UK: Money is the cost of political decisions, but it can also be measured in lives lost

 

Money is the cost of political decisions, but it can also be measured in lives lost

The cost of dealing with the Covid pandemic has been enormous. Lives lost or damaged, job lost, the burden of anxiety and despair plus the economic and political cost.

But in essence, every political decisions has a cost attached. The cost of decision making when dealing with a crisis cannot be underestimated. When wrong decisions are made there is also a cost. Britain has been acting like a gambler, betting and hoping to win, but losing along the way. This gambling behaviour has been at the core of British geopolitical decisions. On the one hand there was the intent of saving money by cutting corners and on the other was the intent to remain relevant.

Afghanistan and Iraq have proven how wrong it was to cut corners while at the time attempting to remain relevant and and the consequences were shambolic. Politicians like to sound impressive and impressive it was the idea of investing hundreds of millions of Pound to build what were thought be state of the art aircraft carriers that have been beset by disasters. On top of delays came the realisation that structures were far from perfect and lead to leaks. As if this wasn't enough, it was understood that the carriers could be operational, but without the aircraft that should carry onboard. The latest chapter was HMS Prince of Wales when having left Porstmouth it had to return to port just when it was on its way for a long naval exercise and these was due to 'technical problems'. If Britain was at war, such kind of deficiences would be unforgivable.

What happens to the British Royal Navy in terms of mishaps does not end there, but other branches of the British Armed Forces are facing challenges. The recruitment crisis is not about lack of candidates to join the British Armed Forces. It is about suitability. Of those wanting to join in, there is a huge percentage in terms of those not judged fit to join in. This is why there was the idea of opening the gates allowing candidates from the Commonwealth to join. That did not go well. Now, recent decisions made in terms of recruitment have been criticized. Positive discrimination, not allowing white candidates to join in, has led to a new low. Trying to be politically correct, those in charge have made a difficult situation even worse. If those wanting to join in - if they trully wanted to join in - are ultimately judged not fit for purpose or if standards are lowered to allow them to join in then there will be serious questions to ask about fighting capabilities. The British Armed Forces do not have the necessary manpower and are also critically stretched in terms of material capabilities. Should Britain have to face a real threat involving a sustained long term effort, Britain would be facing mortal danger without the tools needed to get itself out of danger. Today's Britain is less capable than the Britain of 1940. 

Foreign Secretary Liz Truss spoke about her willingness of 'pressing the button' should it be necessary. Well, without the necessary conventional forces, 'pressing the button' might be the only one thing to do when everything else is missing. Just a few weeks ago, she stated that she was in favour of reducing manpower. It seems that all she has in mind is the nuclear deterrent and IT capabilities to deal with dangers linked to Internet. The formerly glorious Royal Navy had to be committed to the task of patrolling the Channel because Britain does not have enough patrol boats and this didn't go well either. Using warships to chase small ships and rubber boats is not ideal.

Building huge aircraft carriers was expensive and time consuming. One wonders how much could have been done instead of building such huge aircraft carriers. How long did the Bismark last? Were any lessons learnt? Titanic comes to mind. Given the way the British Armed Forces are managed, they could well become the new Titanic.

And when all this is happening, Britain faces a financial crisis of major proportions that threatens to unleash waves of social and political unrest. Will politicians be able to deliver all the promised budget increases? The months ahead come with the threat of blackouts, rationing, riots and defaults. Does internal upheaval make a country stronger? 

 

 

  

European Energy Rationing and strikes: Sanctions against Russian Federation benefit Russian Federation

 

Europe is shooting itself in the foot: sanctions against Russian Federation benefit Russian Federation

In the midst of a hot summer and talk about environmental crisis caused by rising temperatures leading to fires and meltdown snow caps, people can easily forget that winter will come and that when winter comes energy prices will not only hit the roof because of lack of energy sources. Winter will come with rationing and this will bring with it all kinds of unsavoury situations, conflict and most probably social and political unrest across Europe.

Before there was any talk about rationing, prices were rising steadily and utility bills were hitting consumers that are now going to be told that they not only will have to pay more more the energy they use. They will also have to face the certain possiblity of blackouts.

In Germany, head of industry, trade unions and politicians including the Deputy President of the European Commission are alerting about what is to come. Industries that have to pay higher energy costs and/or industries that are told that they will not have the energy they need to be able to function will face extremely harsh choices. If they decide to reduce operations or if they cannot obtain the energy they need to continue operating, the unavoidable consequence will be mass unemployment.

In Britain, the struggle has already begun. Strikes involving transport will be reinforced by strikes of public sector workers that demand salary rises to cope with galloping inflation. Any salary rises will drain even more an already exhausted treasury. Any loss economic activity will lead to economic losses and will threaten the stability of the British Pound. If the currency collapses, then there will be a double wammy. Britain will pay more for the energy it uses not just because of higher market prices, but because the parity with the US Dollar used to buy oil and gas will be less favourable.

The British government is aware that it will come the time when Britain will be paralized by strikes and this is why legislation is being put through Parliament to counter trade unions to allow agency workers to replace ordinary workers. The problem is that alienating ordinary workers is a leading cause to political and civil unrest and there might not be enough manpower to prevent street battles and widespread violence. By passing such legislation the authorities might be unwittingly creating two sides at war in the United Kingdom.

In the meantime, the witchhunt is already underway. British citizens that utterly disagree with UK policies regarding the Russian Federation are being hunted down and their assets are being frozen and there is even the threat of trials for crimes against humanity. Britain has been encouraging British mercenaries to get involved in the war to attack the Russian Federation, but does not like the fact that British citizens of their own volition actually support the Russian Federation.

Britain is at war with the Russian Federation and sooner than later Britain will pay a very high price for it and the same applies to most countries of the European Union. The idea that Europe and/or Britain can target the Russian Federation without any consequences for Britain and Europe is as naive as the words of Hermann Goering when he promised Adolf Hitler that German cities would never be bombed.

Europe and Britain will have to face the consequences, consequences that could be worse than anything conceivable or predictable. Europe and Britain are moving around with the same self-assurance the inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on the eve of the launching of two atomic bombs.

Just yesterday, both Conservative party contenders for the leadership of the Conservative Party were asked very simplistic questions about Britain involvement in Ukraine. Not even the journalists of the BBC have the brainpower to ask proper questions. The issue was not about sending or not sending the Royal Navy to the Black Sea. The issue is what will happen if Britain is formally involved in the war because sending the Royal Navy would be an act of war. The time for intimidation is gone because any additional actions will actually trigger a European conflict.