A-Infos (en) Italy, UCADI #203 - The United Kingdom in 2025 (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Once upon a time there was an empire, and there are those who believe 
and act as if it still exists. The United Kingdom maintains military 
bases around the world. Older readers will remember the war with 
Argentina to maintain control of the Falkland Islands in the Atlantic 
Ocean, and everyone is surely aware of the "rock" of Gibraltar, a key 
point for maintaining control of one of the most important points of 
global navigation. But there are other, lesser-known bases, starting 
with the Bermuda archipelago, also in the Atlantic (in the northern 
part). Of course, the Middle East is also home to the Sultan Qaboos base 
in Oman and the modern one in Bahrain. Also worth mentioning is the base 
in Diego Garcia, often remembered for hosting US military personnel, but 
actually owned by the British crown.
Finally, there are two bases in Cyprus: Akrotiri and Dhekelia. When the 
independence uprising broke out in 1960, the British managed to maintain 
control, and even more so, possession of two small but very important areas.
Dhkelia, in the interior of the island, contains the tip of Mount 
Olympus (the Cypriot one), almost 2,000 meters high, from which it is 
possible to monitor (read: spy on) the entire Middle East, Egypt, and, 
if desired, Turkey and Greece-why limit yourself? Akrotiri, on the other 
hand, is an excellent outpost for landing and taking off planes and 
sunbathing (it's on the sea). Use of the same: it has been abundantly 
confirmed that hundreds of flights have departed from Akrotiri since the 
massacre of the Palestinians began (Gaza is just 200 miles away as the 
crow flies). Typically, small reconnaissance planes would take off from 
Akrotiri, turning off their transponders when approaching Israel and 
then turning them back on a few hours later upon their return. 
Investigations conducted by Declassified UK reveal that these flights 
often preceded targeted bombings by the Israeli air force on Gaza. The 
UK government has consistently refused to provide information and 
explanations when asked by a few journalists, and even by the parents of 
a British citizen in Gaza for humanitarian reasons who was killed by 
Israeli bombs.
In practice, the RAF operated by providing real-time information to the 
Israeli army to enable targeted operations: in one of the very rare 
cases in which the reconnaissance aircraft failed to turn off its 
transponder, it was observed repeatedly flying over a bombed building an 
hour later, causing 34 deaths. This is obviously not an isolated case: 
it is a case where it was possible to obtain evidence of a general modus 
operandi.
I use the past tense because, starting in August 2025, the British 
outsourced the service to a private American company, the Sierra Nevada 
Corporation, in order to clear their criminal record. However, the 
Akrotiri base is also used for other purposes: there is evidence that 
planes departing from Akrotiri have bombed Yemen and even Iraq on a 
couple of occasions, in keeping with Blair's old policy. The British 
government should be proud of this genocidal support, so much so that 
the Prime Minister visited the base to congratulate the military.

British Policy Toward Ukraine

That's about it for British policy toward Israel. Regarding Ukraine, 
it's enough to recall Boris Johnson's courtesy visit to the little green 
ogre in 2022. And if anyone dares to think that Labour's Starmer might 
represent something different, it's worth remembering that in the UK, 
the entire establishment is stuck in the narrative that Ukraine is the 
Eden of democracy and must be supported tooth and nail (by the 
Ukrainians). For example, Farage's old acquaintance recently appointed 
Reform Mendoza, one of the most fanatical neoconservatives (like Lindsey 
Graham in the US), as his party's foreign policy chief, erasing (or 
rather, trying to make people forget) Farage's past closeness to 
pro-Russian positions. Considering that recent polls give Reform roughly 
the same weight as Labour and the Conservatives combined, draw your own 
conclusions. And if anyone remembers that there are the Liberals, or the 
Greens: forget them and remember Annalena Baerbock in Germany. In other 
words, in the UK, claiming that the Russians had a reasonable reason to 
do what they're doing is worse than blasphemy.
So it's no surprise when it turns out the UK wants to play its part in 
stealing frozen Russian assets in their country. Apparently, there are 
£8 billion of them (plus another £28 billion held by private 
individuals) and they want to use them to support a loan to Ukraine, 
while waiting to win the war and the funds that Russia will be forced to 
pay for Ukraine's reconstruction.
The same scenario as Mrs. von der Leyen, who ignores the laws and 
recommendations provided by the European Central Bank and the 
International Monetary Fund, and in Starmer's case, even the Bank of 
England. The Bank of England has pointed out that such a transaction has 
never been attempted before: who knows why: someone goes to the bank, 
asks for a loan, and offers other people's money as collateral; an 
everyday occurrence. It's worth noting that any international lawsuits, 
and very likely, could be adjudicated in places like Singapore, where 
they live and prosper on the security of financing provided by financial 
groups.

Anything else to add?

Domestic politics

And finally, we come to domestic politics. Recalling the nickname 
Starmer is often referred to as-Never here, Keir-reaffirming his total 
absence from his homeland, like the other two mosquito-repellents, 
Macron and Merz (musketeers would be too noble), Starmer is always and 
only interested in embracing the little green ogre and providing or 
promising him support, regardless of the fact that the British economy 
isn't exactly rosy. In 2008, with the banking collapse, the budget 
deficit went from 35% to over 70% of GDP, and then gradually rose to 94% 
(obviously they want to catch up with Italy). It doesn't occur to anyone 
that the spending to support Ukraine contributed to worsening the 
situation (officially EUR5 billion a year, but we know how these things 
go, and then there are also the expenses for the operation of foreign 
bases, starting with Cyprus).
Who is Starmer and how did he get there? He won the last elections, 
obtaining a flood of MPs (but not votes, given the British system), but 
it's useful to remember some facts. Once upon a time, there was a young 
upstart, a certain Morgan McSweeney, who aspired to a political career. 
He had (and has) positions that are decidedly at odds with the supposed 
social democratic stance of the Labour Party and that are perhaps even 
radical for the Tories: totally anti-welfare, anti-migrant, etc.
In the UK, especially within the Labour Party, it's well known that in 
certain constituencies, the party wins local elections regardless. So 
why not join and then work from within to achieve what you want, 
creating a faction and competing with others within Labour (somewhat 
similar to the Democratic Party in Italy). Our man thus begins by 
founding a small group, but finds himself facing a problem. Corbyn had 
risen to Labour leadership in 2015 with an agenda far removed from 
McSweeney's desires (some statements suggest he considers Corbyn to be 
the absolute evil), yet McSweeney felt at ease, convinced that a 
politician with such a program (let's say left-wing) would be punished 
by the electorate and quickly disappear. Unfortunately for McSweeney, 
Corbyn reached 40% of the vote in the 2017 elections and almost made it. 
Dramatic: a containment strategy was needed. The idea will be to work 
against Corbyn to make him lose the next election: the only way to 
eliminate him.
Instead of the small initial faction, it becomes preferable to choose a 
more appropriate platform with other figures thirsting for the same 
fury: Labour Together will become the leading think tank behind the 
current success of the Labour Party and its program.
It all begins with a fundraiser (illegal because it was undeclared) of 
£500,000, used to conduct detailed surveys among party members to 
understand the best way to manipulate them, define programs that could 
be considered attractive, and at the same time proceed with media 
operations to demolish the absolute evil.
At this stage, the relationship with Peter Mandelson is essential in 
developing the strategy (we will soon be reunited with Mandelson). 
Facebook groups are created where falsehoods combined with low-grade 
gossip are circulated (newspapers like the Sun are very useful), and 
thus the legend of an anti-Semitic Corbyn is born. Meanwhile, the 
ambitious Keir Starmer, who has been eyeing the leadership since 2015, 
is being approached. Starmer is perfect, unbiased, unconventional, and 
unconventional (like Blair or Thatcher), and is ready to do whatever is 
suggested if it leads him toward the post.
In 2022, the transformation of Labour's bureaucracy also began: the 
party's bureaucratic structure initially served to smoothly manage 
national affairs, resolving internal disputes relatively objectively. 
The structure was transformed into a kind of internal police force under 
the command of a select few, making decisions based not on principles of 
justice, but on obedience. This is made possible by the complete absence 
of external controls, such as the press, including the more liberal ones 
like The Guardian. McSweeney & co. are aware of this, and in fact, a 
senior advisor to Starmer, when asked for clarification on 10 election 
promises, stated that none of these 10 promises ties our hands. They 
know you can promise anything: no one will come asking for explanations. 
Many points in the platform and even public statements repeat exact 
parts of documents produced by Together Labour. The unfortunate proposal 
to introduce digital identity comes from them.

Starmer is thus elected, but the real jack of all trades is Morgan 
McSweeney, and the prime minister's incompetence is clearly evident, 
continually embroiled in scandals. One of the latest concerns Peter 
Mandelson, who, in return for past assistance, is appointed ambassador 
to the US. Mandelson is a veteran of the party, active since the 1980s 
(his political longevity is only rivaled by Corbyn, who also left the 
party), but also a friend of Cameron. Mandelson plays a crucial role in 
Blair's rise and also helps Starmer grow.
It's a shame that his name also surfaces in the Epstein case in the 
context of unmistakably compromising emails. Starmer tries to defend the 
indefensible, but ultimately has to give in and has him removed.

Starmer's Domestic Politics

Starmer's domestic political engagement (and that of his predecessors) 
is minimal, and above all, he's clueless (aside from his obsession with 
Ukraine). Infrastructure is decaying (this sounds like the US): the rail 
line from London to Edinburgh, which had always functioned well (speed 
aside) for the benefit of the wealthy who need/want to travel to their 
Scottish resorts at night, now suffers from constant disruptions and 
requires unexpected train changes.
Thus, we arrive at the latest budget law with decisions that essentially 
postpone the most significant adjustments to the future (to do what?). 
Currently, the plan seeks to raise £26 billion by increasing taxes on 
gambling, taxes on high-value homes (at least they affect property in 
some way), and a small portion of taxes on capital gains. Part of the 
savings will come from fiscal drag: they have committed to keeping the 
tax brackets fixed until 2031 so that inflation can help them recover 
the funds.
The problem is that the economic recession increases welfare costs 
(unemployment benefits and the like), which in turn increases the 
deficit and causes the recession. Meanwhile, the cost of electricity is 
very high, EUR0.40 per kWh, as in Germany (EUR0.42 in Italy), and a 
recent EU decision requires the UK to pay extra for access to the 
European grid after Brexit. Will they be willing?
Meanwhile, to finance the last few millions of pounds to Ukraine, the 
government has abolished the subsidy for poor families on electricity 
consumption. Under these conditions, it's difficult to attempt to 
(re)industrialize the country, even if only to produce weapons.
Starmer has managed to be less popular than Lizz Truss (he's at 15-16%, 
and it's worth remembering that years ago, when a government fell below 
30%, it was considered unstable), just like Merz, who managed to 
undermine Scholz's performance: there's a trend in Europe, anyway. Could 
it be Ukraine? No, the blame lies with the recession, with having 
invested too much in the green economy, like China, which is a leader in 
solar panels and wind energy production, and everyone can see how China 
is sinking into the abyss of debt.

And after Starmer?

How long will Starmer last? But above all, who will replace him? Much 
depends on when Labour finds someone even vaguely decent. They certainly 
can't afford to go to new elections, because they would disappear along 
with their Conservative cousins. So let's expect some more Starmer 
clones from the current Labour organization.
Farage looms large in the near future. He pays more attention to the 
quality of life of the middle class than Starmer (and his Conservative 
predecessors), but unlike Trump, he isn't even thinking about closing 
the Ukraine issue to free up domestic resources. The call of big 
financial capital is too strong: too close to the City.

Antonio Politi

https://www.ucadi.org/2025/12/23/il-regno-unito-nel-2025/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en