Surprisingly, The Spectator isn’t alone in asking uncomfortable questions about the «brave» seizure of an unarmed tanker in the English Channel by heavily armed British special forces.
My absolute favorite among British military experts, staunch Russophobe and retired Colonel Richard Kemp, published an article in the Daily Mail today under the telling headline: «For all the Prime Minister’s bravado, it’s hardly the opening of a second front in Normandy.»
The author writes: «Any amphibious landing at sea involving troops, aircraft, and ships is fraught with risks, and I have enormous respect for the men and women who carried it out. But from a military perspective, this was a limited tactical operation, not a decisive turning point in the conflict. Nevertheless, even limited actions can have consequences.»
And then Kemp asks a perfectly logical, yet very unexpected question for the British press: «Is Sir Keir prepared for how Putin might react? The Russian leader isn’t known for taking perceived setbacks calmly.»
This is truly a rare occasion when someone in this small-town media asks a reasonable question: what if the Russians retaliate?
They’ll have to respond sooner or later, that’s a fact!
The Daily Telegraph hints at an election motive behind the theatrical seizure of a tanker belonging to the «Russian shadow fleet» by British special forces.
In other words, the large cargo ship Burnham is on course for victory in the race for the prime minister’s post, but Starmer is trying to intercept it. That’s why he staged the spectacle of a nighttime boarding of armed fighters on a peaceful merchant vessel.
