As New Nuclear Dangers Emerge: A Look Back at Cuban Missile Crisis

JFK: "You mean nuclear exchange?" General Taylor: "Guess you have to."

by Greg Mitchell Posted onOctober 19, 2023

Reprinted with permission from Greg Mitchell’s newsletter Oppenheimer: From Hiroshima to Hollywood.

A little change of pace today, as we look back 61 years this week to the beginnings of the gravest nuclear crisis of our era, involving JFK, Castro, and Soviet missiles in Cuba. Ah, I remember it well. The below focuses on the not-so-extensively covered very early stages. It is an excerpt from my 2016 bestseller, The Tunnels: Escapes Under the Berlin Wall, which among other things revealed the Kennedy White House trying to kill, that same autumn, one of the most important TV specials ever, from NBC, documenting one of those astounding passages to freedom.

Note: As I have long said, U.S. nuclear “first-use” policy remains in effect today.

October 16, 1962: For over a month, leading Republicans, and a few media pundits, had charged – based on little apparent evidence – that the Soviets were placing nuclear missiles in Cuba. CIA director McCone, a Republican, had privately voiced this fear to the President, who remained skeptical even as he expanded U-2 surveillance of the island. JFK was not alone in feeling that this might turn out to be just another GOP campaign issue that would evaporate after November. Berlin remained his constant concern. He had told Ted Sorensen, “If we solve the Berlin problem without a war, Cuba will look pretty small. And if there is a war, Cuba won’t matter much either.”

As weeks passed, however, a Soviet military buildup continued in Cuba, so Kennedy ordered more careful study, including a U-2 flight directly over the island on October 14. The following day CIA analysts in Washington studied the photos that resulted. New missiles longer than the defensive SAMs seemed to have arrived on the island,. They could only be medium-range, nuclear-capable SS-4s or their cousins. The President was in New York on a campaign trip so McGeorge Bundy waited until the next morning to inform him.

When October 16 dawned, President Kennedy, back in D.C., responded to Bundy’s startling news by calling the first meeting on the confirmed nuclear threat later that morning. The missiles were not yet operational, but soon would be, with the capability to strike at least the southern half of the U.S. mainland. Already JFK was outlining four options: hit just the missile sites; blast them plus other military sites; do all that and also enact a blockade; or all of that plus invade the island. On his note pad he scribbled scraps of words: Prepare. Berlin. Preparatory. Cuba. Preparation. Cuban uprising. prepare. nuclear. Vice President Johnson, more hawkish than nearly anyone, volunteered that massive air strikes could be carried out without even informing Congress or America’s allies. The meeting ended with the Pentagon ordered to study how air strikes and an invasion might proceed.

Robert Kennedy handed his notes on the meeting to the President’s secretary. One read: I now know how Tojo felt when he was planning Pearl Harbor.

At a morning meeting the next day, Undersecretary of State George Ball argued against military action, claiming the Soviet leaders didn’t really understand the gravity of their Cuba move. Ambassador Thompson, back from Moscow, took issue with this, stating that the Soviets’ aim was to force a showdown on Berlin; General Taylor and John McCone agreed with him. Kennedy left for a long-planned meeting with West German foreign minister Gerhard Schroeder. He did not mention Cuba to him, but Kennedy had to wonder: Were the Germans ready for a Soviet retaliatory strike or another Berlin blockade?

The next major meeting on Cuba was convened on the morning of October 18, day three of the crisis. While JFK was away on another campaign trip, aides and military leaders had discussed options, as air strikes – with or without a warning to Khrushchev, and with or without an invasion – gained wide favor. (The military projected 18,500 U.S. casualties in a conventional invasion, but if nuclear weapons were used, General Taylor dryly advised, “there is no experience factor upon which to base an estimate of casualties.”) George Ball responded with a strongly dissenting memo, arguing that air strikes would smack of Pearl Harbor – echoing Bobby Kennedy on this – and turn much of the “civilized world” against America. But some felt that a strong U.S. action on Cuba, rather than jeopardizing our standing in Berlin, would boost our credibility in dealing with the Soviets down the road.

As the October 18 meeting on the crisis proceeded, Kennedy returned to an argument he had made before: that the Soviets, in response to any military attack on Cuba, would likely “just grab Berlin.” Sacrificing a few Cuban missiles for control of all of Berlin would not “bother” the Soviets at all. And once they took the city, “everybody would feel we lost Berlin, because of these missiles.” Bundy cracked a small joke: “If we could trade off Berlin – and not have it our fault….”

Then came a grim exchange after JFK again said that the Soviets, if attacked in Cuba, would probably cross the Berlin border with ground troops.

McNamara: We have U.S. troops there. What do they do?

Gen. Taylor: They fight.

McNamara: They fight. I think that’s perfectly clear.

President Kennedy: And they get overrun.

Robert Kennedy: Then what do we do?

Gen. Taylor: Go to general war, if it’s in the interest of ours.

President Kennedy: You mean nuclear exchange. (Then a brief pause.)

Gen. Taylor: Guess you have to.

The President, therefore, insisted on considering “what action we take which lessens the chances of a nuclear exchange, which obviously is the final failure.” Apocalypse had reared its ugly head, just in time. Henceforth the discussion – led by Rusk, McNamara and Robert Kennedy – shifted in a more dovish direction, towards trying a blockade. The Joint Chiefs opposed this, still favoring a pre-emptive attack, but within minutes a consensus began to coalesce among the non-military aides in the room. A blockade was best, along with a potential concession to scrap our outmoded nuclear missiles in Turkey. In a revealing moment, McNamara virtually pleaded, “I really think we’ve got to think these problems through more than we have.”

At a crucial point in the meeting an unlikely player contributed to the meeting’s change in tone, appealing to Kennedy to insist on a blockade: “Essentially, Mr. President, this is a choice between limited action and unlimited action – and most of us think that it’s better to start with limited action.” The speaker was Roswell Gilpatric, number two man at the Pentagon, who just two months earlier Kennedy himself had fingered as the likely leaker in the Hanson Baldwin case. Gilpatric, seemingly forgiven – and despite his history of leaking secrets to a journalist – had been attending crucial meetings on the missile crisis and joining in the highly classified discussions. (The FBI investigation into both Baldwin and Gilpatric, meanwhile, continued.)

After the meeting broke up, JFK met with Andrei Gromyko, the Soviet foreign minister. Gromyko lied to Kennedy’s face, denying the presence of offensive missiles in Cuba as the President tapped his desk, exercising supreme self-control, knowing that he had photos that proved otherwise in a top drawer.

Near midnight, after everyone had left the Oval Office, the President turned on his taping system to record his summary of this day. Though the crisis revolved around Cuba, much of JFK’s musings still concerned Berlin. He noted Bundy’s warning of “a Soviet reprisal against Berlin” after any U.S. military action. Others felt that failing to take strong action on Cuba would undermine our promises to the West Germans, “divide our allies and our country.” Kennedy concluded: “The consensus was that we should go ahead with the blockade beginning on Sunday night.” If the Soviets did move on Berlin – well, we faced “a crunch” there in a few months, anyway. And a blockade would be a lot less likely to inspire that Soviet reaction than a military assault on Cuba.

Then he went upstairs to sleep on that decision, if he could.

Thanks for reading Oppenheimer: From Hiroshima to Hollywood! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Greg Mitchell is the author of a dozen books, including “Hiroshima in America,” and the recent award-winning The Beginning or the End: How Hollywood – and America – Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, and has directed three documentary films since 2021, including two for PBS (plus award-winning “Atomic Cover-up”). He has written widely about the atomic bomb and atomic bombings, and their aftermath, for over forty years. He writes often at Oppenheimer: From Hiroshima to Hollywood.

UK

Rishi Sunak was branded 'Dr Death' by his now-top scientist during the pandemic, Covid Inquiry hears

Dame Angela McLean also asked 'who is this f***wit?' when Carl Heneghan, director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, spoke in a Zoom meeting

By RYAN HOOPER FOR THE DAILY MAIL
19 October 2023 | 

Rishi Sunak was labelled 'Dr Death' by his now-most senior scientist in a WhatsApp chat over his Eat Out to Help Out scheme during the pandemic, the Covid Inquiry was told yesterday.

Dame Angela McLean, who this year succeeded Sir Patrick Vallance as chief scientific adviser, also described a fellow expert as a 'f***wit' in a text exchange with Professor John Edmunds, another government adviser, in September 2020.

In one WhatsApp to Professor Edmunds, Dame Angela, then chief scientist at the Ministry of Defence, wrote: 'Dr Death the Chancellor.'ery

Rishi Sunak was labelled 'Dr Death' by his now-most senior scientist in a WhatsApp chat over his Eat Out to Help Out scheme during the pandemic, the Covid Inquiry was told yesterday

Dame Angela McLean, who this year succeeded Sir Patrick Vallance as chief scientific adviser, also described a fellow expert as a 'f***wit'

She also asked 'who is this f***wit?' when Carl Heneghan, director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford, was contributing to a Zoom meeting with Boris Johnson and Mr Sunak.

Professor Edmunds, an infectious disease modelling expert, told the inquiry he is 'still angry' about then-chancellor Mr Sunak's 'perverse' taxpayer-subsidised scheme to boost the hospitality industry.

The Government Office for Science was asked to comment on Dame Angela's remarks. The inquiry continues.

UK

Worst by-election defeat for Tories since Second World War as Labour seizes Tamworth

Benedict Smith
Thu, October 19, 2023 

Labour MP Stephanie Peacock and newly elected Labour MP Sarah Edwards after she was declared the Member of Parliament for Tamworth following Thursday's by-election


The Tories have suffered their worst by-election defeat to Labour in modern history after losing control of Tamworth.

Sarah Edwards took the Staffordshire seat with a majority of 1,316 and one of the party’s largest ever by-election swings as her Conservative rival bolted from the count after the result was announced.

It means Sir Keir Starmer has become the first Labour leader to win Tamworth since the days of Tony Blair, reversing a Tory majority that has increased in every election since 2010.

By overturning a commanding majority of 42.6 per cent, it is Labour’s biggest by-election victory against the Conservatives since the Second World War.

Ms Edwards pitched herself as a “fresh start” against a governing party that is flagging in the polls and struggling locally after its former MP, Chris Pincher, was found to have groped two men in a private members’ club. He denies the claims.

In her victory speech, delivered as Tory candidate Andrew Cooper made a hasty exit through a back door, she demanded that the Prime Minister call a general election and end years of “national decline”.

She said: “The people of Tamworth have voted for Labour’s positive vision and a fresh start.

“They sent a clear message to Rishi Sunak and the Conservatives that they’ve had enough of this failed Government which has crashed the economy and destroyed our public services. The people of Tamworth have made it clear it’s time for change.

“People feel worse off after 13 years of the Conservatives and don’t feel like the Government has a plan to address the big issues that face our country.”

Sarah Edwards announced as the MP for Tamworth - PA

Finishing her speech with a direct challenge to Mr Sunak, she said: “My message to the Prime Minister is get in your government car, drive to Buckingham Palace, do the decent thing and call a general election.”

According to Martin Baxter, the founder of Electoral Calculus, Labour could expect a majority of roughly 200 seats if it repeats its performance in Tamworth in the next general election.

Mr Cooper, a Tamworth councillor, attempted to fight the by-election campaign on his local credentials.

However, he attracted controversy when a social media post from 2020 was unearthed, where he suggested out-of-work parents who struggled to feed their children but paid for phone contracts should “f--- off”.

Mr Cooper, who earned 10,403 votes to Ms Edwards’ 11,719, just spent minutes on stage at the final count, arriving late as the declaring officer apologised for the “brief intermission”.

He exchanged a terse handshake with the Labour candidate before rushing through a back door as the results were read out, pursued by a press pack. Ms Edwards later said his early exit was “disappointing”.

Lord Hayward, the Tory pollster, suggested Tamworth had a pool of Labour supporters whose support had been underestimated because they had not turned out in recent elections as they would for Sir Keir Starmer.

He said the Conservatives had benefitted in 2017 and 2019 from a dip in the Labour vote, dragged down by the unpopularity of former leader Jeremy Corbyn.

“There is a very substantial pool of Labour voters, more there than the actual majority implied,” he told The Telegraph.

The anti-Labour vote appeared to have been split with Reform, the successor to Nigel Farage’s Brexit party. Taken together, the Conservative and Reform votes would have been enough to secure a narrow victory in the seat.

None of the other third parties - including the Liberal Democrats - managed to keep their deposit as their share of the vote was squeezed out by the Tories and Labour.

Turnout was lower than in recent by-elections, although Ms Edwards denied that her victory owed more to Tory indifference than a wave of support for Labour. Earlier in the night, the Conservative’s local campaign chief suggested this showed Sir Keir had failed to energise the electorate.

Pointing to the party’s 23.9 per cent swing, Ms Edwards told The Telegraph: “Conservatives voted for Labour because they could no longer tolerate the awful situation they had been placed in both locally and nationally.”

‘Political earthquake’ as Tories lose two major seats in by-elections

Nick Gutteridge
Fri, October 20, 2023 

Sir Keir Starmer says his party is 'redrawing the political map' - Jeremy Selwyn

Labour inflicted two of the heaviest ever by-election losses on the Tories on Friday morning, in what the party claimed was a “political earthquake”.

Sir Keir Starmer said his party was “redrawing the political map” after overturning enormous Conservative majorities in Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire.

Rishi Sunak was warned the Tories faced being ousted following the dismal results in Nadine Dorries and Chris Pincher’s former seats.

It means that the Conservatives have surrendered seven constituencies in the last three years, a run of losses not seen since Sir John Major was in power.

In the space of half an hour Labour won in Tamworth, the 55th safest Tory seat in the country, and overturned its biggest majority since 1945 in Mid Bedfordshire.

The Labour leader said: “Winning in these Tory strongholds shows that people overwhelmingly want change and they’re ready to put their faith in our changed Labour Party to deliver it.”

In Mid Bedfordshire his party scored the best ever result by an official opposition party against a sitting Government, overturning the Conservatives’ huge 42 per cent majority.

The by-election was called there after Ms Dorries, the MP since 2005, decided to step down after she was refused a peerage in Boris Johnson’s exit honours list.

It had been in Tory hands since 1931 and was traditionally seen as one of the safest blue seats in the country, with the party holding it by 24,664 votes in 2019.

Alistair Strathern, the Labour candidate whose campaign was plagued by criticism of his past eco-activism, achieved a 20.5 per cent swing and took it with a 1,192 majority.

Peter Kyle, the shadow science secretary who ran the Mid Bedfordshire campaign, said: “Make no bones about it, this is a political earthquake that has unfolded here. This is the biggest by-election shock in history.”

Alistair Strathern achieved a 20.5 per cent swing in Mid Bedfordshire - Joe Giddens/PA

News of the result came half an hour after Labour learnt that it had also pulled off another enormous win in the West Midlands town of Tamworth.

There the by-election was called after the Tory MP Chris Pincher quit in disgrace after being found to have drunkenly groped two men at London’s Carlton Club.

It was Mr Johnson’s handling of the scandal that ultimately led to his downfall as prime minister, unleashing one of the most turbulent periods in the party’s history.

The Conservatives saw their huge 19,634 majority in the seat wiped out, with the Labour candidate Sarah Edwards going on to win it by 1,316 votes.

Professor Sir John Curtice, the leading pollster, said the twin results showed the Tories were “staring defeat in the face” at next year’s expected general election.

He pointed out the historic parallels with the last by-election in Tamworth, which was previously called South East Staffordshire, that took place in 1996.

On that occasion Sir Tony Blair won the seat with a 22 per cent swing before going on to achieve a huge general election victory a year later.

Sir John also pointed out the danger to Mr Sunak of getting “caught in a pincer movement” between Labour and Reform UK, losing Brexit voters to both.

Reform UK, the successor to Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party, won more votes than the new Labour majority in both Mid Bedfordshire and Tamworth.

Ahead of the results George Osborne, the former chancellor, had warned that if Mr Sunak lost both by-elections then “armageddon is coming for the Tory Party”.

Andrew Bowie, the nuclear minister, insisted that the Prime Minister could still win next year and said despite the losses “there is no groundswell of support for the Labour Party”.

He told Sky News that voters “do actually agree with our priorities “but are reserving judgment when it comes to who they’re going to vote for in the next general election”.

“Obviously, we’ve got to take notice and listen to what the voters are telling us,” he added. “We’ve got to take notice and listen to what the voters are telling us.

“But we are absolutely determined that we are on the right course, we’re delivering for the British people and people are going to start feeling that very soon.”

Labour plays down ‘moonshot’ chances of winning ‘super-safe’ Tory seats in double by-election
Adam Forrest
Thu, October 19, 2023 

Labour has played down its chances of winning the “super-safe” Tory seats of Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire as voters head to the polls in two by-election tests for Rishi Sunak.

Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman the “moonshot” chances would require Labour to overturn results larger than those seen in Selby, north Yorkshire.

“Winning either of these seats would be a moonshot for us so it’s worth keeping a sense of perspective around just how safe these Tory seats are – neither of them are on our target list,” he said.

But as the expectation management game continued, Tory party chairman Greg Hands also dismissed his party’s chances. “Governments don’t win by-elections,” he told The Times.

But both Conservative and Labour officials now believe Mr Sunak’s party has a decent chance of hanging on to Nadine Dorries’ Mid Bedfordshire seat despite a big slump in the Tory voter.

The Tories have held Mid Bedfordshire since 1931 and Ms Dorries held on to it in 2019 by 24,000 votes over second-placed Labour.

Polling guru Sir John Curtice said: “We can’t discount the possibility that the Tories hang on to both of them” – but said a 20-point vote swing away from the party would mean “they are in trouble”.

“We may discover it’s a 19 percent swing and the Tories just hang on. That would not indicate any particular rescue for the Tories,” he told Politico. A Lib Dem activist said there was “a really good chance” that the Tories come through the middle and hang on.

Labour and Lib Dems expected to split anti-Tory vote in three-way contest in Mid Bedfordshire (PA)

A leaked Tory memo revealed that the party expects to lose half their vote share at two by-elections. The Tories expect their vote share to be cut from 59 per cent to 29 per cent in Mid Bedfordshire.

But pollsters believe it may be enough to cling on to the “blue wall” seat because of Labour and the Lib Dems splitting the vote. Prof Curtice told The Independent that “it may be that Labour won’t pick it up because of the split vote”.

The two-way Labour-Tory contest in Tamworth appears on a knife-edge. The leaked Conservative memo also predicts the Tories would win between 28 per cent and 33 per cent of the vote in Tamworth.

Mr Sunak’s party is defending a 19,600 majority in the Midlands seat – vacated by Chris Pincher, the former deputy chief whip found to have groped two men.

The Tory candidate for Tamworth Andrew Cooper has apologised for suggesting some parents using food banks could “f*** off”. He told Channel 5 News he was “sorry if” anyone was offended by the flowchart he shared back in 2020.

“Obviously it is not something I would share now in today’s world,” said Mr Cooper. “We obviously mature and have different opinions than we do three years ago.”

Tory Tamworth candidate Andrew Cooper has apologised for food bank comments (Conservative Party)

Sir Keir’s spokesman said: “If we were to win Tamworth and had that swing at a general election, it would mean that the Tories will be down to fewer than 60 seats at the next general election.”

Then PM’s press secretary told reporters that “mid-term by-elections are extremely tough for incumbent governments” but said the Tories were “fighting for every vote”.

Polls in both constituencies will open at 7am on Thursday, with the results likely to be known in the early hours of Friday.

Sir Keir’s party hold at least a double-digit lead over the Tories in the polls. That gap was borne out in a huge by-election win in Selby in July when Labour overturned a blue 20,000 majority on a 21 per cent swing.

Meanwhile, Sir Keir received another boost when the boss of BlackRock, one of the world’s leading financiers, gave his backing – arguing that the Labour leader offers a “measurement of hope” to British politics.

Larry Fink, chairman and chief executive of the major asset manager, told the Wall Street Journal that Sir Keir had shown “real strength” in bringing Labour back to the centre ground.

Biggest by-election swings of all time: Labour shocks Tories in Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire

Nuray Bulbul
Fri, 20 October 2023 

Biggest by-election swings of all time: Labour shocks Tories in Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire

One of Britain's top electoral analysts has predicted that the Conservatives would lose the next general election more severely than they did in Tony Blair's landslide victory in 1997, following Labour's two historic by-election victories on Friday.

Labour achieved a great swing of 23.9 points in Tamworth, Staffordshire, which is high enough to be ranked as the second highest swing by Labour at a by-election since 1945.

Mid-Bedfordshire was also taken by Sir Keir Starmer's party, which managed to overthrow the highest numerical Conservative majority (24,664).

In the wake of the results, Sir John Curtice, a professor of politics at Strathclyde University, said on BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It is reasonable to argue that the Conservative Party faces the serious prospect of losing the next General Election heavily, and maybe even more heavily than they did in 1997.”

Here are some of the biggest by-election swings.
What is a by-election?

When an MP resigns from their House of Commons seat during a parliament, either by resignation, death, disqualification, or expulsion, a local election known as a by-election is held.
The biggest by-election swings
1983 Bermondsey by-election - 44.2

On February 24, 1983, a by-election was conducted in the South London constituency of Bermondsey as a result of Labour MP Bob Mellish's departure. Simon Hughes was the Liberal Party candidate, and Peter Tatchell was the Labour Party candidate.

With the majority of votes cast, the Liberals won the seat after a fierce campaign in which they made significant gains. Labour's share of the vote dropped from 63.6 per cent in May 1979 to 26.1 per cent as Tatchell finished well behind. Robert Hughes, the Conservative candidate, received only fourth place and lost his deposit.

The Bermondsey by-election in 1983 continues to have the biggest swing in British political history, at 44.2 per cent.
2014 Clacton by-election - 44.1

Douglas Carswell, the Conservative MP for Clacton, defected to UKIP and then resigned his seat to run for re-election as its candidate, which sparked the by-election.

Retaining his seat with 59.7 per cent of the vote, Carswell then became UKIP's first elected Member of Parliament. Conservative finished second, followed by Labour. The outcome was the largest rise in the vote share for any party in any by-election in history, according to Strathclyde University politics professor John Curtice.
1973 Lincoln by-election - 43

Dick Taverne, a Labour MP for Lincoln, was re-elected in the March 1, 1973, Lincoln by-election after the Lincoln Constituency Labour Party rejected him due to his pro-Common Market stance.

Although Taverne helped fuel a lot of talk following the by-election on the potential creation of a new centrist party, Taverne was unable to sustain his lead.
1967 Hamilton by-election - 37.9

After Tom Fraser, the former Labour MP, resigned to become the chairman of the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, a by-election was held.

From 1945 until 1966, when only the Conservatives had stood up to them, the constituency had been a safe seat for Labour, which had received almost two-thirds of the vote there.

Winnie Ewing of the Scottish National Party unexpectedly won the election. With a swing of almost 38 per cent, the SNP defeated the Labour Party to capture the seat, garnering 46 per cent of the vote in a constituency that they had not even run in the 1966 general election. Although Ewing lost her seat in the subsequent general election, the SNP has maintained constant representation in the House of Commons ever since.
2012 Bradford West by-election - 36.6

The result, which George Galloway of the Respect Party dubbed the "Bradford Spring" (by comparison with the Arab Spring), saw Galloway defeat the Labour Party candidate by a significant majority, surprising everyone. The outcome of the election, according to Galloway, was Bradford's "peaceful democratic uprising" equivalent of the August 2011 riots that erupted across England.

The Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust commissioned a report to examine the campaign due to the unexpected outcome.
1993 Christchurch by-election - 35.4

On July 29, 1993, a by-election was conducted in the Christchurch British House of Commons seat in response to the passing of Conservative MP Robert Adley.

The outcome showed that the Liberal Democrats had gained more than 60 per cent of the vote, about twice as many as the Conservatives, and were noteworthy for having made the swing needed to win such a strong Conservative seat.

The 35.4 per cent swing, as of December 2021, is still the sixth-biggest swing in British politics history.

Other large by-election swings:

2021 North Shropshire - 34.2, Conservative to Liberal Democrats


1988 Glasgow Govan - 33.1, Labour to SNP


1972 Sutton and Cheam - 32.6, Conservative to Liberal


1979 Liverpool Edge Hill - 30.2, Labour to Liberal


2022 Tiverton and Honiton - 29.9, Conservative to Liberal Democrats

‘There’s No Votes Left’: The Conservatives Are Stuck in Denial After Huge By-Election Defeats

Conservative Chairman Greg Hands claims the record-breaking defeats do not suggest voters are at all unhappy with the Prime Minister

Adam Bienkov

20 October 2023

Rishi Sunak and Greg Hands. Photomontage: PA Images / Alamy

There are two routes the Conservative Party could have taken in response to their huge defeats in the Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire by-elections.

The first was to make it clear that they accept that the historic defeats – two of the biggest swings against a governing party ever recorded – were a demonstration of deep public dissatisfaction with the country’s direction and to reassure voters that they have a clear strategy to change course.

The second route, which was the one taken by the party’s Chairman Greg Hands on the airwaves on Friday morning, is to claim that the defeats were not actually that big, and were merely due to “legacy issues” with the departing MPs.

“I’m not denying the fact that Labour won those two seats but the Labour vote was actually down in Mid Bedfordshire and only up by about 800 votes in Tamworth,” Hands told the BBC.

“This wasn’t the case of electors moving over to Labour.”

At best this is deeply misleading and at worst it is outright delusional. While it is true to say that Labour’s total vote was down in Mid Bedfordshire compared to the last general election, so was every other party’s for the simple reason that it was a by-election and voter turnout is always lower in by-elections.

And when you look at actual voter share, it is clear that Labour’s vote was actually up massively from 2019. Indeed the swing to Labour in Tamworth was among the largest ever recorded, while in Mid Beds the party overcame the biggest by-election majority they have managed since the Second World War.

As Britain’s leading pollster John Curtice told the BBC, no UK Government has ever lost a seat as safe as Tamworth to the opposition ever. This is not just mid-term blues. These are historically large defeats which signal that the party is heading, not just for opposition, but for a potential wipeout at the next general election.

EXCLUSIVE

Rishi Sunak is an ‘Upper Class’ Leader of an ‘Elite’ and ‘Out of Touch’ Party, Say Voters

Exclusive new polling finds voters are not convinced by the Prime Minister’s party conference claim to represent ordinary people’s concerns, Adam Bienkov reports

Adam Bienkov

Yet rather than accept this reality, Hands went onto claim that the results were somehow an endorsement of the Prime Minister.

“The conversations I had in Mid Bedfordshire and Tamworth [show that] people were happy with the job that Rishi Sunak is doing as Prime Minister”, Hands told Sky News.

It’s unclear exactly who Hands was speaking to on the doorstep over the past few weeks, yet if results like these don’t signal to the Conservative Party that voters are unhappy with their Prime Minister and Government, then nothing ever will.

Of course many backbench Conservative MPs have long since woken up to what is happening and have announced their plan to stand down at the next election, and take up careers outside of politics.

Yet inside Downing Street,Sunak and his loyal advisers remain intent on a strategy that entirely ignores the reality of what is actually happening in the country.

So while voters again and again have made it clear that their biggest concerns are surging living costs and the state of the NHS, Sunak’s party have instead spent recent months obsessing over fringe issues like ’15 minute cities’, university free speech and gender neutral toilets.

Even when the Government does deal with the big issues, Sunak only seems to make matters worse. His decision to focus his entire party conference in Manchester on his decision to scrap the HS2 link to the city – thereby trashing his own Government’s central claims to be “levelling up” the country – will surely go down as one of the most baffling political decisions ever made.

In recent months Hands has become known for regularly sharing the famous note left by Labour’s Liam Byrne to his successor when the party last left office, in which he joked that there was “no money” left.

The way things are now going, Hands will be leaving a quite similar note to his successor as Conservative Party chairman, when he likely steps down after the next general election.

Except in this case, instead of apologising for the Conservative party’s lack of money, he will be apologising for their lack of votes and lack of MPs.

---

WRITTEN BY

Adam Bienkov

Adam Bienkov is Byline Times’ Political Editor

Israel-Palestine war: 'From the river, to the sea' chant not arrestable offence, say UK police

Pro-Israel groups claim the slogan popular among Palestinian activists calls for the destruction of Israel

A protester holds a banner during a vigil in support of Palestinians in Gaza outside Downing Street on 18 October (Justin Tallis/AFP)

By MEE staff
Published date: 20 October 2023 

London's Metropolitan Police on Friday said they will not be arresting anyone chanting a popular slogan used by Palestinian activists during demonstrations.

The slogan in question, "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free", is commonly heard at solidarity marches and refers to the area of historic Palestine between the River Tiberias and the Mediterranean Sea.

Pro-Israel groups claim it is antisemitic because it is an implicit call for the destruction of Israel, a charge rejected by Palestinian activists.

The police force's guidance comes ahead of what are expected to be large demonstrations in support of Palestinians on Saturday.

Separate marches are being organised by the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and by the Muslim political movement Hizb ut-Tahrir, with the latter expected to be much smaller.

Stay informed with MEE's newsletters
Sign up to get the latest alerts, insights and analysis, starting with Turkey Unpacked

A police statement read: "One particular chant that has been the subject of extensive discussion is ‘Palestine will be free, from the river to the sea’.

"This is a chant that has been frequently heard at pro-Palestinian demonstrations for many years. We are well aware of the strength of feeling in relation to it."

The statement added that while the use of the chant in order to intimidate or harass Jewish people would be an offence, "it is likely that its use in a wider protest setting, such as we anticipate this weekend, would not be an offence and would not result in arrests".

Passions have been running high in the UK as the conflict in Gaza rages on. Israeli air strikes have killed thousands of civilians in the besieged Gaza Strip after Palestinian fighters launched an attack on 7 October in southern Israel, which left more than 1,400 Israelis dead.

Free speech concerns

Palestinian activists have previously expressed concerns about the criminalisation of political expression and free speech when it comes to criticising Israel.

Earlier in October, British Home Secretary Suella Braverman advised police forces across the country to look into the possibility of whether the waving of Palestinian flags amounted to a criminal offence.

Israel-Palestine war: How UK became a hostile environment for Palestinian activismRead More »

"Behaviours that are legitimate in some circumstances, for example, the waving of a Palestinian flag, may not be legitimate such as when intended to glorify acts of terrorism," she wrote in a letter to police chiefs.

As things stand, under British law, expressions of support for proscribed groups, such as Hamas or Hezbollah, can lead to arrest with the possibility of fines and prison sentences for those convicted of an offence.

The civil rights group Liberty has condemned what it calls the government's attack on "the ability to stand up for what we believe in is our fundamental right".

"Recent government responses to protests relating to Israel and Palestine are an attack on that right, and an attempt to erode the way we can make our voices heard," the group said in a statement on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Hamas drone strikes Israeli Merkava tank

By Dylan Malyasov
Oct 20, 2023


Palestinian militant group Hamas has released footage showcasing a drone’s launch of an RPG-7 tandem cumulative grenade onto an Israeli Merkava Mk 4 tank near the Gaza Strip.

The strike hit the rear part of the tank’s turret, precisely where the first-round ammunition is stored. However, no detonation occurred, indicating that either the ammunition had been expended or some safety mechanisms prevented an explosion.

This incident follows a previous occurrence involving a similar grenade attack on the Merkava’s front shell storage, which yielded more significant results

The innovative tactics to use drones to deliver munitions with precision is a testament to the adaptability and resourcefulness of Hamas militants.


Some background: On 7 October 2023, militants from Hamas entered Israel from Gaza by land, by sea and by air using paragliders. The surprise rocket and infiltration attacks from Hamas on Israel come on the 50th anniversary of the 1973 War, a surprise attack by Israel’s Arab neighbors which began on October 6, 1973.

Hamas is designated as a terrorist organization by several countries, including the United States, Israel, the European Union, Canada, and others.

JORDAN IS PALESTINE

Israel-Palestine war: In Jordan, young protesters want to ‘liberate Palestine’

A new generation of Jordanians have bold demands from government: Open the border and let us fight

Jordanians gather outside King Abdullah Mosque to express solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, in Amman, Jordan, 17 October 2023 (Reuters)

By Mohammad Ersan in Amman
Published date: 20 October 2023 

On Wednesday night, two kilometres away from the Israeli embassy in the Jordanian capital, Ali Abu Musameh held a sign that reads, “Paradise is closer than Sinai.”

Ali, 26, and young protesters like him say they are ready to die defending the Palestinians from the Israeli occupation. They would like the Jordanian government to open the borders with Palestine and "allow them to fight there".

It was the day after the Israeli bombardment of al-Ahli hospital in Gaza that killed at least 471 displaced Palestinian civilians and patients.

Israel denied responsibility, claiming a rocket belonging to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad failed to launch properly and hit the hospital.

Jordan's King Abdullah II, however, blamed Israel and described the incident as a "massacre" and "war crime".

The Jordanian government declared three days of mourning for those killed in the hospital strike.

Israel has been waging a ferocious bombing campaign on the Gaza Strip since 7 October, when hundreds of Hamas fighters attacked Israeli communities near the coastal enclave.

Around 1,400 Israelis were killed in the Palestinian attack. The subsequent Israeli bombardment has killed at least 3,859 Palestinians, including 1,524 children as of 19 October.

Protests also broke out in cities across the Middle East and North Africa following the air strike on the hospital.

On Tuesday, hundreds of people marched to Amman's main government building, condemning a planned visit the following day by US President Joe Biden.
'We must not stand idly by'

Ali and other young protesters in Amman on Wednesday demanded the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador and the abrogation of the 1994 peace treaty with Israel, as well as the agreement to buy natural gas from Israel, which Jordan signed in 2016.

Ali's family hails from Beersheba in historic Palestine, now part of southern Israel. They were violently displaced from the area in 1948 by Zionist militias during the creation of Israel, and relocated to Jordan.

'We want the Jordanian government to allow us to remove this embassy and sever relations with the occupier'

- Ali, Palestinian Jordanian

“Today I stand in the face of the occupation and its massacres. We want the Jordanian government to allow us to remove this embassy and sever relations with the occupier," he told Middle East Eye.

"We must not stand idly by.”

Ali is an accountant at a dairy company. He has no affiliation to any political movement.

Since the start of the war on Gaza on 7 October, he and his colleagues have been protesting daily.

“We do not belong to any political parties. We belong to the Jordanian people and the Palestinian people. I am here to contribute to efforts to achieve victory for the Palestinians and the right of return,” Firas, also 26 years old, told MEE.

People take part in a protest in Amman on 18 October after an Israeli air strike killed hundreds of Palestinians at Al-Ahli hospital in Gaza (Reuters)

Bilal, a third protester, came with his children to the vicinity of the Israeli embassy. “I came to support the Palestinian resistance, and to say no to bloodshed in Gaza,” he said.

Most protesters from Ali, Firas and Bilal's generation have never seen Palestine. They only hear about it on the news or from stories passed down from their families about the homes of their ancestors before the Nakba, when more than 700,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes in 1948.

In the 1967 Middle East war when Israel seized the West Bank and Gaza, a further 300,000 Palestinians fled mostly to Jordan. There are 2.2 million UN-registered Palestinian refugees in the kingdom, but the real number of Palestinians in the country is considerably higher.

'They are besieged people. We should not forget our brothers'

- Hadeel al-Sa’bii, 27

Some young protesters tried to storm the Israeli embassy building in Amman on Wednesday from the side roads, and some had Molotov cocktails, but they were dispersed by security forces.

The Jordanian security services said later that evening that some officers were wounded and had to be hospitalised as a result of clashes with protesters.

"Everyone must abide by the law and the instructions of the security personnel who are there to protect them and guarantee their right to express their opinion freely,” a police statement read.

A Jordanian security source denied rumours that the protesters had managed to storm the embassy, and told Middle East Eye that the protesters had been dealt with and removed from the surroundings.

However, the young protesters are demanding that the Jordanian authorities “open the borders, expel the Israeli ambassador, and sever relations with the occupation." Chanting “No embassy, no ambassador on Jordanian soil,” the protesters were also filmed burning the American flag.

Israel-Palestine war: Jordanian police accused of 'treason' for targeting demonstrators

Read More »

According to Fakher, a student activist, a significant number of the participants at the protest were university students, “despite all attempts to exclude the students from official and security matters.”

These young people are coming out to demand the "liberation of Palestine", said Fakher, despite the Jordanian government's systematic amendment of school curricula to delete references to the occupation and the context of the Palestinian issue since its peace agreement with Israel.

Meanwhile, a large number of protesters were of Jordanian, East Bank origin. They were protesting for national, religious, or humanitarian reasons.

One of them, Hadeel al-Sa’bii, 27, said she was there "because of my anger and in the name of humanity, to stop this aggression and stand with the people of Gaza.

“They are besieged people. We should not forget our brothers," she told MEE. "It's also to exercise pressure to deliver aid to them.

“Today I demand that the Israeli occupation state condemn these crimes that resulted in the death of thousands of martyrs, the displacement of families, and the non-stop killing of women, children, and civilians."

Israel-Palestine war: Strike on ancient Gaza church devastates Christian community

At least 18 killed by raid on annex of 1,600-year-old church sheltering Palestinians from Israeli bombing

Palestinian Christians at the Greek Orthodox Saint Porphyrius Church after it was damaged by an Israeli strike, 20 October (Reuters)

By Aseel Mousa in al-Maghazi camp, occupied Palestine
Published date: 20 October 2023

For several days, the oldest church in the Gaza Strip has hosted Palestinians hoping to find shelter from relentless Israeli bombing.

But on Thursday night, an air strike on the site in Gaza City killed at least 18 of them and left the coastal enclave's Christian community distraught.

Israel hit a church-run social services building adjacent to the main part of the 1,600-year-old Church of Saint Porphyrius with two strikes, according to an witness.

“Most of Gaza’s Christians have sought refuge in churches because they have nowhere else to go,” the witness, who did not want to be named for security reasons, told Middle East Eye. “We were surprised. We did not receive a warning to evacuate.”

“We don’t have internet. We only have electricity when we turn on the generator for two hours when we need to pump water from the well and fill our tanks,” he added.

Around 400 Christians and Muslims forcibly displaced from their homes by Israel’s relentless bombing campaign over the past two weeks were sheltering in the church.

At least 18 people were killed, according to the Palestinian health ministry. Many others are still missing.

The social services building was one of the four buildings belonging to the church complex. The Israeli military said it was striking a military command centre, and part of the church was damaged.

Hostilities began on 7 October, when Palestinian fighters stormed Israeli communities near the Gaza Strip, killing around 1,400 Israelis.

In response, the Israeli military has waged a ferocious bombing campaign, killing more than 4,200 Palestinians and forcing hundreds of thousands to flee the coastal enclave's north.

'What have the Christians done?'

The Church of Saint Porphyrius is the oldest still in use in Gaza, serving the roughly 1,000 Palestinian Christians in the enclave.

It was originally built in 425 CE and named after Saint Porphyrius, the fifth century bishop of Gaza who is credited with bringing Christianity to the city. He is buried in the northeastern corner of the building.

The church was converted into a mosque in the seventh century, before Crusader forces restored it as a church in the mid-12th century.

Its striking half-domed roof and entrances supported by marble columns make it one of the most iconic buildings in Gaza.

“The church is 2,000 years old and the Israelis struck it,” a survivor at the scene told local media. “There were no weapons in the church, it was sheltering children.”

“The whole building collapsed to the ground. We aren’t able to pull people from under the rubble,” said another man at a nearby hospital treating the wounded.

“Are these the Israelis’ list of targets? The Christians have nothing to do with any of this. What have the Christians done?”

“Enough, enough, by God we are tired,” he added, after tearing his T-shirt in exasperation.

Palestinians search the destroyed annex of the Greek Orthodox Saint Porphyrius Church in Gaza City on 20 October (AFP)

Last week, the church took to Facebook to address false social rumours that the church had been attacked.

But Thursday night's attack was not the first time Israel targeted the church while civilians were seeking sanctuary.

During the 2014 Gaza war, Israeli shelling partially damaged the building as 2,000 people (mostly women and children) slept in the courtyards and corridors there.

On Friday, the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Jerusalem issued a strong condemnation of the Israeli attack.

'Are these the Israelis’ list of targets? The Christians have nothing to do with any of this'

It said: "Targeting churches and their institutions, along with the shelters they provide to protect innocent citizens, especially children and women who have lost their homes due to Israeli airstrikes on residential areas over the past 13 days, constitutes a war crime that cannot be ignored."

Ramzi Khoury, head of the Higher Committee for Church Affairs in Palestine, described the bombing as part of Israel’s "intentions to annihilate the Palestinian people".

"Targeting places of worship constitutes a war crime, and international law makes it clear that houses of worship may under no circumstances be subjected to attacks," he said.

Israel-Palestine war: A quick history of Christianity in Gaza


The faith took root in Gaza at its inception and it is home to some of the oldest Christian sites in the world


A woman prays at the Saint Porphyrius Church in January 2023

 (AFP/Mahmud Hams)

By Shafik Mandhai
Published date: 20 October 2023

Israel’s attack on the fifth-century Church of Saint Porphyrius in Gaza has turned the spotlight on the besieged Palestinian enclave’s Christian population.

At least 18 people were killed in the bombing on a social services annex in the church's complex of buildings. Both Muslims and Christians took shelter within its walls hoping that its historical and religious importance would spare it the carnage that has affected other areas of Gaza.

As part of historic Palestine it is impossible to disconnect the history of Palestinian Christians in Gaza from those who share their faith in the occupied West Bank, Jerusalem and within the Palestinian community in Israel.

The region is the birthplace of Christianity and the location of many of the events of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible.

Palestinian Christians in Gaza, like other Palestinians there, do not see themselves as detached from the wider Palestinian nation.

Nevertheless, there is a unique Christian history specific to Gaza. While just over a thousand Christians remain in Gaza, the territory holds a special significance in the development of the faith.

The region is referred to by name in the New Testament in Acts 8, which refers to Philip the Evangelist baptising a man from Ethiopia on the road between Jerusalem and Gaza.

“Now an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying, ‘Arise and go toward the south along the road which goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.’ This is a desert,” the verse reads.

There are also several historic Christian sites that are not only important locally but carry importance for Christians generally.

The site of the Israeli attack on Thursday evening, the Saint Porphyrius Church, is one of the most important religious sites in Palestine.

Gaza's hidden heritage: Five historic sites in the besieged Palestinian territory

Read More »

Named after a fifth-century bishop, the site is one of the oldest surviving places of worship in the region and one of the oldest churches in the world.

The church was initially built in 425 CE and then later reconstructed by Crusaders in the 12th century, with much of the present structure dating back to that period.

Another major Christian site in Gaza is the nearby and even older Tell Umm Amer monastery.

The fourth-century structure, which now lies mainly in ruins, once included churches, a baptism hall, a cemetery and crypt.

It served as a place of worship for those travelling between Egypt and the lands of the Levant, including Palestine and Syria.

The site is notable for being the birthplace of Saint Hilarion, a fourth-century Palestinian monk, who helped pioneer monasticism.
The spread of Christianity

The presence of these early churches and monasteries, as well as the Biblical reference, indicate that Christianity in Gaza took root in tandem with the development of the faith in the region.

But widespread adoption of the faith did not take place until the fifth century.

According to the scholar Nicole Belayche, the strength of pagan cults in Gaza before the fifth century is “indisputable”.

In her essay in the book Christian Gaza in Late Antiquity, she writes that when Porphyrius was ordained bishop of Gaza, the Christian population stood at “less than three hundred in a population estimated at between 20,000 and 25,000”.

Israel-Palestine war: Palestinian artist killed in Gaza air strike was a ‘one in a million talent’    Read More »

Gaza’s mass conversion to Christianity started in the fifth century under the auspices of the Byzantine Empire, the successor to the Eastern Roman Empire.

“It was a hard process, one requiring recourse to imperial intervention,” she writes.

Initial reluctance was overcome by the efforts of holy men, such as Porphyrius, and incorporation of indigenous ritual into church rites, Belayche explains.

While Christianity was widely adopted by the end of the sixth century, it was not long before there was a new dominant religion.

In his book History of the City of Gaza, the late 19th century Jewish-American scholar Martin A Meyer writes: “The new faith had barely sufficient time to establish itself before Islam swept it away from this part of the world forever.”

Meyer’s statement is hyperbolic but touches on the truth that over the centuries that followed the Arab conquest, much of the region’s population converted to Islam.

There still remained a small Christian minority in the area of Gaza, which survived for centuries and enjoyed a brief flourishing under Crusader rule in the 12th century.
Modern Christianity

Like their fellow Palestinians, many of the region’s Christians were forced from their homes during the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.

As a result, the Christian population of Gaza has dwindled further over the decades, a trend that has continued after the Nakba.

According to the Guardian, there were 6,000 Palestinian Christians in Gaza in the mid-1960s and that number has fallen to 1,100 today.

Most Christians in the besieged region today follow the Greek Orthodox Church, while minorities follow the Baptist and Catholic churches.

Since the Israeli siege of Gaza began in 2007, Christians have faced similar restrictions on movement as their Muslim neighbours have to live under.

Cut off from larger Christian communities in the West Bank and Jerusalem, members of the faith require Israeli permits to travel to those areas for religious occasions.

In 2021, Israel issued permits for around half of the Palestinian Christian population in Gaza to attend Christmas services.

Such rights to attend rituals are by no means guaranteed, as evidenced by Israel’s decision to cancel 700 permits for Christians in Gaza to attend Easter services in Jerusalem.

Israel similarly rejected permit applications for 260 Palestinians in Gaza wanting to spend Christmas outside of the territory, either in the occupied West Bank or elsewhere.

Despite their small number, Churches in Gaza have regularly opened their doors to adherents of any faith to seek shelter during times of conflict, in the hope that houses of worship will not be attacked by Israel.

Such hopes may fade fast after the most recent Israeli attack on the Church of Saint Porphyrius.