraft carrier is supported by cruisers and destroyers, supply vessels, support ships and submarines. The cost to the US taxpayer is tens of millions per day.

Why they are there was omitted from Trump’s speech. Are they off the coast of Iran to threaten to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities. The ones that were “obliterated” earlier this year. Or are they in Middle Eastern waters to protect Iranian protesters—tens of thousands of whom have been slaughtered by their own government. Or are they there to demand the destruction of Iran’s missile programme. Or, is Trump demanding a regime change and a combination of all of the above.

The fact is that Trump has no clear plan and that is how countries become embroiled in “forever wars.”

Ukraine

How do you calculate a nation’s war morale? Its willingness to fight. Its resilience and ability to absorb blow after blow and retain an air of optimism.

The analysts at the CIA, Royal Services Institute (RUSI) and the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) as well as military attaches are experts at counting men, missiles, tanks and planes. They factor in population sizes and supporting economies; place them on the military/diplomatic scales and come up with what is called the “strategic balance.”

But what they fail to include—what they cannot include—is a calculation that represents a country’s willingness to fight.

At the start of the Ukraine War the Russian military was 4.5 times bigger than Ukraine’s. Its economy was nine times larger, and its population was 3.5 times bigger. As Trump would say: The Russians had all the cards.

Or so it would seem. After four years the Ukrainians fought mighty Russia to a standstill. Putin’s economy appears to be faltering and there are reports of Russian officers forcing their troops at a gunpoint into suicide assaults.

On Tuesday the Ukrainians marked the fourth anniversary of the start of Putin’s War with a moving ceremony in Kyiv. It appeared to reveal that the Ukrainians are as determined to drive Putin’s men from their homes as they were four years ago.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged donald trump, france and ukraine | 4 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Shadow Fleet

By Tom Arms | Sat 28th February 2026 - 9:34 am

Russia’s shadow fleet of oil tankers is now believed to be over 1,000-strong. The ships are 20-25 years old. Putin has neither the time nor the money to build all the ships he needs.

And he needs a lot because a major slice of Russia’s oil exports are seaborne. International oil sales provide 20 percent of the government’s revenues and the government is spending 40-60 percent of its revenues on the Ukraine War.

The floating rust buckets in the shadow fleet are uninsurable and an environmental disaster waiting to happen. But Putin doesn’t care about their seaworthiness. They are cheap to buy and run and thus make the big profits he needs to feed his war machine.

Stop the Shadow Fleet and you seriously damage the Russian war effort.

Trump has shown the way – possibly. Those are words that have never before appeared in this blog and are unlikely to ever appear again. But as far as dealing with the growing sanctions-busting shadow fleet of oil tankers goes, the US president could be the trend setter.

In recent weeks, Donald Trump has ordered the boarding of seven oil tankers; arrested the crew; sailed the ships to a safe port; impounded the vessels and their cargo and announced plans to sell both.

It was a bold move and the legal framework for Trump’s moves is—to say the least—dicey. The procedure goes something like this—the US tracks a vessel with satellites; monitors its signals; checks to see if it is manipulating its Automatic Identification System (which is illegal); watches to see if it is transferring oil to other ships (also illegal); is uninsured or operating under a false flag (both illegal).

If it is doing anything likely to contravene the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) then it can be deemed a suspect “stateless vessel.” As such it can be boarded. Its cargo, registration papers, insurance documents can be checked along with the ship’s seaworthiness. If it is found wanting in any of the above then it is confirmed as “stateless.” The crew is arrested. The ship sailed to a safe port and the vessel and cargo are impounded.

The Royal Navy would love to follow suit. So would the French and the Scandinavians. The French have already detained one shadow fleet tanker in the Mediterranean (the Grinch) and the Royal Navy participated in the detention of a ship in the North Atlantic (the Marinera).

But it is in the Baltic and the English Channel where the shadow fleet is most vulnerable. A large proportion of the Russia’s tanker-borne oil is loaded at Primorsk or Ust-loga and sails through the Baltic, the Danish Straits and then the North Sea and the English Channel on their way to Asia via the Mediterranean and the Suez Canal.

That first leg is largely British and Scandinavian territorial waters where local navies could easily board the shadow fleet tankers.

Posted in Op-eds | 7 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 22nd February 2026 - 9:27 am

Russia

Russia is a petro-state. Its economy. Its ability to feed its people and, most important of all, its ability to wage war, is tied to the price of a barrel of oil. Twenty percent of government revenues come from the oil and gas industries.

Back at the start of the Ukraine War the price of oil peaked at $120 a barrel. Vladimir Putin was able to wage war, pay pensions and maintain social services while keeping inflation under control and fending off sanctions.

This week oil prices dipped to $62 a barrel. And to persuade the likes of China, Hungary and Slovakia to face the wrath of sanctiongs-imposing countries, Moscow discounts the oil price by $20 a barrel.

But there is more. One of Russia’s biggest oil customers was India. Recently, Narendra Modi caved in to American pressure and dramatically cut Russian oil imports.

And there is still more. The Americans, French, British, Swedes and others are starting to board and impound ships in the “shadow fleet” of unregistered oil tankers carrying sanctioned oil around the world. Sixty percent of the roughly 1,000-strong “shadow fleet” of oil tankers are believed to be carrying Russian oil.

All of above, plus the cost of the war, is beginning to be borne by ordinary Russians. Food inflation, for instance, has soared by 12 percent since Christmas. And if Russians want to eat out that option is fast disappearing along with restaurants and cafes displaying “Open” signs.

Growth in the Russian economy is slowing to a crawl last year it grew by just 0.6 percent and the IMF forecast for this year is 0.4 percent. VAT has gone up. Interest rates are 15.5 percent. Corporate taxes have increased. The government is twisting the arms of bank managers to buy war bonds and the sovereign wealth fund has shrunk from $130 billion at the start of 2025 to $50 billion.

Finance Minister Anton Siluanov is under increasing pressure to produce new and better money-making ideas. His latest is government-owned online casinos.

None of the above is surprising when one considers that the defense budget is reckoned to take up between 40-60 percent of the government budget.

Ukraine is in a terrible state. But Russia—with a million war casualties on top of its economic problems—is not far behind in the war of attrition.

Japan

The unexpected landslide victory of Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party has opened the door to a long-cherished aim of Japanese conservatives—revision of the constitution to allow Japan greater military freedom.

In the aftermath of World War Two the allies forced a constitution on Japan which “forever renounced” war. Over the years the pacifist document has been re-interpreted several times to allow the development of a formidable “self-defense force.” But the Japanese military is still constitutionally prohibited from participating in foreign wars or building any weapons that allow them to do so.

Takaichi wants to change the constitution to allow Japan to develop a “more normal” military. With a two-thirds majority in the DIET she can achieve that aim.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged japan, russia, taiwan and ukraine | 3 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Muddling Through

By Tom Arms | Sat 21st February 2026 - 10:19 am

Britain is caught betwixt and between emerging international power lines. It supports Ukraine against Russia and Denmark against America. Whitehall is all for a European defense build-up.

It wants free trade and hates tariff. MAGA, the cult of Trump and the American swing to authoritarianism is extremely distasteful.

Mark Carney’s middle countries bloc appeals, and the UK is likely to sign up to a Carney-proposed trading bloc that includes Canada, the EU, Britain, and the Pacific Rim countries and excludes the US.

But the British “Establishment” can’t bring itself to break with the US. Britain and America’s economies are too intermeshed. So are the military and intelligence establishments. But perhaps most telling of all, the “independent” British nuclear deterrent—the deterrent which allows the UK to lay claim to reduced great power status—is dependent on American made Trident missiles.

Britain may no longer be a member of the European Union but the EU is still the UK’s largest trading partner and geographic realities dictate that Britain’s security is inexorably tied to the continent. In fact, British trade, prosperity and security is tied to both Europe and America and it prospers most when the two sides of the Atlantic work together.

So the Foreign Office mandarins are likely to fall back on the traditional strategic narrative of UK acting as the link between Europe and America; calming troubled waters one day, offering wise counsel another and shifting its limited political weight back and forth to achieve an equilibrium. In short, the UK will “muddle through” with strategic anchors in lands to the East and the West.

It was clear from the recent Munich Security Conference and the NATO defense ministers meeting that an honest broker between Europe and America is becoming increasingly essential. A furious Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen told the Munich conference that trilateral talks between the US, Denmark and Greenland are floundering as President Trump continues to demand ownership of Greenland.

Meanwhile, in Brussels, US Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby told NATO defense ministers that Europe was no longer a defense priority and that “the US would be reducing its capabilities in Europe to a more limited and focused presence” in order to move troops to the Indo-Pacific region.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged european union and Munich Security Conference | 11 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 15th February 2026 - 9:13 am

Endangerment Finding

It is true that, as President Trump says, that ending the 2009 “Endangerment Finding” of the Obama Era will be a major boost for the American car industry. It will probably help the Europeans as well.

It is also true that it will save car buyers more. Trump is on the money when he says that the move will knock $2,800 off the price tag of every new car that rolls off a Detroit assembly line.

It is also a gold-plated economic fact that the deregulation will put billions of dollars in the pockets of fossil fuel companies and their shareholders.

The 2009 “Endangerment Finding” is the foundation stone upon which a a big chunk of subsequent climate change legislation is based. It basically says that fossil fuel emissions—especially those from cars– are a danger to public health and should be regulated.

Any cyclist, motorcyclist or pedestrian that has stood behind a car for more than half a minute knows for a fact that breathing in car fumes is bad for you. But Trump—and the oil executives and manufacturers of petrol-driven cars—have decided that anyone who thinks so is peddling a “green scam.”

But cyclists are not alone. The UN has reviewed over 10,000 research papers on climate change and spoken with more than 10,000 climate change scientists. 97.1 percent of them say that our planet is warming. That this is a bad thing and cars are a major cause of the problem.

In 2024 greenhouse gases reached 424 parts per million, the highest ever in recorded history and 152 percent above pre-industrial era levels.

In the United States, cars, trucks and buses account for about 29% of total greenhouse gas emissions. Since Trump took office America’s fossil fuel emissions have grown by 1.9 percent.

But petrol and diesel are not the only polluters. Coal produces almost double the amount of greenhouse gas emissions as the transport industry, and the latest developments in renewable technology means that renewable energy is now about half the cost of coal in both building and maintenance terms.

On the same day that Trump announced the end of the 2009 Endangerment Findings, the American coal industry presented him with a trophy and bestowed on him the title of “Undisputed Champion of Beautiful Clean Coal.”

The Washington Post

My first news story was published in “The Washington Post.” I was a 13-year-old boy scout, and I wrote a 500-word article on badge-swapping at the Scout World Jamboree. It actually appeared on the front page with my byline. I was quite chuffed.

So, for me, the rapid decline of “The Post” has a personal element. It is even more personal one-third of the Post’s staff who were recently laid off. They are the victims of a changing media-scape and Donald Trump’s attack on the free press.

When the founder of Amazon, billionaire Jeff Bezos, bought the Post in 2013 for $250 million everyone heaved a sigh of relief. The Post had been struggling for years against the onslaught of the internet. If it was going to survive and prosper it needed an owner with deep pockets who believed in its mission and was prepared to inject millions—billions if necessary—to maintain the Post’s position in the pantheon of the great world newspapers.

Bezos promised to do just that. The local subscriber base had been shrinking as more and more readers switched to social media. So Bezos’s plan was to increase the subscriber base by going global. Which he did.

For about seven years, the Post thrived. And one of the reasons was that Bezos remembered the paper’s left of centre roots. Every editor must know what his readers want to read and produce articles that meet that demand. The Post’s readers are left of centre. They are mainly Democrats. During Trump’s first term Bezos kept to the paper’s traditional editorial line and it became a major thorn in the side of President Trump.

Posted in News | Tagged donald trump, endangerment finding, haiti and washington post | 19 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Panic

By Tom Arms | Sat 14th February 2026 - 10:02 am

Trump is panicking. He knows that come November the Republicans are highly likely to lose control of the House of Representatives. They may also lose control of the Senate, but it would take an electoral miracle for the Democrats to win the two-thirds majority necessary to boot Trump out of the White House.

But loss of the lower house would be bad enough. It is the lower house that could impeach him for the third time. Democrat-control of the House of Representatives, can, make it very difficult for Trump to continue to implement his far-right agenda. They can investigate all of the actions of his first two years and block, impede and obstruct anything he has planned for the final two years.

The multi-million dollar jet given to the future Trump presidential library by Qatar will come under scrutiny. The same goes for all the business deals struck by his family and friends and the bitcoins the family have floated. The politicisation of the civil service; tariffs; weaponisation of the Department of Justice to attack his political opponents; pardons for the Capitol Hill rioters and various cronies; misuse of emergency powers; questionable expansion of presidential powers and, of course, the Epstein files, will all come under a Democrat-controlled political microscope.

For the past 18 months the public have been asking: Where are the Democrats? Well, they have been they have been collecting evidence and biding their time. In a radically divisive America, they had little room for manoeuvre without a majority in either of Congress’s two houses. Every time the Democrats tried to act, they were blocked by Trump’s congressional lapdog, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson.

That will change dramatically if – as expected—the Democrats win control of the House of Representatives in November.

Which is why Trump is panicking. And he is panicking now because he needs to start employing every clean and dirty political trick to prevent a Democrat win.

The president has already tried gerrymandering—the redrawing of electoral boundaries to ensure the desired result. This backfired. Republican Texas complied with presidential wishes, but their moves were made redundant by counter gerrymandering by Democrat-controlled California.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged donald trump | 14 Comments

Op-eds

Observations of an Expat: Gaza (Tom Arms)
The Lib Dem strategy review (Rob Blackie)
Our voting system isn’t just unfair. It’s becoming dangerous. (Roz Savage MP)
Andy Burnham’s transport record: Who benefits and who gets left behind? (Iain Donaldson)
Liberals and the unions: time to talk again (Jack Meredith)

Advert

Actually, this Summer of Strategy could be quite good…

Josh Babarinde writes…The Lib Dem Summer of Strategy

Alison Suttie writes: Thank you to our volunteers

What’s going on with party strategy?

Author Archives: Tom Arms

Iran

Americans and the rest of the world

AI

Donald Trump and the liberal consensus

Cuba

Israel

The Thucydides Trap

Ebola

Ukraine

The King and Trump

Iran

United States

Iran

China

Hungary

UK and Russia

Germany

Hungary

State of the Union

Ukraine

Russia

Japan

Endangerment Finding

The Washington Post

Subscribe

Most Read

Search

Op-eds

Recent Comments