Nigel Inkster

@dennisw5 Well someone has to tell them that this has to be solved through dialogue: otherwise, how would they know?

Thank God! This will end the crisis. China to send envoy to Middle East for mediation, foreign minister says reuters.com/world/china/ch…

@edwardstrngr @alessionaval @JohnHealey_MP I think the person who most needs to internalise this message is the Chancellor of the Exchequer

“Sir Keir take note, the UK will need to regenerate hard power.” Quite. ⁦@JohnHealey_MP⁩ take note, Defence Reform is needed urgently or that hard power won’t be generated, at any price… thetimes.com/article/690ee1…

@fbermingham Or even the cojones

@Sandbagger_01 Granted the FCO has like other government departments become risk-averse and process-driven. But good leadership can change that and there are people capable of providing the necessary leadership if given their heads.

"The process will result in approximately 2,000 job losses, or up to 25% of its total workforce - with fears of a jaw-dropping reduction of up to 40% in some London-based departments". Global Britain anyone?

@Sandbagger_01 Penny wise, pound foolish as ever. Successive governments have failed to appreciate and play to the UK’s strengths.

And there is Goodhart’s Law which holds that when a measure becomes an objective it ceases to be a useful measure spectator.com/article/the-re…

@SariArhoHavren I think this pretty much sums it up.

To describe the 🇬🇧–🇨🇳 relationship in this manner may sound tempting, but it would require both to have good intentions at heart. It is also tempting to think that China is different because the US has changed, but one must recognise that China is the same as always, and its ambitions have not changed. What it wants from the UK should be kept in mind: 📍Allowed to monitor and control the diaspora in the UK 📍Keep the British market open and reduce existing barriers (allow investments in critical infra) 📍Maintain access to its science and innovation activities and education 📍Maintain access to buy and acquire technologies 📍Take China’s interests into account in international relations, the WTO, the UN, possibly the Arctic, etc., and promote open trade, and not least China’s vision of global governance 📍And I believe that, in the long run, China wants unlimited access to the financial markets and will use it to expand RMB Internationalisation and finally take over and replace London’s financial expertise 📍And of course, it wants to split the special relationship with the US Does this sound like a recipe for a balanced relationship?

@JohnHemmings2 Though no doubt we will see legions of ambulance-chasing lawyers seeking judicial review. We suffer in this country from massive judicial overreach.

@NigelInkster So we don't know what info those cables carry, but imagine a financial "Pearl Harbor" on NYSE-LSE on the eve of a Taiwan crisis. Inserting wrong data or wiping large reams of trading data could have catastrophic results on the integrity of both markets.

“Beijing has made the embassy issue a priority in the UK-China relationship. Xi Jinping, China’s leader, raised the matter directly with Keir Starmer in their first phone call, in August 2024.” Which raises the question of “why”? theguardian.com/politics/2026/…

@JohnHemmings2 Anyway, approval has now been given. Alea iacta est.

@JohnHemmings2 That is indisputably true: I really hope it has been taken fully into account

@JohnHemmings2 I am well aware that it is possible to tap covertly into focs. But it isn’t a trivial undertaken. To date Chinese technical espionage has relied on (im)plausible deniability. Discovery of an foc is hardly deniable

@NigelInkster The ability to tap, interdict, or even corrupt real time data flows is a risk I think the potential damage outweighs any diplomatic considerations. Yes, you can tap such cables from other locations, but this puts a number of legal and diplomatic walls up around any such efforts.

@JohnHemmings2 Sadly there have been no such briefings

@NigelInkster Curious as to why they denied any important cable proximity to our closest allies right up to November 2025? Any sense of why they’ve not been more transparent? Please let me know if they have provided think tanks with information briefings.

@JohnHemmings2 If that is the case I can’t help wondering why the security and intelligence agencies appear to think the risk is manageable

@NigelInkster Hi Nigel! Great to hear from you. Long time… I’m deeply concerned about the close distance to important communications cables potentially carrying financial data that impacts US and UK financial markets.

Russia wants tourists to visit war-torn Donbas. Visit the Soviet Union - before the Soviet Union visits you. thetimes.com/world/russia-u…

@Sandbagger_01 It was principally about vetting. But modern technologies make people’s pasts and family links more easily discoverable than previously

👀 "Little noticed" when it was announced in 2022, and referred to in previous ISC reports. It's been out there if you look for it. It's as if the agencies may need people with certain linguistic skills for the threats we face today 😉

@RobWhit28130167 @Sandbagger_01 @simonmontefiore Utter nonsense. I can testify that Blaise has extensive field experience.

@Sandbagger_01 @simonmontefiore Zero experience of HUMINT. No field experience. A tick box appointment. Woeful.

Britain’s new female MI6 chief wants to do things differently politico.eu/article/britai…

@yasminalombaert When at the end of the Cold War Europe embarked on a modest effort to develop some independent military capabilities, the US squashed that initiative…

“Why do 450 million wealthy Europeans need 340 million Americans to protect themselves from 140 million Russians?" - Andrew Denison, transatlantic networks. "Naturally, we must hope, and I think we must also be glad when the warring parties, the Americans, and others talk to each other. But if one looks at the balance of interests, then I think one must be realistic. Not much has changed there. And headlines are like smoke and mirrors. One sometimes gets confused. That is clear, but the interests of the Russians in an unconditional ceasefire are not visible at all. And also, regarding a sovereign Ukraine, the Russians ultimately continue to show no willingness to accept that. Until the Americans realise this, it may take a while. Trump also always keeps his isolationist wing in mind. But we must ask ourselves, why so much excitement in Germany this past week—'Panic on the Titanic.' America is turning its back on Ukraine and Europe. Why? Because a realistic perspective would say, no, we are not there yet. I believe it is because Germany is so dependent. And to understand this whole controversy, one must ask: Why do 450 million wealthy Europeans need 340 million Americans to protect themselves from 140 million Russians?"

Ritz among cigar lounges at risk if indoor smoking loophole ends. God preserve us from the puritans and zealots thetimes.com/uk/healthcare/…

@Sandbagger_01 A wonderful colleague. RIP

Paul Ritchie obituary: MI6 officer on front line of post-Soviet threats thetimes.com/uk/obituaries/…