NORTHERN IRELAND

Government outlines terms of reference for independent probe into Omagh bombing


Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris ordered the statutory inquiry into the Omagh bombing (Paul Mcerlane/PA)

By David Young and Jonathan McCambridge, 

PAToday 

An independent inquiry into the Omagh bombing will examine alleged security failings that led a High Court judge to conclude the outrage could plausibly have been prevented.

The UK Government has outlined its terms of reference for the independent probe, which will be chaired by Lord Turnbull.

The dissident republican bomb exploded in the Co Tyrone town on August 15 1998, killing 29 people, including a woman pregnant with twins.

Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris ordered the statutory inquiry into the attack last year in response to a court judgment that directed the Government to establish some form of investigation.

It was a cruel atrocity carried out, not just on the people of Omagh, but on all those in Northern Ireland who supported the peace processChris Heaton-Harris, Northern Ireland Secretary

Michael Gallagher, whose son Aiden died in the Real IRA bombing, took the legal challenge that resulted in the Belfast High Court judge directing the state to act.

Mr Heaton-Harris outlined the terms of reference by way of a written parliamentary statement on Wednesday.

In his 2021 judgment, Mr Justice Horner directly recommended that the UK Government carry out an investigation into alleged security failings in the lead-up to the atrocity.

While having no jurisdiction to order the Irish government to act on the matter, the judge urged authorities there to establish their own probe in light of his findings.

A number of families of Omagh victims have repeatedly called for an inquiry to also be carried out into the bombing in the Republic of Ireland. Mr Heaton-Harris has also pressed the Irish government to act.

On a visit to Belfast on Wednesday, Ireland’s deputy premier, Micheal Martin, pledged to co-operate with the UK inquiry but said he did not think it made sense to have two inquiries into Omagh on both sides of the Irish border.



Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris outlined the terms of reference by way of a written parliamentary statement (PA)

The inquiry will be established under the Inquiries Act 2005 with full powers, including the power to compel the production of documents and to summon witnesses to give evidence on oath.

In his statement, Mr Heaton-Harris said: “I want to first again express my deepest sympathy for all of those affected by the Omagh bombing in August 1998. It was a cruel atrocity carried out, not just on the people of Omagh, but on all those in Northern Ireland who supported the peace process.

“Following the announcement of the inquiry in February 2023, and the appointment of Lord Turnbull as chair in June 2023, I have now agreed with Lord Turnbull the terms of reference for the inquiry. These are focused on the four grounds identified by the Northern Ireland High Court as giving rise to plausible arguments that the bombing could have been prevented.

“With the terms of reference now agreed, the inquiry can press ahead with its work to comply with the judgment of the High Court, demonstrating the UK Government’s ongoing commitment to taking proper action on legacy-related matters.

“The inquiry chairman will now undertake a setting-up exercise to design the inquiry as he sees fit, and he will announce further detail about the inquiry in due course.”

The inquiry will examine the adequacy of the measures taken by UK state authorities, including the police, security forces and intelligence and security agencies, to disrupt dissident republicans who had been involved in attacks from December 1997 up to and including the Omagh bombing.

It will assess whether that approach changed following the Good Friday Agreement of April 1998.

The first thing to stress is that the inquiry is an entirely independent body

Lord Turnbull, inquiry chairman

It will also probe alleged intelligence-sharing failures between the UK and Irish authorities in the year-and-a-half leading up to the bombing.

It will further test an allegation made by former senior police officer Norman Baxter that detectives investigating previous dissident attacks were not given access to full intelligence information on suspects.

It will also examine claims around information allegedly passed to the security forces by a state agent known as Kevin Fulton in the months prior to the Omagh attack.

The inquiry will also look at intelligence said to have been obtained by the UK Government’s Communication Headquarters (GCHQ) from alleged vehicle and telephone monitoring of dissident republicans involved in the planning, preparation and conduct of the Omagh bombing and other earlier attacks.

The subsequent analysis and handling of the GCHQ intelligence by the state authorities will also be investigated.

The inquiry will also examine the extent and adequacy of steps taken by UK state authorities to track and analyse the mobile telephone usage by those suspected to be involved in dissident republican terror attacks before the Omagh bombing and whether that data may have aided efforts to disrupt the atrocity in Omagh.

Inquiry chair Lord Turnbull said he was confident the terms of reference would allow him to conduct a “thorough and robust investigation”.

“The first thing to stress is that the inquiry is an entirely independent body,” he said.

In our view, one inquiry is optimal, two separate inquiries to me doesn't make senseMicheal Martin, Ireland's deputy premier

“I and my team will decide which are the relevant and important issues to explore and which witnesses will be called. We will do so in a manner which is entirely free of influence from the Government, or any of the United Kingdom authorities and agencies.

“The inquiry is established under the provisions of the Inquiries Act of 2005 which means that I will have the power to require the production of documents and the attendance of witnesses. I shall make use of those powers to any extent necessary.”

Lord Turnbull said the voice of the victims would be heard.

“Whilst I have not yet defined the exact procedure the inquiry will follow, it is my intention to invite families and survivors to commemorative hearings in Omagh at some point this year, so I can hear directly from those most affected by the bombing,” he said.

“I recognise that for some, however, revisiting events of the past would be too traumatic and that they may have no wish to return to such a difficult time in their lives and the lives of their own loved ones. I will fully respect that view, and the inquiry will recognise your privacy if this is your wish.”

The first phase of the inquiry will involve gathering information and materials.

The second phase will be the evidential hearings and Lord Turnbull said he intended for those to be held in public and broadcast live, unless it was necessary in the public interest for reasons of national security that they are held in private.

The chairman acknowledged it could take some time before he was in a position to produce a final report and said he would consider whether to issue an interim report ahead of the inquiry’s conclusion.


Tanaiste Micheal Martin during a visit to Ulster University in Belfast (Niall Carson/PA)

Mr Heaton-Harris reiterated his call for the Irish government to set up its own inquiry.

“I urge the Irish Government to now explain what consideration it has given to the setting up of an investigation in Ireland to discharge its obligations under article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in line with the clear direction of the High Court,” he said.

However, speaking during his visit to Ulster University in Belfast, Mr Martin questioned the merit of having two separate inquiries.

He also denied that his government had not done enough to pursue those responsible for Troubles crimes.

“There is no amnesty in the Republic and there never has been an amnesty given in the Republic,” he said in clear reference to the UK’s contentious legacy laws.

“The Gardai and the Director of Public Prosecutions are independent of government.

“No direction has ever been given to either not to pursue cases that arose from the Troubles and not to prosecute, those are the facts.

“In respect of in and around Omagh, people were convicted in the Republic and imprisoned.

“More broadly speaking, in terms of the inquiry, I haven’t seen the terms of reference, we have been seeking the terms of reference for quite some time so that we could then respond.

“We have made it very clear that we would be fully co-operative with any such inquiry.

I have always supported a public inquiry when it comes to Omagh

First Minister Michelle O'Neill

“In our view, one inquiry is optimal, two separate inquiries to me doesn’t make sense because there would be clear overlap and duplication and maybe crossing each other.

“We have mechanisms, we have changed the law in the Republic on a number of occasions to facilitate the provision of information that the Republic may have in respect of certain crimes.”

Mr Martin added: “Our view is, we’ll see the terms of reference and then we’ll work to ensure that we contribute to that inquiry.”

Stormont’s leaders were also asked about the probe on a visit to Limavady on Wednesday morning.

First Minister Michelle O’Neill said: “I have always supported a public inquiry when it comes to Omagh.

“I think that is really important that we allow those families to get to the truth, that they get to the truth that they have been campaigning for many, many years.”

Deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly said: “We have discussed with the Irish government issues related to legacy.

“The Taoiseach (Leo Varadkar) was in Northern Ireland just a couple of weeks ago and I took the opportunity to urge full co-operation and collaboration with all public inquiries and investigations.”

UK
Future of four-day week in limbo

Ellie Ames 21 February 2024

Image: Sinseeho / Shutterstock.com

South Cambridgeshire councillors have been advised to continue the authority’s four-day week trial until the Government offers more detail on plans to ‘disincentivise’ the practice.

Ministers recently consulted on the use of ‘financial levers’ to discourage local authorities from operating a four-day working week for full pay.

South Cambridgeshire District Council’s trial of the shortened working week had been due to end in March, with the authority set to consult on becoming a permanent four-day week employer soon after.

However, the council has said today that its consultation ‘cannot go ahead’ until it understands the implications of the Government’s proposed changes, and a new report to councillors recommends that the trial should continue until ministers provide further details.

The trial began for desk-based staff last January, and for waste operatives in September.

The new report sets out how the trial has seen £434,000 less spent on agency staff after the council recruited to 10 roles that it had previously struggled to fill.

However, South Cambridgeshire’s Conservative group noted that the savings delivered through reduced use of agency staff are ‘miles off’ the previously projected £776,000.

The council report also shows that extra costs involved with moving to a four-day waste collection service bring the net saving down to £316,000.

The report recommends that weekly hours worked by desk-based staff are increased from 29.6 to 32, in line with the working pattern that has been drawn out for waste service operatives.

This means all staff will be working 86.5%, rather than 80%, of full-time hours.

1933

‘Our struggle goes hand in hand with Palestinians’ struggle’—Lebanese protester

The Egyptian regime is colluding with Israeli genocide

End the apartheid placard on protest in London (Picture: Alisdare Hickson)

By Sophie Squire
SOCIALIST WORKER
Wednesday 21 February 2024

“Targeting the Egyptian embassy was a direct response to the regime’s complicity in besieging Gaza,” Hadi, a Lebanese activist, told Socialist Worker. He and other protesters blocked entrances to the Egyptian embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, on Monday to rage against their state’s collaborating with Israel’s genocide.

They also blocked the road outside the embassy and doused the floor in red paint. One protester held up a sign that said, “You siege Gaza; we siege your embassy.”

The action came after reports that the Egyptian state plans to build a walled camp in the Sinai Peninsula for Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.

The Wall Street Journal newspaper quoted an Egyptian official who said a “walled enclosure” was built in an area that could accommodate 100,000 people.

Protesters outside the embassy were met with repression. “We faced brutality from internal security forces who attempted to suppress our demands to protect the embassy’s building, blocking our way,” he said.

“They did this despite the presence of individuals with disabilities, including those in wheelchairs.”

Hadi added, “Our demands include opening a crossing to deliver food and medical aid to Gaza,” he said. “And we want journalists to enter through the Rafah crossing to document Israeli occupation crimes.

“We want the evacuation of the wounded and injured from Gaza. immediately and unconditionally.

“We also want the Egyptian state and Arab rulers to clear the way for militants to support armed Palestinian resistance and defend Gaza and Palestine.”

Anger at the Israeli state inside Lebanon isn’t going away. “It is profound and widespread,” said Hadi. “This anger stems from the ongoing colonial violence and oppression perpetrated by the Israeli occupation forces against the Palestinian people, specifically the people of Gaza.

“It has been expressed in Lebanon through protests and various forms of militancy aimed at opposing settler colonialism and supporting the struggle of Palestinians for liberation.

“The Israeli occupation state has also launched an ongoing aggression since 8 October targeting civilian infrastructure in Lebanon.”

On Monday Israeli forces bombed the town of Ghaziyeh in southern Lebanon. Since 7 October, the Israeli state has murdered at least ten people in Lebanon.

The Israeli state justifies these attacks by saying that it is trying to root out the Lebanese resistance group Hezbollah.

But Hadi added that people in Lebanon aren’t just angry with the Israeli state. “People in Lebanon are deeply frustrated towards Arab rulers’ complicity in supporting the Israeli occupation,” he said.

“The betrayal of Arab rulers, including the Egyptian regime, is a grave injustice. We understand that our liberation from reactionary regimes in the region goes hand in hand with the struggle to liberate Palestine.”

Opinion

Netanyahu: The Antithesis of Ben-Gurion



Hazem Saghieh


In 1956, the stance of the US turned Israel’s military victory into a political defeat. Indeed, at the insistence of President Eisenhower and his administration, the countries that had launched the "Tripartite Aggression" against Egypt (Britain, France, and Israel) were made to suffer a humiliating setback that led to British Prime Minister Anthony Eden’s resignation.

As for David Ben-Gurion, he drew a crucial lesson that would later become a foundation pillar of Israeli state policy. He understood that the US ultimately called the shots in the Middle East - after Britain and France once played this role, the important decisions now were made by the United States alone.

Following the Second World War, the latter, alongside with the Soviet Union, had become the world’s two ascending powers. Because of this lesson, Ben-Gurion led the shift that made Washington, instead of the declining powers in London and Paris, the political reference point of Tel Aviv. This path was not without its fair share of supplication and grovelling, requirements imposed by the fact that, at the time, Washington had been more concerned with shoring up alliances with the Arab and Muslim worlds than Israel.

In doing so, Ben-Gurion showed himself to be adept at adapting to changes in the balance of power and fine-tuning the diplomatic adjustments they demanded. Israel reaped the benefits of his capacity for adaptation, which was never more evident than in the 1967 War.

Indeed, military and technological superiority combined with reliance on the United States - two factors that are ultimately intertwined - to allow the Jewish state consistent success, which was also helped by parliamentary democracy that governed and organized the country.

However, one wouldn’t find a trace of Ben-Gurionism in the approach of Benjamin Netanyahu, who was raised in the Revisionist tradition of Jabotinsky. Political nihilism has accompanied the humanitarian horrors of the conflict since that war began, as reflected by the objectives of annihilating Hamas and getting the hostages back without negotiations.

Although subsequent developments have demonstrated that it will be difficult to continue to cling to both objectives absolutely, the potential campaign on Rafah would reinvigorate the notion of total war and bring us back to a political void.

Benny Gantz has announced that unless all the hostages are released before Ramadan, the war cabinet will launch its campaign on Rafah, in which a massive number of Gazan civilian victims are now crammed. However, Netanyahu reiterated his unequivocal rejection of a Palestinian state in conjunction with this announcement, calling it a reward for terrorism, and his finance minister, Smotrich, urged him to withdraw from the Oslo Accords if a Palestinian state is unilaterally recognized.

While this hubris ignores the United States’ publicly stated position, as well as that of countless countries, governments, and peoples around the world, another minister, Ben-Gvir, voiced reservations about allowing Muslim worshippers into the Al-Aqsa Mosque during Ramadan, which the Haaretz columnist Amos Harel warned would risk igniting a religious conflict.

And all this comes as the government pursues an approach that ranges from encouraging the actions of settlers to turning a blind eye to them. In turn, domestic headlines suggest contradiction and volatility far more than they do cohesion: this is evident in the reporting on the West Bank, which is being violated on a regular basis, while getting the hostages back seems increasingly at odds with the war Israel is waging.

Netanyahu and his coalition government have now become a burden on politics and political process as such. They are undermining the foundational pillars upon which the Israeli state was built, foremost among them its special relationship with the United States and its excellent relations with Western European countries.

However, their actions are raising serious questions at the regional level as well, putting the future of its peace with Egypt and Jordan in jeopardy, and perhaps the agreements concluded with the countries that normalized relations later on too, to say nothing about weakening the prospects for peace and normalization with countries that, under different circumstances and if different stances had been taken, might have been inclined to make peace and normalize relations.

By slamming the doors to politics shut and choosing total war, the Jewish state is making the world more tolerant of the actions of Iran's proxies in Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq, and granting the narratives of these parties, including their misrepresentations and lies, more acceptance. This Netanyahu-led Israel would seem like brainless tongueless muscle, especially if the Palestinians manage to get their affairs in order and agree to a framework that brings Hamas into the Palestine Liberation Organization following its adoption of the latter’s program.

Thus, even if Israel were to emerge victorious after another extremely bloody and brutal campaign in Rafah, many actors could reconsider their calculations in ways that harm the country: we see this in the wobbling of the foundations that have underpinned its policy since the era that began 1956, especially its relationship with the US, and in new considerations linked to the region and Israel's place within it.

Set their stance on Palestinian rights aside, Israelis who care about their country and want to protect it inevitably fear that there will come a day when sacrificing Netanyahu and his coalition is no longer enough to save what Israel stands for, or to salvage what remains of its meaning from the clutches of total war and its repercussions.

What we are seeing, in essence, is the accelerating demolition of what the country’s founders had built, or the antithesis of Ben-Gurionism. Israel’s founding father, after having retired from politics, called for a withdrawal from the territories occupied in 1967, with the exception of segments of Jerusalem, demanding nothing more than practical and viable armistice arrangements in return. He certainly did not do so out of concern for the Palestinians or the Arabs. It was his keenness on Israel's interests that drove him, and it took him in the opposite direction of that which Netanyahu’s primitive view of these interests is leading the country.

WHO IS ACTUALLY IN CONTROL OF THE ECONOMY?

THE INVISBLE HAND

This article by Dr Edward Thomas Jones appeared in the Daily Post Business section on Wednesday 21 February 2024.

WHO IS ACTUALLY IN CONTROL OF THE ECONOMY?

This article by Dr Edward Thomas Jones appeared in the Daily Post Business section on Wednesday 21 February 2024.

A key concern for most voters, here in North Wales and elsewhere, is the performance of the economy.  The phrase “It’s the economy, stupid” was coined by James Carville, strategist of U.S. President Bill Clinton’s successful 1992 campaign against George Bush Snr.  The quip was meant to bring voters back to the fact that the campaign was being held in the middle of a recession, which the Clinton team used successfully to unseat Bush.  Over thirty years on, it remains good advice to political aides.  Voters in the U.K. consider the economic performance of each party as a key factor in their political decision-making, with the Conservatives enjoy a clear advantage in the British perception of which party is best at managing the economy. 

Assessing a political party’s influence on the economy is not a simple task.  For instance, a recently elected government requires time to draft and implement its new policies, with time also needed to show their effects.  On the other hand, it could be argued that individuals and businesses adjust their behaviour before a government implements its policies.

Quarterly real GDP data from the Office for National Statistics can help us see the economic impact of the two parties.  Between 1955 and 2023, the Conservatives have presided over 181 quarters while Labour has been in power for 95 (for a total of 276 quarters).  The average quarterly real GDP growth over this period was 0.58%; that is, the U.K. economy grew on average 0.58% in each quarter between 1955 and 2023. 

Since 1955, the Conservatives achieved a slightly higher average GDP growth per quarter (0.60%) than Labour (0.55%).  However, this difference is statistically insignificant.  In other words, a statistical test shows that there is no real difference in how the economy performs under the different political parties.  Even when considering lags of various lengths (to take account of the time a newly elected government needs to implement its policies), there is no significant result. In short, the economy grows at a very similar pace under both the Conservatives and Labour governments.

What about the North Wales economy?

Regardless of the party in power at Westminster, the North Wales economy has grown at a similar pace.  Data from the Welsh Government shows that the economy in North Wales has grown by an average of 3.27% per year between 1999 and 2021.  When Labour is in power at Westminster, North Wales economy grew by an average of 3.35% per year while it grew by an average of 3.20% when the Conservatives were in power.  A statistical test shows that there is no real difference in how North Wales economy performs regardless of which party is in power at Westminster.

While further analysis is needed to better understand the impact of the two political parties on the economy, the initial results raise an interesting question: who is actually in control of the economy? 

The UK government aims to stop publishing stats on homeless people’s deaths

Daniel McCulloch ▪ Victoria Cooper
PMP
23 February 2024 |


The government is contemplating discontinuing the release of vital statistics on homeless deaths as part of a mortality data review, exacerbating the invisibility and challenges confronting the unhoused.

The UK government is consulting on plans to stop publishing vital statistics from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on the deaths of homeless people. This is part of a wider review of mortality statistics including deaths in care homes and winter mortality.

Since 2018, the ONS in England and Wales and the National Records for Scotland (NRS) have published annual reports about the deaths of homeless people. This data offers insights into year-on-year changes in recorded deaths, including details about sex, age and cause of death. (There are plans to collate similar official data in Northern Ireland, but none has yet been published.)

The UK government claims that these statistics are “experimental” and that “further development work” is needed to bring them up to “national statistics status”. As part of its consultation, which closes on March 5 2024, the government is looking for feedback on “the relative importance” of these statistics.

Our research shows that death is a constant threat for people experiencing homelessness. However, this is rarely considered, by the public or by politicians, as part of the plight of being unhoused.

Invisible in life and death

Globally, homeless populations are three-to-four times more likely to die than the general population. Homelessness and health expert James J. O’Connell has said that despite the diverse methodologies different institutions across the world use to measure homelessness-related mortality, there is a “remarkable consistency” in death rates internationally – one that “transcends borders, cultures and oceans”.

Research shows that homeless adults and children are more likely to suffer underlying health conditions than the general population. Unhoused people are disproportionately likely to die due to violent accidents, such as being run over by a motor vehicle, or being crushed in a bin lorry.

Until 2018, the UK government did not track the number of people dying while homeless. Only when the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and journalist Maeve McClenaghan, working with London-based group The Museum of Homelessness, revealed the profound invisibility of this precise issue as part of their Dying Homeless project, did the ONS in England and Wales and the NRS begin to tackle it.

To date, their data is the most accurate official data on homelessness-related deaths in the UK. It is, however, imperfect – the ONS recognises as much, and advises caution in how it is interpreted.

These data limitations include the unreliability of coroners’ reports, which do not always record the fact that the deceased was homeless. This might be due to incomplete information given to the registrar, or out of consideration for the person’s family.

There is also no specific question on a death certificate to ask if a person was homeless at the time of death. Instead, the ONS must search death certificate data for registered addresses specified as “no fixed abode” or that are of a known hostel. And the ONS does not yet have a comprehensive list of all homeless hostels and emergency shelters, although such a list is now in development.

CREDIT: UNSPLASH/DAN BURTON —

— Unhoused people suffer from invisibility in both life and death.

Why this matters

The absence of data concerning homeless populations is not a new phenomenon. It underlines the wider invisibility from which unhoused people suffer.

The way people sleeping rough are counted involves less-than-perfect methods. In 2022, 80% of local authorities in England gauged numbers of rough sleepers using an “evidence-based estimate meeting”. This involves local agencies (such as charities, outreach teams and homelessness accommodation services) giving an informed estimate of how many people might be sleeping rough on a typical night. Only 20% of local authorities actually counted the people they saw sleeping rough.

And of course, homelessness covers more than rough sleeping. Statutory homelessness refers to people to whom local authorities owe either a main duty to house or a relief duty, whereby they work with applicants to attempt to prevent or relieve homelessness (for example, by developing a personalised plan to support an applicant).

Research shows the tools used to measure and assess homelessness and rough sleeping vastly underestimate how extensive it is. People who are not eligible for statutory support are not counted.


Further, not all homeless people will present themselves to local authorities, as some people – often referred to as the “hidden homeless” – are put off from applying because of fears of being rejected. As data on statutory homelessness is compiled based on these applications, many homeless adults and children are excluded from official statistics.

Health researchers argue that homelessness presents a public health crisis. Gauging the extent of it – by publishing official statistics on the number of people who die while homeless – is the first step in combating it.

At a time when evictions are rising, and the affordable housebuilding system is set to all but collapse, the deaths of homeless people is a critical political issue. The UK government needs to take responsibility for it.






Sources:
▪ This piece was originally published in The Conversation and re-published in PMP Magazine on 23 February 2024. | The authors write in a personal capacity.

▪ Cover: Unsplash/Jon Tyson. (Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.)

Written by:

Daniel McCulloch
Lecturer in Criminology and Social Policy, The Open University.
UK.
See all the articles by this author...

Victoria Cooper
Lecturer in Social Policy and Criminology, The Open University.
UK.

See all the articles by this author...

Divers retrieve 80-pound brass bell from first U.S. Navy destroyer ever sunk by enemy fire

By Emily Mae Czachor
February 21, 2024 /  CBS News

An enormous bell once attached to a historic warship that was torpedoed during World War I has been recovered from the wreckage, about a year and a half after divers discovered the lost ship in waters off the southwestern coast of England.

The bell was retrieved by a specialized salvage unit assigned to survey the wreck site of the USS Jacob Jones, a United States Navy destroyer that went down in the English Channel on Dec. 6, 1917, after being struck by a German submarine's torpedo. It was the first U.S. Navy destroyer sunk by enemy fire, according to the Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC).

The U.K. Ministry of Defence's Salvage and Marine Operations unit successfully conducted a survey of the historic WWI wreck of the USS Jacob Jones on Jan. 22, 2024. The operation led to the recovery of the ship's bell. 

IMAGE COURTESY ASSET PROVIDED BY U.K. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SALVAGE AND MARINE OPERATIONS (SALMO)

After the shipwreck was discovered in August 2022, the NHHC partnered with the U.K. Ministry of Defense to study the site, which a group of expert divers found about 400 feet beneath the ocean's surface some 60 miles south of Cornwall at the tip of the southern English peninsula.

Normally, the U.S. Navy's policy stipulates that newly-discovered shipwrecks like this one are left undisturbed. But the international partnership, in this case, was commissioned out of concerns about "unauthorized and illegal salvaging of the ship's bell," said Sam Cox, a retired U.S. Navy rear admiral and the director of the Naval History and Heritage Command, in a statement.

Made from brass and weighing 80 pounds, according to a Washington Post report, the bell "will serve as a memorial to sailors who made the ultimate sacrifice in the defense of both the United States and the United Kingdom," Cox's statement continued. CBS News contacted the NHHC for more details about the bell but did not receive an immediate response.

Pulled from its initial patrol off the coast of Virginia before the U.S. joined World War I in April 1917, the USS Jacob Jones was deployed to the U.K. carrying supply convoys and is remembered for ultimately rescuing hundreds of survivors from damaged British ships that had been hit by enemy fire. Citing the Maritime Archeology Trust, the U.S. Naval Institute said the destroyer has been credited with rescuing 374 crew members and passengers from torpedoed merchant ships and passenger ships throughout its deployment in European waters.

The destroyer sank eight minutes after being hit by the German torpedo in December of that year, with two officers and 62 crew members on board, according to the NHHC. There were others on the USS Jacob Jones who survived the torpedo strike, since Commander David W. Bagley called for the ship to be abandoned and its life rafts launched as the stern began to sink, according to the agency.

"The wreck of the ship is a hallowed war grave and is the last resting place for many of the 64 men who were lost in the sinking," said Cox. The crew assigned to salvage the site of the destroyer recently used a remotely operated vehicle to place a wreath and the American flag over the wreckage in memory of the sailors who died more than a century ago.

During the recovery of the bell, the U.K. Ministry of Defence's salvage team team placed a wreath and an American flag on the wreck to honor lost sailors.

 IMAGE COURTESY ASSET PROVIDED BY U.K. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SALVAGE AND MARINE OPERATIONS (SALMO)

After its recovery, the bell was given temporarily to the private U.K. firm Wessex Archaeology, under contract with the NHHC, the agency said. It will be turned over to the U.S. during a ceremonial transfer set to take place later this year, and will subsequently be sent to the NHHC's Underwater Archaeology Branch for conservation treatment. It will eventually be displayed at the National Museum of the U.S. Navy in Washington, D.C.

The discovery of the USS Jacob Jones in 2022 came less than two months after a U.S. Navy destroyer escort sunk during World War II was found about 23,000 feet below sea level off the Philippines, making it the deepest shipwreck ever located.

USS Jacob Jones sinking off the Scilly Islands, England, on 6 December 1917, after she was torpedoed by the German submarine U-53.

 PHOTOGRAPHED BY SEAMAN WILLIAM G. ELLIS. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PHOTOGRAPH.

WAR PROFITEERS

Analysis

British firms' exports are almost certainly bolstering Russia's war machine in Ukraine, Sky data analysis finds

Items including drone equipment and heavy machinery are being sent from the UK to countries such as Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Uzbekistan and are then being moved to Russia, analysis indicates. Exports to former Soviet satellite state Kyrgyzstan have risen by over 1,100%.


Ed Conway
SKY NEWS
Economics and data editor 
Wednesday 21 February 2024

AP/Russian defence ministry


British companies are exporting hundreds of millions of pounds of equipment and machinery which almost certainly ends up in Russia, undermining the official sanctions regime and bolstering Vladimir Putin's war machine, according to data analysis from Sky News.

The items - which include drone equipment, optical supplies and heavy machinery - are being sent to countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia, including Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Uzbekistan and others, from where they are understood to be forwarded on to Russia.

The numbers show that despite the sharp fall in the flow of goods to Russia, following the imposition of trade sanctions after its invasion of Ukraine two years ago, large volumes of sensitive, "dual use" British goods are still finding their way to Moscow.

The analysis underlines the scale of Britain's participation in a shadow economy which helps keep Russia's military supplied with parts and hardware for the weaponry it uses against Ukraine

Flows of British goods to Russia itself have fallen by 74% since the outbreak of war, following the imposition of sanctions. The vast majority of exports still flowing to Russia are food, medical products or other humanitarian items.

Flows of heavy machinery, electrical equipment and cars have dropped to nearly zero.



Those figures imply the sanctions regime has been incredibly successful, and indeed, a government spokesperson said: "We have implemented the most severe package of economic sanctions ever imposed on a major economy."

However, closer examination of Britain's official trade statistics provides an alternative prism.

They show that while UK exports to Russia have fallen sharply, UK exports to a suite of former Soviet satellite states - from Uzbekistan to Georgia - have risen at an unprecedented rate.

British exports to Kyrgyzstan, the small former Soviet satellite state, have risen at a breakneck rate, by over 1,100%. These exports are dominated by the heavy machinery and vehicles which can no longer be sent directly to Russia.



A Europe-wide problem

According to Robin Brooks, former chief economist of financial body the IIF, this is something which has been going on for some time, with other European countries, most notably Germany and Poland, also sending large quantities of hardware to Russia via these Caucasus and Central Asian states.

"They're clearly getting an order from somewhere that is a Russian satellite that happens to be domiciled in one of these Central Asian countries," he said.

"What happens then? Maybe there's plausible deniability, maybe they know... all we know for sure is that the rise in export volumes that is happening is completely insane, and is inconsistent with any underlying data in these countries.

"So the only reasonable explanation is: Russia.

"From the Western European and especially the EU side, I would say, this has been going on for a while. It is at this point widely known in Brussels, and I think there is a key question as to why nothing is being done at a central EU level to stop this?"

British officials argue that they are constantly attempting to tighten the UK sanctions regime. A spokesperson told Sky News: "We also recently announced the creation of a new Office of Trade Sanctions Implementation to strengthen our enforcement of sanctions.

"Any non-compliance with these tough sanctions is a serious offence and punishable through large financial penalties or criminal prosecution."

Exports to other Russia-adjacent states

However, the scale and breadth of the trade is striking. UK export volumes haven't just spiked to Kyrgyzstan. They are also up nearly as sharply to Armenia, which, according to Mr Brooks, has recorded a sharp increase in its onward goods exports to Russia.



Doubly worrying is the fact that among the goods being sent to these countries are significant quantities of items considered "dual use" - which can be repurposed into weaponry.

Found in battlefield remains of Russian weapons

The European Union has a list of 45 categories of goods - "common high priority items" as they call them - which have been found in battlefield remains of Russian weapons.

Sky News analysis shows that British exports to four Caucasus and Central Asian states of these goods, which have been documented as being used to kill Ukrainian citizens - have risen by over 500% since the outbreak of war.



The analysis shows that by far and away the biggest category of goods being sent to these four Caucasus and Central Asian nations was "parts of aeroplanes, helicopters or unmanned aircraft" - in other words, equipment which can be used to make drones and other aeronautic units.

British companies have exported £6m worth of these goods to the four countries, above what they historically tend to export to them.

Other items being sent by UK exporters include data processing machines, aeronautic navigation equipment and radio navigation aids.



According to Tom Keatinge of RUSI: "It's absolutely a red flag if you're producing that kind of equipment... and you've got this big spike in exports to Kyrgyzstan.

"You've surely got to stop and ask yourself: why is that? Am I indirectly resourcing the Russian military? And clearly you don't want to be doing that. And indeed, in doing that, you're probably in breach of sanctions.

"The tragedy is that whenever the Ukrainians dissect a drone, or a cruise missile or communications equipment that they get their hands on, there are components in those bits of equipment that come from the EU, that come from the UK and come from the US, and have been manufactured since February 2022.

"So these are fresh exports, these are not legacy exports."

ROFLMAO

U.K. defense chief declares confidence in Trident nuclear missiles after reports of failed test off Florida

By Duarte Dias
February 21, 2024 

London — Britain's Defense Secretary Grant Shapps sought to reassure U.K. lawmakers Wednesday that the country's nuclear deterrent weapons program was functional and ready to be called upon if needed after a second consecutive missile test reportedly failed. A nuclear-capable Trident II missile test launched in the Atlantic off the coast of Florida on Jan. 30 reportedly splashed back down shortly after launching, according to Britain's The Sun newspaper.

The missile was launched from one of the Royal Navy's HMS Vanguard-class submarines — with Shapps on board to observe — but its first stage booster engine failed to ignite, causing it to fall back down and then sink, according to CBS News partner network BBC News.

While Britain's Trident missiles are designed to carry nuclear warheads, they are not armed for test launches

.

A U.K. Royal Navy Vanguard-class submarine undergoes maintenance at HM Naval Base Clyde at Faslane, north-west of Glasgow, Scotland, April 28, 2023.

ANDY BUCHANAN/AFP/GETTY

In a statement to parliament, Shapps confirmed an "anomaly" during the missile test, but insisted that it had "reaffirmed the effectiveness of the U.K.'s nuclear deterrent."

The BBC said it was the second consecutive test of a Trident missile to fail after one of the rockets veered off course in 2016, also off Florida's Atlantic coast. The test launches don't happen often, with each missile costing U.K. taxpayers more than $20 million.

The cause of the 2016 failure has never been disclosed, but at the time, The Sunday Times newspaper reported the missile had suffered an in-flight "malfunction."

"The U.K.'s nuclear weapons program is not functioning and needs an urgent rethink," David Cullen, a former activist who's now the director of the British monitoring group Nuclear Information Service, told CBS News on Wednesday. "This failure has happened with a backdrop of the navy struggling to maintain [Trident submarine] patrols and ballooning costs."

Shapps, however, called the Trident system "effective, dependable, and formidable." North Korea's Kim hurls nuclear threats as U.S. enters an election year

"The test reaffirmed the effectiveness of the U.K.'s nuclear deterrent, in which the government has absolute confidence," Shapps said in a written statement delivered to lawmakers in the British Parliament on Wednesday. "On this occasion, an anomaly did occur, but it was event specific and there are no implications for the reliability of the wider Trident missile systems and stockpiles. Nor are there any implications for our ability to fire our nuclear weapons, should the circumstances arise in which we need to do so."

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, a U.K.-based group that has long called for an end to Britain's nuclear weapons program, derided the test as a "colossal waste of money."

"We have to ask if this is a good use of the Defense Secretary's time — going to Florida chasing photo opportunities for what ultimately was an expensive failure," the campaign's General Secretary Kate Hudson said in a statement.

The U.K.'s nuclear deterrent program consists of four Vanguard-class submarines, each of which can carry up to 16 Trident II D5 ballistic missiles. At least one submarine is always deployed, with its location among Britain's most closely guarded military secrets. A second sub waits on standby while a third carries out training exercises and the fourth is brought in for maintenance.

The Ministry of Defense says that since the system was deployed in April 1969, there has constantly been at least one British nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarine quietly patrolling the seas. The "deterrent" principle of the Trident system relies on the U.K.'s global adversaries never knowing the exact location of the deployed submarine.

Trident test failure an ’embarrassment’ for UK as expert warns of ageing fleet

Former defence minister Tobias Ellwood said weapon's rocket system did not fire because of testing equipment strapped to the missile

The Vanguard-class submarines will be around 10 years past their expected lifespan when replaced in the 2030s (Photo: David Moir/Reuters)

By Alannah Francis

Reporter

February 21, 2024 

The Trident missile test failure is an embarrassment for the UK and will heighten concerns about the impact of delays in replacing the current fleet, a military expert has told i.

The Government said it retains “absolute confidence” in the UK’s nuclear deterrent despite reports of a HMS Vanguard Trident missile test failure last month – the second unsuccessful test in eight years.

But questions remain about the effectiveness of the nuclear deterrent, after it was revealed the Trident missile crashed into the sea close to the launch site after its boosters failed shortly following its launch on 30 January.

Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute, said although the incident is unlikely to significantly effect its international adversaries’ perceptions of the UK’s nuclear capabilities, it could be detrimental in a domestic context.

Mr Savill told i: “I do think the bit where it matters is that for domestic public and political support. It looks embarrassing.

“It’s the second failure, allegedly, of a UK firing and the UK has not announced a successful firing of a Trident missile now since 2012.

“It’s been over 10 years since we’ve – at least announced – that we have [successfully] fired such a missile.”

Last month’s incident, which occurred as HMS Vanguard is set to re-enter service after a seven-year refit, has also put the reliability of the ageing fleet under the spotlight.

Mr Savill said: “There is already concern around the deterrent and, more specifically, the replacement programme.”

The Vanguard-class fleet was introduced into service in the 1990s. They are designed to last 25 years but are set to be 10 years over their expected lifespans by the time they are replaced by the Dreadnought class.

Setbacks with the Dreadnought programme have delayed the phasing out of the current fleet of nuclear deterrent submarines.

“The material state of those boats will be degrading over time, even with refits,” Mr Savill said.

He added: “The critical thing about the Vanguard-class is that it must not be detected. It has to be able to continue to operate at-sea completely undetected by Russia or China.

“As they become less reliable and more stressed, that becomes harder.”

Mr Savill added: “Both the boats and the people are under stress because they age, they become less reliable – that’s why you have to put more effort into maintaining them – and that means, for example, the territory patrols are getting longer and longer, which puts even more stress on the equipment.”

Former defence minister Tobias Ellwood said the missile’s rocket did not fire because of testing equipment.

He told GB News: “I understand it was some equipment that was actually attached to the missile itself that prevented the firing of the rocket system after the missile had left the submarine.”

He added: “The actual rocket didn’t fire because of the testing equipment. Now, of course, were this to be fired in anger you wouldn’t have that testing equipment strapped on to the missile itself.”

Until the Vanguard-class fleet is replaced it is required to maintain continuous deployment at sea.

In September 2023, it was reported that a Vanguard-class vessel set a new record for the long patrol after spending more than six months at sea.

The patrol is significantly longer than the previous typical three-month patrol.

A British Nuclear Missile Test Fails, Again

An unarmed Trident missile splashed into the sea close to its launch site, the U.K. government confirmed on Wednesday, fueling scrutiny of the state of Britain’s nuclear deterrent.
The Royal Navy aircraft carrier the H.M.S. Queen Elizabeth approaching a naval base in Portsmouth, England.Credit...Henry Nicholls/Reuters


By Mark Landler
Reporting from London
Feb. 21, 2024

The British government confirmed on Wednesday that the test launch of an unarmed Trident missile from a Royal Navy submarine last month had failed, raising questions about the state of Britain’s nuclear deterrence capability.

It was the second straight malfunction of such a launch, coming nearly eight years after another Trident flew off course at sea, an incident that at the time drew criticism about the government’s failure to disclose it.

This time, too, the failed launch was first reported not by the defense ministry but by a London tabloid, The Sun, which said the missile’s boosters failed and it landed in the water not far from the submarine, the H.M.S. Vanguard, which had just come out of a seven-year refurbishment.

Britain’s defense secretary, Grant Shapps, and the top-ranking officer in the Royal Navy were both aboard the Vanguard for the test on Jan. 30. In a written statement to the House of Commons, Mr. Shapps said “an anomaly did occur” during the test launch but that it was “event specific.”

“There are no implications for the reliability of the wider Trident missile systems and stockpiles,” Mr. Shapps wrote. “Nor are there any implications for our ability to fire our nuclear weapons, should the circumstances arise in which we need to do so.”

More on BritainA Setback for Conservatives: Britain’s governing party suffered crushing defeats in two parliamentary elections in a new blow to its embattled leader, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, whose future has been questioned by critics within his fractious political party.
A Rebrand: The train lines on London’s Overground, a rail system that largely serves people in neighborhoods outside of central London, will be renamed and will be assigned new colors. The changes are expected to make the system easier to navigate.
Labour’s Success and Setbacks: Britain’s main opposition party has a large lead in the polls but recent missteps have led to questions about the management skills of its leader, Keir Starmer.
A Tea Shortage: Some British grocery stores warned customers that supply issues had affected the “nationwide” availability of black tea, as Houthi attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea caused shipping delays.

Britain’s Navy has suffered a string of problems in recent months with its fleet. One of its flagship aircraft carriers, the H.MS. Queen Elizabeth, pulled out of a deployment to a NATO exercise off the coast of Norway earlier this month because of a problem with one of its propeller shafts.


Its sister ship, the H.M.S. Prince of Wales, took its place in the exercise, but its deployment was briefly delayed as well before it departed on Feb. 12. In 2022, the Prince of Wales broke down off the Isle of Wight, also because of a propeller-related issue, and required nine months of repairs.

Military analysts said it was difficult to say exactly what went wrong with the latest launch. Britain has four nuclear-powered submarines equipped with the Trident missile system, which is manufactured by the American firm Lockheed Martin. The missile was not armed with a nuclear warhead during the test.

“Whether the problem can now be rectified, or even what it is, is not clear,” said Malcolm Chalmers, the deputy director general of the Royal United Services Institute, a think tank in London. “But Vanguard is getting very old, beyond its planned service life, and it just came out of a seven-year repair and refueling.”

Mr. Chalmers criticized the government’s handling of the incident, noting that it had announced the test in advance but then failed to report its failure.

“Someone was bound to spot this, sooner or later,” he said, “and they should have got out in front of the story.”

The last failed launch, in June 2016, became a political headache for the government of Prime Minister Theresa May when news of it first leaked out several months later. Ms. May was initially unwilling to acknowledge the incident, even as she appealed to Parliament to invest in new Trident-armed submarines.

With anxieties rising about an aggressive Russia under President Vladimir V. Putin, Britain’s military readiness has again become a political hot button. The opposition Labour Party has accused successive Conservative-led governments of bleeding the armed forces through years of budget cuts imposed by fiscal austerity.

“Over the last 13 years, our army has been cut to the smallest size since the days of Napoleon,” Labour’s lawmaker responsible for defense policy, John Healey, and the party’s chief foreign policy official, David Lammy, wrote in a column last fall in the Daily Telegraph.


Mark Landler is the London bureau chief of The Times, covering the United Kingdom, as well as American foreign policy in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. He has been a journalist for more than three decades. More about Mark Landler

UK

GENTRIFICATION OF THE COUNTRYSIDE
Roanhead Farm wildlife row holiday resort plans backed

By Dan Hunt

BBC

Local Democracy Reporting Service

Roanhead Resort

Friends of the Lake District object to building on a "rare, fragile and protected area"

Revised plans for a holiday park in Cumbria, opposed by wildlife groups, have been backed by tourism bosses.

Developers scaled back plans for a 450-lodge resort at Roanhead Farm, near Askam, to 233 lodges after facing a backlash.

The groups objected to building on a "rare, fragile and protected area" that is "teeming with wildlife".

Cumbria Tourism claims the park could bring "transformational benefits" to the area and improve visitor numbers.

The ILM group lodged new plans with Westmorland and Furness Council in January, after previous proposals were withdrawn in November.

Under the new proposals, "buffer zones" between the resort and designated nature sites have been expanded and construction access to the site has been moved from ancient woodland.

'Completely inappropriate'

The original plans saw objections from town councils, Cumbria Wildlife Trust, Friends of the Lake District and Natural England.

Head of Friends of the Lake District Michael Hill said: "The impact of lodges, parking, restaurants and sports facilities on the landscape, along with the additional footfall of thousands more people in a rare, fragile and internationally protected area, teeming with wildlife, is completely inappropriate.

"Over 7,200 people have signed a petition against the proposal but planners will only take into account objections made directly to them. Also responses to the previous application won't count either.

"We are therefore urging anyone who values Roanhead to make their views known once more, and as soon as possible."

Charity welcomes withdrawal of resort plans

Plans for £100m holiday resort withdrawn

Andrew Coutts, the head of ILM Group, described the updated plans as "more balanced and sensitive to the surrounding environment".

Cumbria Tourism managing director Gill Haigh said the organisation believes there will be "clear benefits for the wider areas and communities of Barrow, Morecambe Bay, the Lake District Coast and the county as a whole".

Cumbria Tourism added that Furness was "underperforming in terms of the visitor volume and value" and said the "modified plans should now be fully considered".


The proposals will now go through Westmorland and Furness Council's planning process.