UK news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The big idea: is it too late to stop extremism taking over politics?

      by

      Welcome to the 2020s, the beginning of what history books might one day describe as the digital middle ages. Let’s briefly travel back to 2017. I remember sitting in various government buildings briefing politicians and civil servants about QAnon, the emerging internet conspiracy movement whose adherents believe that a cabal of Satan-worshipping elites runs a global paedophile network. We joked about the absurdity of it all but no one took the few thousand anonymous true believers seriously.Fast-forward to 2023. Significant portions of the population in liberal democracies consider it possible that global elites drink the blood of children in order to stay young. Recent surveys suggest that around 17% of Americans believe in the QAnon myth. Some 5% of Germans believe ideas related to the anti-democratic Reichsbürger movement, which asserts that the German Reich continues to exist and rejects the legitimacy of the modern German state. Up to a third of Britons believe that powerful figures in Hollywood, government and the media are secretly engaged in child trafficking. Is humanity on the return journey from enlightenment to the dark ages?As segments of the public have headed towards extremes, so has our politics. In the US, dozens of congressional candidates, including the successfully elected Lauren Boebert, have been supportive of QAnon. The German far-right populist party Alternative für Deutschland is at an all-time high in terms of both its radicalism and its popularity, while Austria’s xenophobic Freedom party is topping the polls. The recent rise to power of far-right parties such as Fratelli d’Italia and the populist Sweden Democrats bolster this trend.I am often asked why the UK doesn’t have a successful far-right populist party. My answer is: because it doesn’t need to. Parts of the Conservative party now cater to audiences that would have voted for the BNP or Ukip in the past. A few years ago, the far-right Britain First claimed that 5,000 of its members had joined the Tory party. Not unlike the Republicans in the US, the Tories have increasingly departed from moderate conservative thinking and lean more and more towards radicalism.In 2020, Conservative MP Daniel Kawczynski was asked to apologise for attending the National Conservatism conference in Rome. The event is well known for attracting international far-right figures such as Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and the hard-right US presidential candidate Ron DeSantis. This year, an entire delegation of leading Conservatives attended the same conference in London. It might be hard for extreme-right parties to rise to power in Britain, but there is no shortage of routes for extremist ideas to reach Westminster.Language is a key indicator of radicalisation. The words of Conservative politicians speak for themselves: home secretary Suella Braverman referred to migrants arriving in the UK as an “invasion on our southern coast”, while MP Miriam Cates gave a nod to conspiracy theorists when she warned that “children’s souls” were being “destroyed” by cultural Marxism. Using far-right dog whistles such as “invasion” and “cultural Marxism” invites listeners to open a Pandora’s box of conspiracy myths. Research shows that believing in one makes you more susceptible to others.I sometimes wonder what a QAnon briefing to policymakers might look like in a few years. What if the room no longer laughs at the ludicrous myths but instead endorses them? One could certainly imagine this scenario in the US if Donald Trump were to win the next election. In 2019 – before conspiracy myths inspired attacks on the US Capitol, the German Reichstag, the New Zealand parliament and the Brazilian Congress – I warned in a Guardian opinion piece of the threat QAnon would soon pose to democracy. Are we now at a point where it is it too late to stop democracies being taken over by far-right ideologies and conspiracy thinking? If so, do we simply have to accept the “new normal”?There are various ways we can try to prevent and reverse the spread of extremist narratives. For some people who have turned to extremism over the past few years, too little has changed: anger over political inaction on economic inequality is now further fuelled by the exacerbating cost of living crisis. For others, too much has changed: they see themselves as rebels against a takeover by “woke” or “globalist” policies.What they have in common is a sense that the political class no longer takes their wellbeing seriously, and moves to improve social conditions and reduce inequality would go some way towards reducing such grievances. But beyond that, their fears and frustrations have clearly been instrumentalised by extremists, as well as by opportunistic politicians and profit-oriented social media firms. This means that it is essential to expose extremist manipulation tactics, call out politicians when they normalise conspiracy thinking and regulate algorithm design by the big technology companies that still amplify harmful content.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIf the private sector is part of the problem, it can also be part of the solution. Surveys by the Edelman Trust Barometer found that people in liberal democracies have largely lost trust in governments, media and even NGOs but, surprisingly, still trust their employers and workplaces. Companies can play an important role in the fight for democratic values. For example, the Business Council for Democracy tests and develops training courses that firms can offer to employees to help them identify and counter conspiracy myths and targeted disinformation.Young people should be helped to become good digital citizens with rights and responsibilities online, so that they can develop into critical consumers of information. National school curricula should include a new subject at the intersection of psychology and internet studies to help digital natives understand the forces that their parents have struggled to grasp: the psychological processes that drive digital group dynamics, online engagement and the rise of conspiracy thinking.Ultimately, the next generation will vote conspiracy theorists in or out of power. Only they can reverse our journey towards the digital middle ages. Julia Ebner is the author of Going Mainstream: How Extremists Are Taking Over (Ithaka Press).Further readingHow Democracies Die by Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky (Penguin, £10.99)How Civil War Starts by Barbara F Walter (Penguin, £10.99)Pastels and Pedophiles: Inside the Mind of QAnon by Mia Bloom and Sophia Moskalenko (Redwood, £16.99) More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      We bailed out the banks but we’re not prepared to bail out the planet

      by

      Like many other politicians, Joe Biden talks a good game about the need to tackle global heating. Climate change is an “existential threat”, the US president said last week, as America sizzled amid record-breaking temperatures.Biden had to do something in response to what António Guterres, the UN secretary general, described as the boiling of the planet. The White House announced a series of measures – such as improved access to drinking water and planting more trees – in response to what has been the hottest month on record.To Biden’s critics, this is fiddling while Rome burns. They say he should be declaring a climate emergency, which would allow him to block new fossil fuel projects without congressional approval. As it is, Biden has showed a marked reluctance to take this step. There are clearly limits to what the US government is prepared to do to counter this “existential threat”.It is a similar picture in the UK, where the Conservative party’s surprise victory in the Uxbridge and South Ruislip byelection was in large part due to the plans by London’s Labour mayor, Sadiq Khan, to expand the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez) to the capital’s outer boroughs.Put simply, the Ulez seeks to improve London’s air quality by placing a charge on the use of older petrol and diesel vehicles, which tend to be not just the most polluting but also the most likely to be owned by poorer households already struggling with Britain’s cost of living crisis.The byelection defeat clearly rattled the Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer. “We are doing something very wrong if policies put forward by the Labour party end up on each and every Tory leaflet,” he said. “We’ve got to face up to that and learn the lessons.”In their different ways, recent events in the US and the UK show just how difficult it will be to put the global economy on a saner and more sustainable course.Problem number one is that politicians struggle to think beyond the next election. Biden is running for re-election next year, and Starmer wants to end a run of four successive defeats for Labour. The temptation to put off tough decisions to another day is powerful.That’s because of problem number two: the lack of consensus about what needs to be done and over what time period change needs to happen. What’s needed is for Democrats and Republicans in the US and Labour and the Conservatives in the UK to announce that they are jointly signed up to a course of action that will extend well beyond one presidential or parliamentary term. The failure to forge a bi-partisan approach provides an incentive for parties to look for short-term political gain, even when doing so risks longer-term harm.There’s a reason for that, namely that some of the policies required have upfront costs that make them unpopular for those that find them hard to bear. Telling a key worker who can only afford an ageing diesel car that they will have to pay £12.50 a day to drive to their job is never going to be easy, especially in a period when living standards are being squeezed. There is no getting away from the fact that the Ulez expansion is a regressive tax and, as Khan has found, changes that make hard-up people even worse off breed anger, and that anger will inevitably find a political outlet.So problem number three is that there are a lot of poor people in the UK and the US. And problem number four is that not nearly enough is being done to help these people make the green transition. For that to happen, there would need not just to be a recognition of the link between global heating and grotesque levels of inequality, but a willingness to do something about it.In the developed west, this means using the financial firepower of the state to reduce the number of losers from the green transition. In developing countries, it means transfers of both money and technical knowhow, so that countries that need growth as part of their anti-poverty programmes minimise the use of fossil fuels. Meeting the “existential” threat that Biden talks about requires action not just in the UK or the US but in China, India and other emerging countries, too. Climate action on a global scale will be costly.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThat brings us to problem number five. The change from one economic paradigm to another – the creative destruction that the political economist Joseph Schumpeter talked about – is hard because it requires those who have invested in existing industries to recognise that the game is up. This transition can be prolonged if those wedded to the status quo have invested huge sums and wield enormous power, as is the case with the fossil fuel industry.The solution to these problems lies ultimately in the hands of politicians such as Biden, because they alone have the power to remove barriers to change.As the rapid responses to the global financial crisis of 2007-09 and the Covid pandemic proved, governments can act speedily, collectively and decisively if the crisis is deemed big enough. When the banks were facing their existential crisis in 2008, money was created to bail them out and prevent a second Great Depression. In 2020, economies were effectively put on a war footing.Should the same approach be adopted in the fight against climate change? Yes. Is there any sign of this happening? Not on the scale required. Effectively, this is like the 1930s, when there was resistance to meeting the threat of fascism. Then, as now, what was needed was rapid rearmament. Then, as now, what we’re getting is a failure to do what needs to be done. More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Can Boris Johnson emulate Donald Trump and make a comeback? No chance

      by

      There are two very big differences between the situation confronting Boris Johnson and that facing the man with whom he is frequently compared, Donald Trump – namely, popularity and context.Johnson is weaker than Trump. First, because he is less popular with Conservative voters than Trump is with his Republican supporters. About half of 2019 Conservative voters disapprove of Johnson’s performance in office. And at the time he left office, 40% or more rated him as untrustworthy, dishonest and/or incompetent.Things haven’t improved since. In polls conducted in recent weeks, about half of current Conservative voters have said they think Johnson misled parliament over lockdown parties, while a similar share consider the 90-day suspension he received either “about right” or “not harsh enough”.A majority of Conservative voters believe it is right that Johnson has resigned from the Commons, and less than half of them say they would like to see Johnson return as an MP.In short, about half of both 2019 Conservative voters and the party’s smaller base of current supporters take a low view of Johnson in various respects. The contrast with Trump is stark – between 70% and 80% of Republican voters approve of Trump, and more than half say they will vote for him as their candidate in the coming Republican primary contest.That brings me to the second big difference – Trump’s ability to disrupt politics is enhanced because America’s system is candidate centred, while Johnson’s ability to do the same is diminished because Britain’s system is party centred.Trump won direct personal mandates from Republican voters in 2016 and 2020, and most of them seem eager to do the same again next year. If Trump prevails in the Republican primary contest, there is little other Republicans can do to prevent him running for a third time as their candidate for the White House.The British system is very different. Johnson never received a direct personal mandate as prime minister from voters at large – there is no direct election of the executive in our system. Removing a directly elected president is very difficult. Removing a prime minister is considerably easier. If Conservative MPs had had enough of Johnson, they could – and did – remove him. The Conservative party – and Rishi Sunak, its current leader – have a lot more control over who gets to stand in Conservative colours, so it is much easier for them to keep Johnson out, particularly now he is no longer even an MP.The two factors also interact. If Johnson had Trump-style popularity with Conservatives, it would be harder and riskier to exclude him. But he doesn’t, so it isn’t.There’s also the question of whether local Conservative associations might be keener on Johnson than Conservative voters overall – perhaps keen enough to back him as a candidate, or to punish (or even deselect) their local Conservative MP if they vote for sanctions against the former PM.It is possible that Johnson has a stronger following among activists, but it is also plausible that he doesn’t. After all, these are the people who will have borne the brunt of the anger at Johnson’s antics when campaigning on the doorstep, and paid the heavy electoral price for his unpopularity in recent local election rounds.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionConservative associations have also traditionally been fairly deferential to the party leadership. They have not gone in for local deselection campaigns. While trouble on this front cannot be entirely ruled out, it seems unlikely.So some sort of Trump-style hostile takeover is unlikely. The Conservative party has higher barriers to entry than American parties, and Johnson isn’t popular enough with current or 2019 Conservative voters to fuel an uprising capable of overcoming these barriers.Johnson will no doubt retain a lot of capacity for mischief, but this is more likely to play out on the front pages of Conservative-aligned newspapers rather than in the halls and bars of local Conservative associations.Robert Ford is professor of political science at Manchester University and co-author of The British General Election of 2019 More

    • 225 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      After the destruction of the Kakhovka dam, another threat lies on Ukraine’s horizon: Donald Trump | Jonathan Freedland

      by

      The war for Ukraine gets darker and more terrifying, and now a new front has opened up many miles away – in a US Republican party whose biggest players are itching to abandon Ukraine to its fate.Proof of the conflict’s deepening horror came this week, with the destruction on Tuesday of the Kakhovka dam in Russian-controlled Ukraine, releasing a body of water so massive it’s best imagined not as a reservoir but as a great lake. The result has been the flooding of a vast swath of terrain, forcing thousands to abandon their homes and flee for their lives. But the menaces unleashed by this act go further than the immediate and devastating effect on the people who live close by.For one thing, this calamity has hit a region of rich and fertile farmland, the same soil that long made Ukraine a breadbasket for the world: the fifth-largest exporter of wheat on the planet, the food source on which much of Africa and the Middle East has relied. Now there are warnings that the fields of southern Ukraine could “turn into deserts” by next year, because the water held back by the dam and needed to irrigate those fields is draining away. That will have an impact on food supplies and food prices, with an effect in turn on inflation and the global economy.Not that the international impact can be measured in dollars and cents alone. Volodymyr Zelenskiy has warned that contaminated floodwaters now carry with them sewage, oil, chemicals and even anthrax from animal burial sites. That toxic material will, said the Ukrainian president, poison rivers and, before long, the water basin of the Black Sea. “So it’s not happening somewhere else. It is all interrelated in the world.”Meanwhile, the Red Cross has sounded an alarm of its own: the bursting of the dam does grievous damage to its ongoing effort to locate and clear landmines in the area. “We knew where the hazards were,” the organisation lamented. “Now we don’t know. All we know is that they are somewhere downstream.” Dislodged by the racing waters, those devices are now floating mines. And that’s before you reckon with the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the biggest in Europe, which relies on water from the now-draining reservoir for the essential process of cooling.Small wonder that Zelenskiy speaks of “an environmental bomb of mass destruction,” while others now mention Kakhovka in the same breath as Chornobyl. Except few believe this was an accident.Naturally, Moscow insists that this was not a Russian act: it says the Ukrainians did this to themselves. Still, and even though investigations are ongoing, it’s worth heeding the advice of the specialist in Ukrainian history Timothy Snyder, and remembering the fundamentals of detective work. “Russia had the means,” Snyder notes, in that Russia was in control of the relevant part of the dam when it appeared to explode. Russia had the motive, in that it fears a Ukrainian counteroffensive aimed at taking back territory – and flooded ground is ground over which tanks cannot advance.And there is the pattern of behaviour, the record of past crimes. Russia has scarcely restrained itself from targeting Ukraine’s civil infrastructure over the last 15 months: Kakhovka would just be the latest and most wanton example. Indeed, the destruction of dams to trigger mass flooding is no more than Russia’s ultra-nationalist talking heads and TV pundit class have been demanding for a while. This week one such voice suggested Moscow give the Kyiv dam the Kakhovka treatment and that it “raze the city to the ground”. As if weighing up the moral implications, he asked, “Why should we be holier than the pope?”The official denials should not be taken too seriously, given the Kremlin’s history of disinformation and outright lies. Better to judge Russia by its deeds than its words. So what did Russia do to help those made desperate by the floods? The answer was swift and it came from Russian artillery units, seemingly firing on Ukrainian rescue workers and evacuees as they tried to flee to safety. It’s a strategy familiar from Moscow’s war in Syria: pile pain upon pain, misery upon misery.Supporters of Ukraine say that this is a sign of Russian weakness, that it is resorting to barbaric methods because it knows that, in key respects, Ukraine has the upper hand – not least because it enjoys the support of a united west. That is true, for now. But there is a threat from within the alliance’s most powerful member.Freshly indicted though he is, Donald Trump remains the frontrunner for the Republican nomination for president. And Trump is a well-documented friend of Vladimir Putin and a sceptic on the merits of continued US support for Kyiv. When asked on CNN last month, the former president couldn’t say who he wants to prevail in the contest between Russia and Ukraine, between invader and invaded. Nor would he commit to supplying aid to Kyiv: “We don’t have ammunition for ourselves, we’re giving away so much.” Asked about war crimes charges against Putin – centred on the alleged mass abduction of Ukrainian children and their transfer across the border to be “re-educated” as Russians – Trump again refused to condemn the “smart guy” in the Kremlin.Because Trump has remade the Republican party in his own image, this is not a danger confined to him alone. His nearest current rival, the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, echoed Moscow talking points in March when he referred to the war as a “territorial dispute”, a remark he later sought to undo. But the window into his thinking had been opened.Most Republicans in Congress still back Ukraine, but the right of the party has moved into a different place, one illuminated by Tucker Carlson’s debut Twitter show this week, his first since his firing by Fox News. There he described Zelenskiy, who is Jewish, as “sweaty and rat-like … a persecutor of Christians … shifty, dead-eyed”, suggesting without evidence, and in a perfect echo of Moscow, that the hand of Kyiv lay behind the destruction of the Kakhovka dam.We already knew that much is at stake in the November 2024 presidential election, not least the life expectancy of US democracy. But there is something else, too. Ukraine is engaged in a profound battle for its own survival as an independent nation, and for larger principles essential to the whole world: that freedom must prevail, and that aggression must not. Ukraine cannot win that fight alone. It cannot win only with the backing of its European neighbours, which, though necessary, is not sufficient. It requires the United States, its muscle and its money. The plight of Kherson and the indictment in Miami are linked: the world desperately needs the defeat of Donald Trump.
      Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Rish! talks up his hectic schedule in bilat with Biden | John Crace

      by

      Rishi Sunak: Good morning, Mr President.Joe Biden: Er … good morning … er … I’m sorry, who are you?Sunak: It’s…Biden: No, don’t tell me … It’s on the tip of my tongue. I’m sure I recognise you. I never forget a face. You’re that guy who bought me that coffee in Belfast when I was over in Ireland.Sunak: That’s right, your excellency. We also met in San Diego and HiroshimaBiden: Are you stalking me?Sunak: No. I’m just a bit needy. We have a special relationship, remember?Biden: Do we? News to me … No. It’s no good. You’ll have to jog my memory.Sunak: I’m the prime minister of the United Kingdom …Biden: Of course you are. Good to see you again, Rashi Sanook.Sunak: It’s Rishi. Rishi Sunak.Biden: Whatever. So what brings you over to Washington?Sunak: I’m not sure really. A combination of things. Nothing’s going well at home. My polls are rubbish, I can’t do anything about inflation, hospital waiting lists are up, you know the kind of thing …Biden: Not really.Sunak: Anyway, I just fancied a break. Plus I had loads of free air miles after my brilliant ‘Take Your Helicopter to Work’ scheme. And I wanted to catch a ball game. Go, Nationals! High five!Biden: Glad, you’re having a nice time.Sunak: So, what have you been up to since I last saw you, your highness?Biden: Not a lot … Just a $1tn infrastructure act, fixing a two-year debt ceiling deal, fighting off the Republican crazies and a host of other minor stuff …Sunak: Gosh!Biden: So how about you? What have you been doing?Sunak: I’ve been rushed off my feet … I don’t really know where to start, but here goes. First and foremost, I have been working on my five priorities. To halve inflation, grow the economy-Biden: Sure. But what have you actually been doing?Sunak: As I said, I have been working on my five priorities for the British people which I have promised to deliver on. Let me tell you what my five priorities are. They are the five priorities on which I want the British people to judge me-Biden: So, you haven’t really been doing that much.Sunak: As I said, my five priorities-Biden: But what else?Sunak: Apart from my five priorities? Well, let me see … I’m taking the Covid inquiry my government set up to court because it keeps asking for information that I want to keep secret. And I’m just about to OK Boris Johnson’s honours list.Biden: So a disgraced prime minister still gets to do the honours?Sunak: Sure.Biden: You Brits crack me up. What else shall we talk about?Sunak: How about a US-UK trade deal? Back in 2016 I and the Vote Leave team promised that an improved trade deal would be a Brexit bonus.Biden: No.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSunak: What do you mean, ‘no’?Biden: I mean it’s not happening. There is no trade deal to be had any time soon. The UK is just not that big a deal for us since you left the EU.Sunak: Not even a little deal? We’ll take the chlorinated chicken …Biden: No. Not a chance. Maybe in five or 10 years. If then.Sunak: OK. I get the message. But can we at least say that we agreed not to talk about a trade deal? Or maybe we could just sign something vague and meaningless.Biden: If you like …Sunak: It would look good for my end-of-visit communique to the British media. Make it look like we had in fact talked about a trade deal a bit. Even though we haven’t. By the way, have I told you about my five priorities?Biden: I don’t have a lot of time, is there anything else you want to say?Sunak: There is. I want to talk about artificial intelligence.Biden: What about it?Sunak: That I’m very worried about it. Apart from AI that is obviously beneficial. Did I mention my five priorities?Biden: Sounds like you could do with an AI upgrade yourself. Unless you really are a halfwit. But what are you suggesting?Sunak: Well, seeing as I’m a world leader in AI …Biden: Since when? You had scarcely mentioned it until a few AI experts raised their concerns a few weeks ago.Sunak: But I am the expert! I had read something about it on my MBA at Stanford. Did you know I had an MBA from the States?Biden: You may have mentioned it before …Sunak: So here’s the thing. Because I know more about AI than anyone else and also have a lot of spare time on my hands, I am proposing the UK takes a leading role in regulating the industry.Biden: But you know that since you left the EU, the UK is no longer a member of the US-EU council that regulates AI-related policies …Sunak: Really? Never mind. What I mostly want is a PR exercise. We won’t actually regulate anything. We’ll just have a conference to talk about regulating AI. It will all be pointless as by the time anything happens, AI will have evolved to take over the world. So we’ll all just meet a few times, have a nice jolly and then forget about it. But we need the US to come. We’ll pay your air fares and hotels. It’s just that without you no one else will come. So please say you will.Biden: If we must …Sunak: Just a couple more things: Ukraine. Can we agree that we are both still committed?Biden: You didn’t need to come to Washington for that…Sunak: And, my green card … Is there any chance it can be renewed? I might need it again in a year or so.Biden: Is that the time? Must be getting on. More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Sunak’s foreign policy: a Europe-shaped hole | Editorial

      by

      The alliance between Britain and the US, resting on deep foundations of shared history and strategic interest, is not overly affected by the personal relationship between a prime minister and a president.Sometimes individual affinity is consequential, as when Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were aligned over cold war doctrine, or when Tony Blair put Britain in lockstep with George W Bush for the march to war in Iraq. But there is no prospect of Rishi Sunak forming such a partnership – for good or ill – with Joe Biden at this week’s Washington summit.Viewed from the White House, the prime minister cuts an insubstantial figure – the caretaker leader of a country that has lost its way. That doesn’t jeopardise the underlying relationship. Britain is a highly valued US ally, most notably in the fields of defence, security and intelligence. On trade and economics, Mr Sunak’s position is less comfortable. The prime minister is a poor match with a president who thinks Brexit was an epic blunder and whose flagship policy is a rebuttal of the sacred doctrines of the Conservative party.Mr Biden is committed to shoring up American primacy by means of massive state support for green technology, tax breaks for foreign investment and reconfiguring supply chains with a focus on national security. Mr Sunak’s instincts are more laissez-faire, and his orthodox conservative budgets preclude interventionist statecraft.The two men disagree on a fundamental judgment about the future direction of the global economy, but only one of them has a hand on the steering wheel. Mr Sunak looks more like a passenger, or a pedestrian, since Britain bailed out of the EU – the vehicle that allows European countries to aggregate mid-range economic heft into continental power.London lost clout in the world by surrendering its seat in Brussels, but that fact is hard for Brexit ideologues to process. Their worldview is constructed around the proposition that EU membership depleted national sovereignty and that leaving the bloc would open more lucrative trade routes. Top of the wishlist was a deal with Washington, and Mr Biden has said that won’t happen. Even if it did, the terms would be disadvantageous to Britain as the supplicant junior partner.If Mr Sunak grasps that weakness, he dare not voice it. Instead, Downing Street emits vague noises about Britain’s leading role in AI regulation. But, in governing uses of new technology, Brussels matters more to Washington. London is not irrelevant, but British reach is reduced when ministers are excluded from the rooms where their French, German and other continental counterparts develop policy.Those are the relationships that Mr Sunak must cultivate with urgency. But his view of Europe is circumscribed by Brexit ideology and parochial campaign issues. His meetings with the French president, Emmanuel Macron, have been dominated by the domestic political obsession with small-boat migration across the Channel. The prime minister has no discernible relationship with the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz. He has not visited Berlin.Negotiating the Windsor framework to stabilise Northern Ireland’s status in post-Brexit trade was a vital step in repairing damage done by Boris Johnson and Liz Truss to UK relations with the EU. But there is still a gaping European hole in Britain’s foreign policy. It is visible all the way across the Atlantic, even if the prime minister refuses to see it. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Wednesday briefing: Inside Rishi Sunak’s whirlwind US visit

      by

      Good morning. Archie loves early mornings so much he is having a baby, so I’ll be bringing you this email, with Nimo, for the next few weeks while he’s on paternity leave.As you read this, Rishi Sunak has just landed at Andrews air force base ahead of a whirlwind two-day visit to Washington DC, in which he will discuss trade with Joe Biden and seek investment from US business leaders – but sadly not humiliate himself on the baseball field (of which more below).It’s Sunak’s first trip to the White House as PM, and he is also expected to discuss the two countries’ cooperation on Ukraine, while pitching for a role for Britain in regulating AI – all part of a bid to prove Britain still has a place on the global stage following Brexit and its turbulent aftermath.The Guardian’s Peter Walker is travelling with the prime minister; he spoke to me about Sunak’s ambitions for the trip – and why he’ll be the first PM since David Cameron to stay in one of Washington’s most palatial residences (or as Sunak might call it, “slumming it”). That’s after the headlines.Five big stories
      Ukraine | Russia’s UN envoy was accused of floundering in a “mud of lies” after he claimed at an emergency session of the security council that Ukraine destroyed Kakhovka dam in a “war crime” against itself. Sergiy Kyslytsya, Ukraine’s ambassador, said the Russians were resorting to “flooded earth tactics” because “the captured territory does not belong to them, and they are not able to hold these lands”.
      Media | The parent company of the Daily and Sunday Telegraph faces the threat of being put into administration by lenders. Lloyds Banking Group has threatened to put Press Acquisitions, the company controlled by the Barclay family that owns the newspapers’ parent company, Telegraph Media Group (TMG), into administration after a breakdown in talks over loans the business has racked up over the years.
      Health | Cases of syphilis were at their highest level in 75 years in England last year, rising to almost 8,700, while diagnoses of gonorrhoea rose by 50% in just 12 months – the most since records began in 1918, according to the UKHSA figures.
      UK news | The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said it has won a confidence vote put to its members after sexual misconduct allegations. A majority of its members backed its proposals to overhaul its culture and governance, with 93% of votes cast in favour of continuing to support the CBI.
      Environment | Research has found that it is now too late to save summer Arctic sea ice. Scientists say preparations need to be made for the increased extreme weather across the northern hemisphere. The study also shows that if emissions decline slowly or continue to rise, the first ice-free summer could be in the 2030s, a decade earlier than previous projections.
      In depth: ‘It’s the lesser cousin visiting the rich uncle – the power is very much on their side’There’s a remarkable video of a speech made by Joe Biden last October, on the day Rishi Sunak became prime minister. To guffaws of laughter from his audience, the president said news had come from Britain of Sunak’s elevation – or as he called him “Rashi Sanook”.“As my brother would say, ‘Go figure!’,” grinned the president. Biden didn’t refer explicitly to the chaos that had preceded the latest PM; with a smirk that wide, he didn’t have to.Seven and a half months later, Sunak (pictured above, with Biden) will be hoping Britain is no longer such a laughing stock in Washington – and that the president can at least pronounce his name. The PM has certainly put the miles in – this will be the pair’s fifth meeting in Sunak’s short premiership and their fourth since March.Sunak’s focus this week is on trade, but with a looming election at home, the symbolism of a statesmanlike “bilat” promoting Britain’s interests on the world stage may be just as important.What is No 10 hoping for?“This is a heavily business-focused trip,” says Peter Walker, the Guardian’s deputy political editor. Sunak will meet with senators and members of Congress today at Capitol Hill, and tomorrow he will address a major meeting of US business leaders, hosted by the CEO of General Motors. Their investments already account for thousands of British jobs, and Sunak will be hoping for more.“They’ve given up on the idea of a full post-Brexit, UK/US free-trade agreement,” says Peter – much vaunted by Brexiteers, but abandoned as a short-term goal by Downing Street – “but they’re trying to just get lots of kind of mini deals done.”That could mean concessions to help the British car industry, for example, and deals in the digital and technology sectors.Is Britain back?Given that it’s only weeks since Biden had to deny being “anti-British”, it’s fair to say the much-vaunted “special relationship” has had a bumpy time of late, particularly through the Boris Johnson years (and Liz Truss weeks).“As with any British prime minister visiting the US, it’s the lesser cousin visiting the rich uncle: the power is very much on their side,” says Peter. That said, Sunak’s achievement in securing the Windsor agreement in Northern Ireland – an area of British politics to which Biden pays close attention – impressed the White House.With cooperation over Ukraine and Nato critical, too, “having someone in Downing Street, at least for the next year, who they believe is reasonably stable, will say the right things on Ukraine and not do anything completely bonkers over Brexit, is actually quite important [for Washington]”, says Peter.And Sunak is getting the red carpet treatment. Unlike Theresa May, Johnson and Truss, he is being put up in Blair House, a palatial residence opposite the White House that has been described as “the world’s most exclusive hotel”.He will also give a joint press conference with Biden – relatively rare for the US president – and this evening will attend a baseball game between the Washington Nationals and the Arizona Diamondbacks, billed as a “friendship event” between the US and UK and featuring joint military bands and a flyover.Alas, however, reported discussions over Sunak throwing the ceremonial have come to naught – despite the PM fancying himself as a rather handy bowler in cricket.“At the very best, you get an OK photo opportunity,” says Peter. “But if it goes even slightly wrong, that will dominate the trip. That’s very much No 10’s mindset – to play it as safe as they possibly can.”What else will Sunak be hoping for?Amid tricky headlines at home over Covid and immigration and determinedly dreadful polling figures, a trip that cast the prime minister as a bold statesman, out there lobbying for Britain, would be hugely welcomed by his allies, says Peter.“Talking to Tory MPs and to ministers, some of them think their only election hope is to have Sunak travelling around the UK and the world seeming broadly competent and not openly mad while, in the meantime, they hope inflation goes down, growth goes up and the number of small boats goes down.“If everything goes right, they think there is a small chance they could be the biggest party after the election – but it all depends on him plugging on in quite a managerial way. So he doesn’t want to rock the boat. He’ll just want to go out there, be sensible and strike trade deals if he can.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhat else we’ve been reading
      Melissa Jeltsen’s report into the growing tension between some independent abortion clinics (pictured above) and Planned Parenthood, the US’s largest single abortion provider, is enlightening. Jeltsen reveals how the deteriorating relationship between the abortion providers is impeding patient care. Nimo
      More than 10 years ago, Stuart Jeffries’s car was towed to the pound, and when he realised it would cost more to release it than it was worth, he decided to leave it there. In this lovely piece, he talks about a decade of happy car non-ownership – but recognises going car-free not as easy for everyone. Esther
      Jason Okundaye’s compelling analysis on the rise of Mizzy, an 18-year-old TikToker who found fame online by filming himself terrorising strangers or trespassing (sometimes both at the same time), is worth a read. In pursuing this “cloutrage”, Okundaye writes, Mizzy is gaming the “amoral, algorithmic universe that rewards anything that garners attention – he is engaging in a twisted form of online entrepreneurship”. Nimo
      I know, I know, you’ve read everything you could possibly ever want to about Phil and Holly. Make an exception for Marina Hyde. Her column is worth the price alone for her joke about This Morning editor Martin Frizell and a warder from HMP Full Sutton. Esther
      ICYMI: This week’s edition of the How we survive series is a must-read. Jonathan Freedland spoke with Ivor Perl about the year he spent, from the age of 12, as a prisoner in Auschwitz and the eight decades since. It is a remarkably moving story on survival, luck, hope and compassion. Nimo
      SportFootball | Chelsea midfielder N’Golo Kanté is reportedly being offered a salary that could reach €100m (£86.2m) a year to join a club in Saudi Arabia. Kanté’s Chelsea contract expires this month and emissaries from Saudi Arabia are in London to present their proposal. His salary would include image rights and commercial deals.Golf |PGA Tour, DP World Tour and Saudi backed LIV Golf have agreed to merge, ending a bitter split in the sport. The shock announcement will mean that the Saudi public investment fund will pour money in a new company that will effectively control top-level golf. Litigation between long-term rivals LIV and the PGA Tour has come to an abrupt end.Tennis | Aryna Sabalenka, the second seed, defeatedUkraine’s Elina Svitolina 6-4, 6-4. The win has moved her to the French Open semi-finals for the first time. Novak Djokovic will also be at the semi-finals after his 4-6, 7-6 (0), 6-2, 6-4 win against Karen Khachanov, the 11th seed, and confidently passing his biggest test of the tournament so far.The front pages“‘Environmental disaster:’ floods hit Ukraine as dam is destroyed”. That’s the Guardian lead today, as it is in some other papers. “Bombing of dam ‘a new low’ for Russia” says the Daily Telegraph and the i has “40,000 fleeing ‘war crime’ after dam blown up”. “Russia set off ‘environmental bomb’ by breaching dam, Zelenskiy claims” – that’s the Financial Times. It’s on the front of the Times as the picture but the lead is “Duke launches political attack”. For others it’s less about the constitutional implications – the Sun goes with “Harry’s day in court – Me, Hewitt … and that two-faced s**t Burrell”. The Daily Mail taunts: “He must have longed for the schmaltzy embrace of Oprah!”. The page one splash in the Daily Express is “‘Game-changer’ new drug to slim down nation”. The Metro leads with assaults on ambulance crews: “999 heroes under attack”. “Knight these heroes” – the Daily Mirror has a call to “Make it Sir Rob & Sir Kevin” about ex-rugby league player Kevin Sinfield’s motor neurone disease campaigning. His fellow star Rob Burrow has the condition.Today in FocusHow to develop artificial super-intelligence without destroying humanitySam Altman, the founder of the revolutionary application ChatGPT, is touring Europe with a message: AI is changing the world and there are big risks, but also big potential rewardsCartoon of the day | Ella BaronThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badIt has been 25 years since Sex and the City debuted and became an instant classic. While the show has clear, and at points painful to watch, flaws (namely its focus on white cis, mostly heterosexual women with lots of disposable income), it is still one of the best female-led series that centres sisterhood, friendship and romantic love. SaTC successfully reimagined the single woman, portraying her not as a desperate spinster or an ice queen but as a complicated, messy and (gasp) unlikable figure who is still deserving of whatever kind of love she desires. The protagonists spoke frankly and openly about sex and relationships in a way that still defines the genre. In commemoration of the anniversary, perhaps it’s time for a rewatch.Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day – with plenty more on the Guardian’s Puzzles app for iOS and Android. Until tomorrow.
      Quick crossword
      Cryptic crossword
      Wordiply More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Boris Johnson tried to persuade Donald Trump to back Ukraine on US tour

      by

      Boris Johnson has held discussions with Donald Trump about Ukraine during his tour of the US, in an apparent attempt to make the Ukrainian case to the sceptical former US president.Johnson met Trump “to discuss the situation in Ukraine and the vital importance of Ukrainian victory”, his spokesperson said. It is understood that they held the talks on Thursday.The former prime minister – who faces continued questions at home over allegations about lockdown-breaking parties at Chequers and No 10 – has been in Dallas, where he met Greg Abbott, the Republican governor of Texas, and Las Vegas, where he made the latest in his recent sequence of highly lucrative corporate speeches.The discussions with Trump, the location of which has not been divulged, probably centred on Johnson, a vehement international cheerleader for the Ukrainian cause, trying to impress his ideas on the former president.Trump, who is the favourite to win the Republican nomination and take on Joe Biden in next year’s presidential election, has repeatedly praised Vladimir Putin and appears agnostic on the issue of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.During a question-and-answer session aired on CNN earlier this month, Trump declined to say whether he wanted Ukraine to win the war. “Russians and Ukrainians, I want them to stop dying,” he said. “And I’ll have that done. I’ll have that done in 24 hours.”Speaking earlier, Keir Starmer said Johnson has questions to answer about the Chequers allegations, despite the public being “fed up to the back teeth” with stories about his lawbreaking.The Labour leader said there were people who were feeling hurt and fed up about the continuing saga, but there were “questions now about why these allegations have not come out before”.Starmer weighed in on the controversy after the Cabinet Office passed fresh allegations of wrongdoing to the police this week. They did so after seeing diary entries about guests who visited Chequers during the pandemic, which Johnson handed to lawyers representing him as part of the Covid inquiry.Police fined Johnson more than a year ago in relation to an event in June 2020 to mark his birthday. More than 100 fines were handed out to others over events held in and around Downing Street.The Partygate saga contributed to the demise of Johnson’s premiership, but he has since been mulling whether a comeback is possible. Johnson is still facing an inquiry by the privileges committee of MPs into whether he misled the House of Commons by saying all Covid rules were followed in Downing Street.On Friday, Starmer told broadcasters: “I think people are fed up to the back teeth with stories about Boris Johnson. The heart of this is a simple truth that, across the country, people made massive sacrifices during Covid.“Some people not going to the birth of their baby, not going to the funeral of one of their close family members. These are deeply personal things, and increasing revelations about Boris Johnson, I think, just add to that sense of hurt, and people are fed up with it.“I do think there are questions now about why have these allegations not come out before … Obviously, there will be investigations, I understand that. The core of this is a very human feeling of one rule for us, which we obey, another rule for Boris Johnson and those at the top of the Tory party.”The diaries, showing about a dozen events at both the prime minister’s grace-and-favour mansion, Chequers, and No 10, between June 2020 and May 2021, were provided to Johnson’s government-appointed lawyers.However, the Cabinet Office, which paid for the lawyers, also received the diaries, and officials then decided that under the civil service code, they should refer the matter to the police.Downing Street denied that Johnson was the victim of a politically motivated “stitch-up” after his allies reacted with fury to the news of the latest police involvement.No 10 stressed that Rishi Sunak had no involvement in the decision to hand over Johnson’s pandemic diaries, saying he had “not seen the information or material in question” and that ministers had “no involvement in this process and were only made aware after the police had been contacted”. More