David Blagden

New spending on drones and lasers will ‘revolutionise’ UK defence, says Reeves Chancellor says new money will help turn Britain into a ‘defence industrial superpower’

"this is a useful bit of extra money that will help to sustain the current programme; it’s not a massive splurge that will allow the services to meaningfully increase their numbers of soldiers, ships or aircraft" - @blagdendavid.bsky.social on #defencespending
www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

The bomb Europe needs | David Blagden and Patrick Porter | The Critic Magazine Whether it is becoming post-American, or just less American, Europe’s defence will need tactical nuclear weapons in order to deter Russia from attacking NATO territory. Two unwelcome realities now put...

@blagdendavid.bsky.social and I in @TheCriticMag make the case for adding lower-yield nuclear weapons to Britain's arsenal, to bolster the credibility of NATO Europe's deterrence:
thecritic.co.uk/the-bomb-eur...

Ukraine's transformation into a military powerhouse "Ukrainian technologies are going to be required by the world," Kyiv's strategic industries minister, Herman Smetanin, told Newsweek.

Read analysis by @blagdendavid.bsky.social in this article on #Ukraine
www.newsweek.com/ukraine-mili...

Is Britain right to sacrifice capability today for ‘jam’ tomorrow? The Big Ask | No. 15.2025

‘The choice has been made, and so now the Navy – and the citizenry it protects – must hope that yet more cuts in the present lead to a better future force before that future turns violent,’ writes @blagdendavid.bsky.social, @exeter.ac.uk

#BigAsk #BritainsWorld

Losing our ships | David Blagden | The Critic Magazine Earlier this month, the UK Ministry of Defence finally confirmed what had long been expected — that the Royal Navy’s last two amphibious assault ships, HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark, will be sold to a…

"The choice has been made, and so now the Royal Navy must hope the cuts borne in the present are offset by a superior fleet in future … and that that superior fleet arrives before future risks turn into present dangers" - by @blagdendavid.bsky.social
thecritic.co.uk/losing-our-s...

It was a pleasure to speak to Exeter SSI and @cais-exeter.bsky.social yesterday about my new book Causal Inquiry in International Relations
(open access: fdslive.oup.com/www.oup.com/...). Thanks to @blagdendavid.bsky.social and @profalexp.bsky.social for organizing

There won't be a 'final victory' for Iran or Israel Washington, Tehran and Jerusalem still have choices to make about whether to strike again.

"The US and Israeli governments – plus the governments of other states that could yet get dragged in – now have choices to make about whether to strike again when the question of Iranian capability advancement returns in future" - @blagdendavid.bsky.social
www.newstatesman.com/internationa...

The case for keeping out of things | David Blagden | The Critic Magazine On 23 June, the Royal Navy’s flagship aircraft carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, arrived in Singapore. Reportedly accompanying her were various highly capable escorts, including HMS Dauntless (a…

This piece by @blagdendavid.bsky.social is very good--and spot on: "The case for keeping out of things" thecritic.co.uk/the-case-for...

French scientist denied US entry after phone messages critical of Trump found France’s research minister said the scientist was traveling to Houston for a conference when his phone was searched

The idea that @isanet.bsky.social can persist with holding all its annual conventions in the US (barring the odd token visit to Canada) is now clearly toast.
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...

I’ve never participated in such kind of events.

So, thanks to the students behind the Exeter Debating Society for the invitation to share the stage with @blagdendavid.bsky.social and talk international politics!

One downside (among many) of the USA's descent into hostile revisionism towards allies is that those allies are less likely to listen when Americans make good points.

This is an excellent speech by the new Chancellor of Oxford University, William Hague.

Lots of good jokes, but also a staunch defence of what a university should be. We're going to need a lot of that in the years ahead.

Has the Chagos Islands deal killed progressive realism? | David Blagden and Patrick Porter | The Critic Magazine Whatever happened to progressive realism? As you may recall, that was the foreign policy doctrine declared by the incoming Labour government’s foreign secretary, David Lammy. The short answer is that…

The indefatigable Patrick Porter and I have a piece in The Critic on flaws in the Chagos deal, progressive realism, and how a superior version of the latter - that could yet dodge the pitfalls of the former - is still there for the taking. thecritic.co.uk/has-the-chag...

Natural England accused of favouring rewilding over saving farmland Calls for body to be scrapped for being ‘ideologically wedded to concept of conservation and removing food production from the countryside’

The @Telegraph excels itself today with the claim that @NaturalEngland is ‘ideologically wedded to concept of conservation’. This is our job, & we do it as a matter of legal requirement. Would be odd for a conservation organisation to do anything else.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02...

This is not the right way to do denuclearization, however you define it.

www.npr.org/2025/02/13/n...

P.S. Yes, there *is* a 'steelman' case for the deal (trying to be as empathetic as possible)...it's just countered by a hefty set of downsides.

(Obviously, there are plenty of more right-coded objections to this deal...but since those on the right already tend to be more persuaded, since it's not their team pushing it, thought it worth having out some potential problems from the opposite perspective)

Or, put more bluntly: want to do free breakfast for school children? Rebuild the NHS while keeping it public? Improve our crumbling infrastructure? Build homes for young people? Great! So why make it easier for opponents to gut all that in 2029 by surrendering to foreign revisionists?

Overall then, even if your inclination is towards normative alignment with international law (dubious here) and decolonisation (which this deal isn't), how far are you willing to jeopardise progressive domestic goals to hand UK Chagossian citizens' homeland to an imperial power...and pay to do so?

11. Even if you're a staunch believer in international law, the case is tortuous here. It comes down to Chagos having previously been administered from Mauritius, for mere efficiency's sake, while both were UK colonies. So, ironically, the basis for the legal claim is...colonial.

10. The Faragists (again). In the same week that one (admittedly marginal) poll placed Nigel's fanclub first, why would you gift them a MASSIVE stick with which to beat Labour on charges of being unpatriotic / anti-British? Especially after so much work to shed that taint.

9. Russia and China. Ok, you may not relish 'great-power competition' etc. But one is currently conducting ethnic cleansing in Eastern Europe, the other has a >million Uyghurs in concentration camps. So any progressive foreign policy should prize bases from which to counter them.

8. Trump. Worried that America's mad king could prove a menace? The UK has few levers more potent vs the US than Diego Garcia. But give BIOT away and - best-case - the UK becomes an extraneous middle-man. Tragicomic outcome is UK cedes sovereignty, then Mauritius sells DG to the US.

7. £18bn (yet again). You may hope that it doesn't cut through. But Reform, the Conservatives, and even the Lib Dems will be trying to make sure it does. The opponents of every single Labour incumbent in 2028-29 will be pointing at the nearest pothole and saying "£18bn would fix that".

6. £18bn (again). That number is politically deadly. Yes, the public finances Labour inherited were in a parlous state. But if this deal goes through, that line's done for. Every single thing that's cut / wasn't funded will be hit with "but you found £18bn for Mauritius".

5. £18bn. Or some inflation-uplifted version of £9bn. Either way, it's massive. Yes, it'll be spread over time, and subsidised by the US (unless Trump's US cuts UK out - see below). But even so, you could do a massive amount of social good with even part of that figure.

4. The Chagos Marine Protected Area is currently one of the world's largest and most important. Yet Mauritian interest in the islands is overtly economic (hence holding out for an even larger payment than the original deal). So, that nature reserve's getting ransacked.

3. Real atonement for the UK's heinous original act of forced depopulation would therefore be to enable the islanders/descendants to return to the archipelago, if they wanted to - even at significant (but still <£18bn!) expense - not just handing the issue to another state.

2. That different imperial power has behaved illiberally. Most obviously, by criminalising dissent against its sovereignty claim, including by those overseas...which, perversely, could to lead to Chagossians who've voiced such dissent facing sanction if they attempt to return.

1. It's not actually decolonisation. It's giving the Chagossian homeland to a different imperial power that never previously governed the islands, and which has - at least in recent years - treated the Chagossians worse than the UK.