John Kelly - The Man who knows

In Afghanistan the British and Americans are honing their military skills to levels they haven't reached since the 1960s during their adventures in Malaya and Vietnam. The question now is which military philosophy will prevail; the British concept of taking and holding ground or the American approach fast attacks and equally rapid withdrawals.

In Afghanistan the British approach born of generations of experience as an occupying power has the potential to succeed but only if the garrisons they install are sufficiently large to deal with any assault by Afghan irregulars. Leaving garrisons of two or three platoons to hold a town merely invites attack as a force of this size doesn't have enough firepower. If this strategy continues there is a genuine danger of a 'Fort Zinderneuf' style situation where a whole garrison gets wiped out. The easy solution would be to put brigade size garrisons in every town in Helmand province. Unfortunately this would commit the entire British Army to the operation.

The American approach limits casualties and enables the maximum force to be delivered against the enemy. The downside is that just like Vietnam once the Americans pull out, the other guys move back in no matter how much damage the US forces cause. Like the Viet Cong the Afghan warlords will not commit their forces to a set piece battle with the full might of the Americans and British, that would be suicide. Instead they will continue with the guerilla tactics that served them so well against the Soviets.

This leaves the Americans and British trapped in a war they can't win or afford to lose. There is no viable exit strategy, any kind of withdrawal would be regarded as a defeat unless they left behind a government in Kabul that was in full control of the whole country. I think there is more chance of apples growing on an ivy tree than there is of that happening in the next 10 years.

It took Britain about 100 years before she finally gave up trying to subdue the Afghans first time around. It looks as if they didn't learn from that experience.

Five years ago crude oil cost 20 or 30 dollars a barrel. The prospect of a $50 dollar barrel would have been considered terrifying. We passed that mark after the Iraq invasion, people said the Iraq war would bleed the US dry just like Vietnam did. Now in 2006 we are edging towards $80 per barrel. The world economy is still ticking over. Oil companies are now so rich they can afford to fund all the alternative fuel research they can think of. Not for the public benefit but simply as a profit maximisation exercise. No point in focusing too much on oil these days, the profits roll in whatever they do. If the black stuff runs out then BP and their buddies will simply start selling us more bio-diesel and bio-ethanol from the plants the current high oil prices have paid for.

Adam Smith's invisible hand strikes again. Back at the ranch the risk of increasing oil prices no longer worries the cowboys in the Whitehouse, oilmen to their fingertips. $80 a barrel is a price they have dreamt of all their lives. Now does this mean they will have any concern about attacking Iran if the chance arises, nope they'll go in with all guns blazing.

High oil prices doesn't hurt the West like it used to. Our manufacturing base has shrunk, we don't need the same volume. China and India on the other hand need millions of gallons of the stuff to run their emerging industries. Maybe the sabre rattling in the Middle East is really a cunning tactic to take some of the force out of Chinese and Indian economic juggernauts. The big conflict of the future will be between China, India and the USA for the status of the world's most powerful nation.

Disappointed by Hisbollah's failure to sort out Israel Iran have now decided to take centre stage in the crisis riven Middle East. We will have nuclear weapons and we will use them if we want is their message. Like their great enemy Israel the Iranians want to become a mini-superpower.

Sadly unlike Israel they don't have the USA as their best pal. Bush and co have been waiting for this moment for 27 years, a chance to legitimately act against Iran. Every since the Shah fell and the students stormed the US embassy in Tehran this day has been dreamt of by the US right wing. A chance to teach the Islamic revolution a direct lesson.

Don't be surprised if we see the first use of a nuclear weapon in anger since 1945. There has been a lot of venom spouted by both sides which won't be vented by a few minor firefights and botched commando raids. Bush and Ahmadinejad are two guys who want to fight and they are fed up being held back by the coat holders. They will do whatever they think is necessary to win.

How did we get here? Well blame it on 9/11 because it gave the US the one thing it has lacked since 1979, direct access to Iran's borders. With Saddam and the Taliban out of the way Iran can be invaded from the East and West. A prospect which may attract support from Sunni Muslims in Iraq, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia who have always regarded the Shia as heretics.

Will destroying Iran bring peace to the Middle East? No but it will fulfil another of Mr Bush's ambitions, all he will have left to do is sort out North Korea and his campaign against the "Axis of Evil" will be complete. Can Iran win? No this time the US will go for the throat, they have learned from Iraq and Afghanistan that limited force doesn't work.

What does it mean to us, possibly the end of the world as we know it. Destroying Iran will not stop terrorism, Al Quaeda are of course Sunnis. The price of oil will not go down. The World economy will be severely disrupted. We will suffer from a backlash against Bush and his allies. A gloomy forecast that is dependent of Bush and Ahmadinejad realising that they are in a no-win situation if they come to blows. Do you believe either man has enough sense to realise the danger they are in?

The ceasefire between Israel and Hisbollah is one of those diplomatic manoeuvres that everyone knows is doomed to failure. Hisbollah have no intention of going away peacefully, Israel are determined to crush them and the UN can't cobble together anything like the size and strength of force required to enforce the deal. The Lebanese Army will be forced to go hunting Hisbollah alone or face a full scale Israeli invasion. Those of us with reasonable memories will recall that the Lebanese Civil War lasted over 25 years and is not long finished.

The Oslo Accords promised peace in the Middle East but were ultimately torn up by the very people who would have benefited most; the Arabs and the Israelis. The rest of the world just can't stop meddling in the Middle East's affairs without every doing any real good. A rational approach would be to allow Israel to use her full military might to crush Hisbollah. Like the US in Vietnam, Israel is handicapped by its leadership's reluctance to strike with full force against Hisbollah regardless of the impact on world opinion.

The Israeli campaign in Lebanon was relatively limited, villages were destroyed and then the Israeli's pulled out leaving Hisbollah to re-occupy the territory and attack Israel again. Guerilla forces thrive on this kind of conflict.

To defeat them Israel needs to occupy Lebanon and impose a police state which has a huge presence in every village and a network of informants loyal to the Israeli cause. A dramatic change in strategy and a massive investment in manpower would be required to achieve this objective. However if the fighting breaks out again, expect an Israeli invasion force to push Hisbollah back north of Beirut with no concern for the casualities.

As for the UN, the Bush Administration has effectively killed it in the same way that Hitler and Mussolini destroyed the League of Nations. By treating the UN as an irrelevance Bush and Co have made the world a dangerous place where any country is fair game for an assault by an envious neighbour.

I suspect that within the next ten years we will be in the grip of a new world order. The sad thing is that the utopian ideals of the UN will not be a part of it. Welcome to a re-run of the nineteenth century, the Age of Empire is back.

Watching the tv and reading the newspapers these days is depressing. Oil is running out, western civilisation is in decline and the bulk of the worlds population is overweight and brain dead, apparently!

In the middle east things are a little less sedentary but just as worrying, Israel has finally cracked and turned on its Islamic tormentors. Like the big kid at school Israel has dominated the region for years with ever really unleashing his full force. Hamas and Hezbollah benefited greatly from Israel's reticence, taking their enemies reluctance to massacare them as a sign of weakness. Now things have changed, Israel doesn't really care about world opinion any more. The failed peace of the last ten years is proof that the weight of world opinion doesn't have the power to stop islamic terrorism. Israel is now following a rational foreign policy option for a sovereign state; i.e. taking military action to prevent attacks on its territory. I suspect Israel will not stop until they achieve their objective of neutralising Hezbollah permanently.

Why does Israel feel able to act in a rational manner without fear of retribution from the rest of the world? Simply because Britain and America have led the way by knocking out Saddam Hussein's Iraq and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. The traditional apologist nations like Russia and France have been rendered impotent by George W Bush and his 'Wild Bunch in the White House'. The politics of the Old West have been resurrected. If a man calls you names or insults your 'Maw' its ok to shoot him or invade his country, depending on whats most effective. France and Russia's favoured approach of maintaining a balance of power by subtly arming anyone who fancies a crack at the Anglo-Saxons and the Israelis whilst demanding a ceasefire at the UN is not working this time. The angry giants have had enough of being stung by ants, this time they are going to burn the ants nest. Or to continue the western anology 'the posse is gonna hunt down every single one of that damn Apache raiding party!'

If Syria tries to intervene in Lebanon do not be surprised if the US/UK invades Syria from Iraq. We are at a tipping point in the 'War on Terror'. Israel will be allowed to crush Hezbollah, regardless of the cost. The US will watch and see who comes to Hezbollah's aid, whoever it may be,Syria or Iran, they will suffer. The US with its presence in Iraq is able to strike quickly at either state.

World War 3 will begin the day that the US attacks Iran, because that will be when Iran's shadowy friends in the world community will have to act to prevent the US achieving total hegemony over the Middle East oil reserves.