All posts by jmb82BBp

Britain is inciting violence with sanctions against Israeli ministers

Article published by Ynetnews.com, 12June 2025. © Richard Kemp

The British government has sanctioned two Israeli ministers for incitement to violence. By this despicable action against the State of Israel it is they who are inciting violence, both at home and abroad.

First, they are guilty of the most appalling double standards. The British, along with Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Norway, indict Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich but completely ignore the dictatorial Palestinian Authority’s encouragement, financing and glorification of terrorism.

Why has UK Foreign Minister David Lammy not sanctioned their ministers and officials, at the very least? What about Mahmoud Abbas, time-expired PA president and infamous Holocaust denier, who has praised Hamas’s genocidal invasion on 7th October? Instead, accusing Israel and not the PA, Lammy is de facto approving of their violent actions and encouraging them to do more. There is no other way to read it.

Lammy does concede a half-hearted condemnation of Hamas and says he wants the hostages returned. But his actions say something entirely different. With Britain and its four international accomplices ganging up on Israel, they are sabotaging a potential peace deal and hostage exchange in Gaza by giving Hamas hope at a time they sorely need it.

The fact that Hamas applauded an earlier statement from Britain, France and Canada threatening sanctions should surely have told Lammy something. Instead he demands that Israel end the conflict. What does that mean? Israel withdraws from Gaza, Hamas survives and the hostages remain captive. That is the only alternative to prosecuting the war until Hamas is destroyed or forced to give up.

The British Foreign Office cites the two ministers’ inflammatory rhetoric. That is undeniable, but how many other government ministers around the world has the UK sanctioned for such words, and you can be sure there is no shortage of targets for such ire if they wanted to find them. But unlike many of them, Israel is a democracy with a hugely powerful judicial system. It can itself deal with such allegations if they amount to a crime, without the former Mandatory power shoving its nose in where it has no business to be.

Israel has done exactly that many times before. Indeed Ben-Gvir was convicted in 2007 for incitement and support for extremist groups. In any case, should Britain really be casting the first stone? Don’t forget that until 2017 the murderous IRA terrorist leader, Martin McGuinness, was Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland, part of the UK’s apparatus of government. His crimes were infinitely worse than anything Ben-Gvir and Smotrich have been accused of. And McGuinness was far from the only former terrorist to hold political office in the UK, and many are still in power.

The reality is that none of this is about Israel. It’s all about British domestic politics and a Labour Party plunging in the polls and desperate to shore up its position ahead of the next elections. Continue reading

There are no ‘journalists’ in Gaza. Just Hamas propaganda operatives

Article published in The Daily Telegraph, 10 June 2025. © Richard Kemp

Britain and the world’s views of the rights and wrongs of the Gaza war are so often shaped by what the BBC reports. That’s mattered more than ever in recent weeks, amid the feverishly heated coverage of Israel’s new Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) scheme to deliver aid to the Palestinian people and bypass allegedly Hamas-controlled NGOs.

Hamas-linked sources claim Israeli soldiers have repeatedly shot and killed Palestinian civilians waiting for GHF food with their families. Stories bearing the bylines of BBC ‘journalists’ in Gaza largely tell this version of events, albeit including the denials of the IDF.

News organisations using Gazan reporters say they have no choice, given the IDF’s refusal to allow in outside journalists.

But that’s no reason not to exercise care and employ the same editorial standards as they would on any other story.

For critics of the BBC, the results have been a disaster for the Corporation and its standards.

They point to the stories that have not been told, or have been largely overlooked, by these reporters almost throughout the war: of Hamas’s tyranny over the people of Gaza, its torture and murder of opponents, and of the courageous Palestinians who defy its rule.

And why is there such scant coverage of Hamas using the civilian population as a human shield by placing tunnels under civilian buildings and military bases in hospital?

Where are the stories of Israeli hostages being moved across Gaza?

Why is there no footage of Hamas firing rockets or their gunmen on the move?

There is an obvious answer: it appears that these reporters are either pro-Hamas, or too afraid of reprisals from terrorist gunmen to tell the truth.

It is a charge that BBC Global News Director Jonathan Munro entirely rejects.

Almost spluttering in disbelief recently at the suggestion that ‘some of the people you’re using in Gaza might be under pressure, might be restricted in what Hamas allows them to see’, resulting in a ‘partial view’, he insisted: ‘There’s no restriction on what they can see, what they can show and what they can film when they’re on location.

‘There’s no suggestion at all that any of those very brave people are under any political influence.’

Munro’s denial shows an astonishing disregard for the well-documented reality of life in Gaza.

Take a recent report from the well regarded NGO the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). It tears apart the notion that press freedom exists in Gaza.

According to the CPJ, journalists there have been subject to ‘detentions, assaults, obstruction and raids’ going back to the start of Hamas rule almost twenty years ago.

While detailing numerous violent assaults on members of the press in Gaza, the analysis warns that violations by Hamas are ‘underreported’.

Some journalists who have been assaulted are believed to be too afraid to say anything at all; others have gone to the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS) but say they do not want to go public for fear of retaliation.

Note that both the CPJ and PJS are the staunchest critics of Israel. There can be no doubting the credibility and accuracy of their accounts on this matter. The picture they paint is light years removed from Munro’s suggestion of unencumbered press freedom in Gaza.

Some of the journalists in Gaza used by the BBC have been exposed as having deeply hateful views of Israel and Jews, making them entirely unsuitable as journalists.

Yet there is a problem that goes far beyond any individual, if Munro and other executives cannot understand the reality of reporting from Gaza.

TV producer Leo Pearlman has proposed the solution: ‘The BBC make a huge deal of adding to every news script from Gaza by saying that Israel doesn’t allow independent access for journalists.

‘What it never says – and maybe should start doing – is that no journalist can operate freely in Gaza under Hamas control.’

Until they start doing so, Munro and his fellow BBC executives are not only deceiving audiences but also themselves.

Trump is running out of time to crush Iran’s nuclear ambitions

Article published in The Daily Telegraph, 8 June 2025. © Richard Kemp

As President Trump works to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran, the Islamic Republic is feverishly building up its offensive military capabilities. The most recent International Atomic Energy Agency report says Tehran has been producing enough 60 per cent enriched uranium to make one nuclear weapon every month and now has enough material to build ten bombs.

It would take no more than two weeks to further enrich this to the 90 per cent required to achieve weapons-grade. It seems likely that the pace of enrichment has if anything increased since nuclear negotiations began.

The IAEA board is due to meet today and may vote on a noncompliance resolution against Iran. Logically, this would lead to snapback UN sanctions under the 2015 Obama nuclear deal, unless Tehran starts to comply with IAEA inspections which it has failed to do up to now. Snapback wouldn’t necessarily happen immediately and no doubt the European signatories would coordinate with the White House given Trump’s live negotiations.

The president gave the ayatollahs two months to reach a deal, threatening military action if not. That two months is up now and all proposals have apparently been rejected.

Iran’s nuclear programme threatens the world and especially the Middle East, with Sunni Arab countries viewed as sworn enemies in Tehran’s maniacal eyes. But Israel is most immediately in Khamenei’s cross-hairs with his repeated guarantees to annihilate it. It is the only country other than the US that is capable of damaging Iran’s nuclear project, but is now on the horns of a dilemma.
Israel can hardly attack while its number one ally is in negotiations on exactly this issue. And if Trump eventually agrees a deal which does not fully dismantle nuclear production facilities – which is a distinct possibility – it will be faced with a decision on whether to go ahead anyway against Trump’s likely desire.

Israel is also certain to face obstruction from European leaders who will cravenly do what they can to avoid conflict no matter the consequences. If Trump’s negotiations grind to a halt and snapback Continue reading

D-Day

Article published in The Daily Mail, 6 June 2025. © Richard Kemp

Imagine yourself storming the beaches of Normandy into the teeth of enemy fire. Around 62,000 British men did exactly that on 6th June 1944. Many were mere youths, the youngest, Jack Banks of the Durham Light Infantry, just 16. Like others in that war he’d falsified his age to sign up, which tells you a great deal about a generation that willingly took their lives into their hands to fight for family, friends and country.

Returning to our visualisation, before the invasion you were  crammed onto the decks and holds of your ship for days, waiting for the weather to break. Even when it became calm enough, the crossing still made you violently sick, bucking through heavy waves for hours on end. The landing craft hit the beach, you ran down the ramp with your stomach churning, jumping off to wade through the lashing waves: cold, tired, terrified and weighed down by helmet, rifle, bullets and grenades. Then you were on the mine-infested  beach, charging into a wall of machine gun fire, some of your friends left and right ripped apart by enemy bullets.

That is what we asked of our young men on that day of hell, and the way they rose to the challenge can’t fail to fill our hearts with pride even 81 years later.

D-Day was and remains the largest amphibious landing in the history of warfare. It was a critical turning point, leading to the liberation of Europe from the Nazi savages. But back then the success of the D-Day landings was far from certain, like everything in war. The Supreme Commander, American General Dwight D Eisenhower, wrote a speech on 5th June which he would read if it failed, taking the blame fully onto his own shoulders.

That D-Day and the invasion of Europe did not fail was due to a miracle of intensive planning and vigorous command. The landings included over 5,000 ships, 11,000 planes, and more than 160,000 ground troops. That supreme effort and the months of fighting that followed could not have succeeded without extraordinary cooperation across the whole of society and across Allied nations.

But above all it was due to the courage, fortitude and sacrifice of thousands of men from Britain, America, Canada and many other nations, to whom we all owe our liberty and way of life today.

The appalling truth: Putin might now fire a tactical nuke – and even get away with it

Article published in The Daily Mail, 3 June 2025. © Richard Kemp

Russia is wounded, far more badly than the Kremlin ever believed possible. Ukraine’s extraordinary special forces mission deep inside enemy territory has done vast damage to Putin’s war machine.

There will be retaliation. The Russian president, afraid more than anything of appearing weak, cannot be seen to let such a devastating attack go unanswered.

Since he first ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Putin has frequently warned he is willing to use tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield – often issuing these threats through lackeys in Russia’s state-controlled media.

Now he might well calculate that, by unleashing such a device, he can demonstrate his invincibility and force Ukraine’s surrender. The appalling reality is that such a calculation might be right.

Europe does not have an effective nuclear deterrent. Britain, once the predominant nuclear power of the continent, has shamefully dismantled its own arsenal. We used to have tactical nuclear weapons, with immense blast power but limited radiation yields, which could be dropped from Vulcan bombers.

We also possessed short-range Lance tactical ballistic missiles capable of being armed with atomic warheads. But no longer. Our only nuclear option now is the Doomsday weapon, a strategic missile of cataclysmic power, designed solely for self-defence, to deter an enemy from waging all-out war on Britain.

To use one of these against Russia as punishment for anything they do in Ukraine would be a suicidal escalation. A global holocaust would ensue. And Putin knows we will never provoke that.

The French do have tactical nuclear weapons, which can be delivered by cruise missiles launched from the air. But these also are intended for last-ditch self-defence. Continue reading

Scaring Putin is the only route to a just peace

Article published in The Daily Telegraph, 3 June 2025. © Richard Kemp

Nobody in their right mind thought Putin would come to the latest round of peace talks in Istanbul with any seriousness. And so it has proven. His demands are straight out of Soviet foreign minister Andrei Gromyko’s negotiating playbook: demand the maximum, present ultimatums and do not give one inch.

Putin’s terms for a final settlement are no different from his diktats from the start, including international recognition of Moscow’s occupation of the four regions he considers Russian territory, and a guarantee Ukraine never joins any international alliances. Even Putin’s pathways to a temporary ceasefire require withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from all of the four regions, demobilisation of the armed forces, cessation of international military aid and electing a new government.

In other words: total capitulation, with Ukraine surrendering its sovereignty, partitioned, isolated, disarmed and a Russian puppet government in Kyiv. That doesn’t mean negotiations shouldn’t continue in the hope of achieving less punitive terms. The Ukrainian government has already signalled it would be ready to accept the temporary occupation of territory Russia has already captured. But it is hard to see how Putin will climb down from his maximalist position without significant changes on the battlefield or to the economic situation.

President Trump tried a softball approach with Putin, extending the prospect of major economic benefits through a return to normalisation in US-Russia relations. Putin hasn’t bought that even though he has ham-fistedly attempted to mollify Trump and encourage him to abandon Ukraine with his disingenuous ploy of engaging in negotiations. Trump obviously sees right through that. He said he was ‘p—-d off’ by Putin’s proposal that Ukraine should be placed under external administration with elections overseen by the UN.

The US now needs to try a different approach. Trump can say he did everything he could to end the bloodshed in the first months of his presidency but Putin’s intransigence now demands different tactics.

What would those tactics be? Continue to hold out an olive branch while doubling down on US military backing to Ukraine and Continue reading

Dropping tactical nuclear weapons was a major strategic error. We must correct it

Article published in The Daily Telegraph, 1 June 2025. © Richard Kemp

Britain must urgently restore tactical nuclear weapons to its defence arsenal. That thought understandably fills many minds with horror but the logic of strategy means that these weapons would in fact make us safer. If the enemy possesses a devastating capability that we do not he is far more likely to use it on us. And Putin, not to mention China, has vast and growing stockpiles of tactical nuclear weapons while we have none. Now it seems the Government may be thinking about tackling this vulnerability in the defence review due to be unveiled this week.

After the Cold War ended Britain dropped tactical nuclear weapons from its inventory. Before that, faced by the conventional superiority of the Warsaw Pact, these bombs had been intended to halt Soviet armoured thrusts into Western Europe if our ground and air forces couldn’t hold them back. They are relatively low yield, including in radiation, and are intended to obliterate major military targets such as troop concentrations, massed tank formations and airbases, rather than laying waste to entire cities and creating wide area nuclear fall-out.

With highly inadequate European conventional forces now confronted by a violent menace, shown only too clearly by the war in Ukraine, we are again back in a situation where Nato nations are faced with the choice of resorting to tactical nuclear weapons or losing everything to Russian advances. Of course our strategic nuclear forces are intended to deter enemy aggression, but their credibility in a situation short of nuclear Armageddon now lies exposed. Is Putin likely to think that our response to his tactical nuclear strikes would be to go to ultimate escalation with a nuclear attack against Moscow or St Petersburg? And if not, what?

The Americans have tactical nukes deployed in Europe but they can withdraw them at any time. And with so much at stake, can we any longer rely absolutely on the US nuclear umbrella to defend us and our Nato allies? Hopefully yes, but optimism is a fool’s strategy. Continue reading

Ignore the Left-wing naysayers, Israel is winning this necessary war

Article published in The Daily Telegraph, 30 May 2025. © Richard Kemp

The EU’s foreign affairs chief, Kaja Kallas, says ‘Israeli strikes in Gaza go beyond what is necessary to fight Hamas’. Perhaps she should head to Jerusalem and give precise instructions to the IDF on what they should be doing to eliminate the Hamas terrorist regime – assuming that’s what she actually wants. She can tell them how you kill terrorists entwined into the population, hiding in tunnels beneath schools, hospitals and houses, protected by the most comprehensively booby-trapped terrain in the history of warfare, all while minimising harm to civilians.

Of course, like so many other blowhard Western politicians, she doesn’t have a clue. Fortunately the IDF does and has been waging this hugely complex war for 19 months with a combination of fighting prowess and humanitarian restraint that no other army could match. That is the true picture that I have witnessed with my own eyes, unlike the vast array of armchair commentators and rabble-rousers with their lies and distortions intended to break Israel or signal their own non-existent virtues or both.

And Israel has had unparalleled success. They have killed something like 20-25,000 Hamas terrorists, including many senior commanders. The latest of these is Mohammed Sinwar, Hamas’s leader in Gaza, blown apart in an air strike earlier this month as he was skulking in a tunnel beneath a hospital in Khan Younis. His older brother Yahya, from whom he took over the reins of Hamas, met his maker last October. Shortly before that Mohammed Deif, Hamas’s military commander, saw the same fate.

The list goes on, and many more would have joined it had the IDF not been so determined to avoid killing the hostages and where possible to avoid harm to civilians in line with their scrupulously observed obligations under International Humanitarian Law. Those who have been dispatched have been replaced, though by less experienced and less able terrorists, but I’m not sure how long the list of applicants will be for the Sinwar brothers’ uniquely hazardous job. Continue reading

International ‘do-gooders’ aren’t helping the people of Gaza

Article published in The Daily Telegraph, 19 May 2025. © Richard Kemp

On Friday, President Trump claimed that people in Gaza are ‘starving’ and ‘we’re going to get that taken care of’. Those eager to find a rift in the close relationship between Trump and the Israeli prime minister have leapt all over that comment, desperately trying to portray it as a rebuke to Benjamin Netanyahu. They will be disappointed to learn that Trump’s words in fact refer to a joint plan drawn up by the US and Israel to hasten the destruction of Hamas while feeding the Gazan population.

Two of Israel’s war aims are to destroy Hamas’s military capabilities and prevent it from continuing to govern Gaza. Last week, the IDF began an intensive campaign to finish off the terrorist group. This has been prepared over the past 11 weeks by blocking supplies into Gaza. That has been necessary because until now Hamas has been hijacking food and other aid entering the Strip, stockpiling some for its own use and selling the rest to the population at inflated prices. The proceeds of aid sales have been essential for Hamas to fund its terrorist activities, given that most other sources of income have been cut off.

Israel has come under fire, including from our own Government, for preventing aid from entering. Many have claimed this is a breach of international law, citing Article 23 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which requires essential aid to be allowed into enemy territory. They conveniently ignore the proviso that this need not be done if there are ‘serious reasons for fearing that the consignments may be diverted from their destination’. The IDF is clear that aid has been hijacked and looted by Hamas. Numerous videos and eyewitness reports have shown that same picture.

Hamas’s control of aid distribution is also the most powerful tool it has to retain a stranglehold over the Gaza population. The new US-Israel initiative, co-ordinated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, aims to put a stop to that. The idea is to establish secure aid posts inside the Strip from where those in need would collect food under strict control.

Enter the UN crying foul, predictably joined by a chorus of so-called humanitarian NGOs. You might think those who claim to have the Gazans’ welfare at heart would welcome a plan that gets aid to where it’s needed without impediment from Hamas terrorists. If so, you haven’t been paying attention to what seems to be the real agenda of many of these groups, including UNRWA, the UN Human Rights Council, international courts, and various human rights charities. Their missions apparently focus on twisting the facts on the ground (not to mention international law) into weapons to stick into Israel.

UN officials have said they are worried about the dangers of thousands of people crowding round a limited number of distribution points. Even if valid, does that outweigh their frequently expressed and often overblown concerns about ‘starvation’ and “famine” in Gaza? Some have also voiced doubts over Israel’s allegations that Hamas has been stealing aid, despite the overwhelming weight of evidence proving otherwise.

It is hard to escape the conclusion that António Guterres and others inside the UN simply do not want Israel to continue with its defeat of Hamas terrorists in Gaza. They have previous form on this. Right at the beginning of the conflict, I’m told, the Israeli government appealed to the UN to set up a humanitarian zone in the south of Gaza to house refugees driven away from danger in active combat zones further north. The UN refused to do so, arguing they would be abetting the displacement of civilians.

I know of no other conflict in which the UN has not actively encouraged the removal of populations from a dangerous combat zone. The same applies to the failure of the UN or any major power to pressure Egypt into opening its borders to allow temporary refuge. Again, there have been few other conflicts worldwide where neighbouring countries have not opened their borders to let civilians escape to safety.

Hamas is well known for using human shields as a crucial element of its military strategy against Israel. Can it really be that the UN and others in the international community are also using Gazan civilians as a different kind of shield?

Refusing to co-operate in proposals to get civilians to safety so that Hamas terrorists can be killed while minimising the prospects of collateral damage, and rejecting an initiative to supply them with humanitarian aid while denying it to the terrorists, certainly help frustrate Israel’s war efforts.

These international do-gooders may be doing good to Hamas, but they aren’t doing any good to the civilian population of Gaza. After more than 18 months of vicious fighting, the best way to end this war and get the hostages out is the rapid and efficient defeat of Hamas, and that depends to a very large extent on the success of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s food-distribution project. All responsible governments and humanitarian bodies have a duty to support it. Those who do not are exposing their concerns for Gaza as empty words. Or worse.

Even if Trump’s ceasefire holds, it will not end the conflict over Kashmir

Article published in The Daily Telegraph, 12 May 2025. © Richard Kemp

US diplomacy has potentially brought India and Pakistan back from the brink of what could easily have turned into a much wider and more violent conflict. For the time being at least – the ceasefire over the weekend, if it holds, is due to be followed up by more substantive negotiations.

On Saturday morning, a couple of hours before Pakistan’s air force launched missiles at Indian military bases, lieutenant general Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, the army spokesman, accused India of ‘pushing the whole region towards a dangerous war with its madness’.

In fact it is Pakistan’s madness that is responsible for the most ferocious conflict between the two countries since the war in 1971. India’s air strikes against terrorists were an entirely justified response to the April 22 slaughter of 26 civilians in Pahalgam, the most deadly attack on Indian civilians since the 2008 bomb and gun attacks in Mumbai.

Indian intelligence has linked the Pahalgam shootings to Lashkar-e-Taiba, an internationally proscribed terrorist group. LeT’s primary focus is on violently separating Kashmir from India to use as a base for the eventual conquest of India in order to force Islamic rule on the subcontinent, destroying Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity. It also has strong connections with Al Qaeda and has been implicated in global terrorist attacks including in the UK, US and the Middle East. LeT is a proxy of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) agency which funds and directs it.

Of course Pakistan denies that, claiming only to provide moral, political and diplomatic support to Kashmiri separatists. But some years ago, when working in British intelligence, I saw numerous reports confirming the ISI’s direct role with LeT and other jihadist groups, and the situation won’t have changed since then. Furthermore, Pakistan’s extensive use of a range of terrorist organisations as instruments of state policy is widely understood and has been admitted by Pakistani leaders. Continue reading