The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, presented her "surprise" spring budget to the House of Commons on March 26 [1]. She alleged that the government's task had been to "provide security for working people. And to deliver a decade of national renewal." What this "security" and "national renewal" meant was soon revealed when she justified the government's war budget by saying: "Now our task is to secure Britain's future ... in a world that is changing before our eyes. The threat facing our continent was transformed when Putin invaded Ukraine. It has since escalated further... and continues to evolve rapidly." What kind of "secure future" do Britain's working people contemplate with Reeves' announcement that "we will increase defence spending to 2.5% [an increase of £2.2bn - Ed] of GDP", coupled with the claim that this further militarisation is to be funded by "reducing overseas aid to 0.3% of Gross National Income ... to fund our more capital-intensive defence commitments"? The Chancellor is presenting cuts on the claims of the people on the economy and investing in war as "a decade of national renewal"! Some renewal! Some security!

Actually, reduction of "overseas aid" was just mentioned twice, and with no details. It was the reduction in the payment of welfare benefits "saving £4.8bn in the welfare budget" that revealed most about this government's contempt for the vulnerable, being almost on a par with the increase in the "defence" budget of well over £5 billion, along with the £3bn Britain gives to Ukraine annually. What Reeves referred to as "capital-intensive defence commitments" means huge profits for Britain's war industries. It can be seen that the real aim of the budget is a blatant attack on the welfare benefits and vital social programmes of the people, including in investments in the NHS. Right through her speech, Reeves tried to address the situation as if the government were concerned mainly about dealing with "driving efficiency and productivity across government". Allegedly, there were to be £3.6 billion of departmental day-to-day spending reductions, and £1 billion of additional revenue from reducing tax avoidance. The actuality is that the spring statement crudely cobbled together cuts right across the social spectrum on livelihoods and claims of the people. What was so noticeable was the vindictiveness with which a so-called "Labour" government is making cuts to the disabled, the old and the poor.

As the Stop the War coalition declaimed: "Already a third of children were living in poverty before this week's cuts were announced - that's 4.4 million children. According to the government's own assessment 250,000 more people, including 50,000 more children, will be plunged into poverty as a result of their cuts - campaigners say this is a gross underestimate. Over three million people will be hit by the changes to Personal Independence Payments (PIP).

"Yet the Ministry of Defence is to receive a further £2.2 billion increase in its budget this year - that's on top of the £13.5 billion more per year Starmer previously pledged. Starmer's Labour is prioritising the arms industry and City bankers over our children, the poor, the sick and disabled."

"Balancing the books on the back of the poorest"

Such has been the characterisation of the Chancellor's proposals. The government's self-imposed fiscal rules are meant to serve as a signal of its fiscal rectitude, reflecting a claim to the mantle of economic competency that the Conservatives under Liz Truss renounced. The cartel parties' concurrence on the thrust of the statement confirms that militarisation is not simply a policy of the government, but a dictate of the state under the control of oligarchs of the ruling elite and those in the political sphere following their agenda.

These fiscal rules are economic nonsense, non-sequiturs which cover over that working people applying their labour are the source of wealth. It is the direction of economy which needs to change from cutting funding for social programmes into investing in social programmes, putting more into the economy than is taken out as the economy is geared to paying the rich and militarisation. What is the government's mantra of "growth" about, unless it is grasped that the economy must be geared to the people's interests and their claims?

The programme of the government is more austerity, deeper austerity, whatever they say, and making sure the state jumps to the tune of the financial and other oligarchs. Necessary public investment in the economy is termed as "splashing the cash" and other derogative terms. A "blackhole" in balancing the books is nonsensical. And, even if we were to take the claim at face value, a moratorium on interest and debt repayments with the well-being of the people in mind would be a sensible measure.

Increasing investments and funding in social programmes that favour the people, the polity and the economy, not funding on militarisation and war, is the direction for the economy which is so much needed.

The people's opposition intensifies

Immediately there has rightly been huge opposition to this Spring budget. Even before Rachel Reeves got up to speak, there was a furious rally outside Downing Street as over 1,000 disabled people, trade unionists, anti-poverty and anti-war campaigners protested. Many more protests and demonstrations have taken place across the country.

It is vital to also oppose the Labour government's use of the budget to directly fund increased investment in the war industries, especially for interference in and support for wars in other countries such as Palestine and Ukraine. These measures are not to defend the peace and security of Britain and Europe but for Britain to participate in escalating NATO's proxy war in Ukraine and to continue to play a warmongering role in interfering in Eastern Europe, West Asia and Africa as well as other areas of the world. The measures are also in support of and arming the Israeli genocide against the Palestinians and to participate in the bombing of Yemen, all of which must be condemned and opposed.

Rachel Reeves tries to pass over Britain's role by claiming that Ukraine and Russia and the Middle East and elsewhere are "our continent" and that this is to "secure Britain's future". The British government's role in funding war and attacking the welfare of the people in the name or providing "working people with security" and "national renewal" is opposed to the renewal of society and on the contrary will lead to, and is hell bent on, Britain's destruction.

The government's latest attacks on the most vulnerable in society must continue to be opposed. Britain's escalation of war and the sending of its armies, air force and navy to get involved in Europe, or West Asia and elsewhere must continue to be opposed. The opposition must be stepped up by the working class to win over people as they fight to defend the rights and claims of all the people and oppose the youth being sent to die in the wars of the ruling class in other countries.

Fight for the Alternative!

It is the well-being of all the members of the polity, not just the rich, whose interests must determine the solutions to a broken economy. The necessity is not for the government's "national renewal" but for the democratic renewal of society that is pro-social and anti-war and that gives rise to people's empowerment with the modern democratic personality. The aim is to make sure that the people, not ruling elites, set the direction for the economy, and take the path of ending the power and privileges of ruling elites. The way forward lies in fighting for political renewal, for modern arrangements which empower the people, not those with power and privilege, and in preparing the conditions to establish an Anti-War Government in Britain.

This is the alternative. It is an alternative which puts human persons at the centre of the solution of the problems which face them. This is the modern programme for the youth and all of the working class and people.

Note
1. Spring Statement 2025 speech as delivered by Chancellor Rachel Reeves.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/spring-statement-2025-speech

The Pembrokeshire Anti-Radar Campaign (PARC) has gained national attention as it opposes the installation of military radar systems in Pembrokeshire, Wales. The campaign is determined to prevent a proposed US-linked radar installation in Pembrokeshire, the Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability (DARC). PARC Against DARC is spearheading opposition to the project at the former RAF Brawdy base.

Supporters of the campaign argue that the installation of 27 radar dishes on the St Davids peninsula - an area known for its scenic beauty and tourism industry - would cause irreparable damage to the landscape and place Pembrokeshire at the centre of future global military conflicts. They also point out that the proposed system would support military priorities under the AUKUS treaty, giving the United States greater control over space-based assets.

Concerns have also been raised about the long-term implications for UK foreign policy, national security, and the future role of Wales in international defence infrastructure. DARC Against PARC also points out that hosting such a major facility could compromise the UK's commitment to peaceful space exploration and weaken local democratic oversight.

Speaking to The Pembrokeshire Herald, Plaid Cymru MP Liz Saville Roberts said: "At a time when the United States is becoming a less reliable defence partner, we must question whether we want to further entangle Wales in US foreign policy through DARC and the AUKUS Treaty. The Ministry of Defence must also address local residents' concerns regarding high levels of radio-frequency signals."

A House of Commons Early Day Motion (EDM) tabled by the Plaid MP highlighted concerns about the visual and ecological impact of the proposed radar array, potential health risks from radio-frequency emissions, and its implications for international law under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. The EDM also warns of the potential for increased space debris and the militarisation of space, concluding with a call for the UK Government to withdraw the planning application for the site in Pembrokeshire - or any alternative location in the UK.

The Pembrokeshire Herald reported that PARC Against DARC have stepped up their efforts by launching a UK-wide lobbying campaign targeting all 650 Members of Parliament. The move is intended to raise awareness across Britain of the project's potential impact and encourage political support for its cancellation. The campaign is also calling on local MP Henry Tufnell to clarify his position on the radar proposal, which they describe as "deeply unpopular and destabilising."

Campaigners say that, despite repeated outreach, Preseli Pembrokeshire MP Henry Tufnell has not made any public comment on the DARC proposal. A spokesperson for PARC Against DARC said: "We, and many members of the public, have contacted Henry Tufnell MP on numerous occasions. We invited him to table this EDM and have not even received a reply. There is a growing sense of a political vacuum in West Wales, where our elected representatives are simply refusing to speak out on hugely important issues."

PARC Against DARC says that public engagement has reached unprecedented levels, with over 17,000 people signing a petition and more than 40,000 leaflets distributed locally. The group has also been featured in over 100 media articles and held several well-attended public meetings.

A spokesperson for the group said: "With support growing across party lines both in Cardiff Bay and Westminster, the momentum is now unstoppable. We are urging everyone concerned about this project to contact their MPs and MSs [Members of the Senedd]. This campaign is not just about Pembrokeshire - it's about the future of our country's landscape, safety and sovereignty."

The campaign also points to the fact that a similar US radar proposal in the 1990s for the same site was ultimately abandoned after facing significant public and political opposition. Workers' Weekly calls on everyone to take a stand in supporting this campaign against militarism and for a just and peaceful outcome with the people's voice being heard and their participation in decision-making respected.

Visit the PARC Against DARC website and sign the petition at: https://www.parcagainstdarc.com/

A Research Briefing of the House of Commons Library by Louisa Brooke-Holland was published on February 25, 2025. It aims, it says, to give a broad overview of the major ongoing operational commitments of the UK's armed forces in 2025. Extracts from the briefing follow for reference, in the context of the Prime Minister's recent warmongering claim that together with France it would lead a "coalition of the willing" to deploy military forces in Ukraine against Russia, involving 31 countries, and the British government's ongoing commitment to the aggressive NATO alliance, and its history of military intervention globally:

On February 16, 2025, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the UK is "ready and willing to contribute to security guarantees to Ukraine by putting our own troops on the ground if necessary".

MPs and defence experts have questioned the UK's capacity to provide such a force given existing operational demands, issues with the recruitment and retention of personnel, the cost of maintaining current equipment and buying new capabilities.

[...]

The Ministry of Defence explains that [the] armed forces have several core tasks, which include:

Protect the UK, its Crown Dependencies, and its Overseas Territories, and contribute to the collective deterrence and defence of the Euro-Atlantic area: be able to deter and, if necessary, defend against and defeat, attacks on the UK homeland (including our Overseas Territories) and our NATO allies. The government has already said NATO and the Euro-Atlantic will remain the focus of its defence policy in the forthcoming strategic defence review, which it says will be published in spring 2025.

[...]

At a strategic level, [the core task of the armed forces] takes the form of the submarine-based nuclear deterrent, which the Ministry of Defence has explained allows the UK to "take the actions required to maintain regional and global security and stability free from the threat of nuclear coercion".

The Royal Navy and Royal Air Force (RAF) maintain several military assets tasked with monitoring and defending UK territorial waters and airspace, including escort ships to shadow vessels through or near territorial waters, and maritime patrol aircraft to help find and track submarine movements. In an unusual move, a Royal Navy submarine surfaced close to what the Defence Secretary described as a Russian spy ship as a deterrent measure in November 2024.

The RAF's quick reaction alert force of Typhoon combat aircraft responds to unidentified aircraft nearing or in UK airspace. They launched 11 times in financial year 2023-24, four of which were in response to Russian aircraft approaching UK airspace.

The UK is part of NATO's integrated air and missile defence (NATO IAMD) system. It is comprised of a network of national and NATO systems including sensors and early warning radar, command and control assets and weapon systems. The UK also has air defence assets of its own which can be deployed for localised defence of the UK mainland, should it be required.

The armed forces are responsible for protecting the UK's 14 Overseas Territories. Some also function as strategic locations for UK military action and bases, including Cyprus, Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands.

Euro-Atlantic and NATO

Successive governments have committed to prioritising the Euro-Atlantic region.

The Ministry of Defence explained its contribution to European security in written evidence to the Defence Select Committee in January 2025 for its inquiry into the UK's contribution to European scrutiny. The MOD says the UK "offers almost all of its armed forces to NATO" as part of its contribution to NATO's warfighting plans. [...]

The UK is leading the land component of the new Allied Reaction Force until mid-2025. The ARF is intended to offer a "strategic, high-readiness, force-generated, multi-domain and multinational capability that can be deployed and employed immediately".

The MOD says the UK contributes to every NATO operation and mission. The MOD does not regularly publish a list of contributions to missions. The armed forces participated in on average 14 NATO-led operational deployments each year between 2015 and 2023. Current commitments include:

An army battalion in Estonia and a squadron in Poland as part of NATO's forward land forces.

Typhoon aircraft to support air policing missions in the Baltics and in eastern NATO countries.

Contributing to maritime missions, including Operation Sea Guardian in the Mediterranean, and surveillance aircraft to Baltic Sentry.

Staff members of KFOR, the NATO-led mission in Kosovo.

Outside of NATO, the UK leads the Joint Expeditionary Force, a coalition of ten northern European countries to train and exercise together. The army also regularly contributes troops, including reserve forces, to the UN peacekeeping force in Cyprus.

Middle East

There are three major ongoing operations in the wider Middle East region:

Operation Kipion, a long-standing maritime security mission in the Arabian/Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean. The aim of the operation is to promote peace and stability in the region, as well as ensuring the safe flow of oil and international trade.

Operation Shader, the UK's contribution to the global campaign against Daesh in Iraq and Syria since 2014. In September 2024 the Iraqi and US Government announced that the Coalition against Islamic State would end its military mission in Iraq by September 2025. Following that announcement, the UK Government has announced its own new bilateral defence agreement with Iraq. The NATO training mission is also expected to continue to support Iraqi security forces.

Operation Prosperity Guardian, a US-led coalition to support freedom of navigation in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, begun in late 2023 in response to Yemeni-based Houthi attacks on international shipping. [...]

Africa and Indo-Pacific

The armed forces have previously deployed with UN peacekeeping operations in Africa, most recently in Mali and South Sudan.

The army maintains several permanent training bases overseas, including in Kenya, Belize, Canada and Brunei.

The Royal Navy permanently deploys five offshore patrol vessels to specific geographic regions on a long-term basis. These cover the Mediterranean and Africa's west coast, the South Atlantic, the Caribbean and the Indo-Pacific.

Future commitments

The Ministry of Defence does not comment on future operations "as to do so could, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness, or security of the Armed Forces". However, the MOD has announced some major deployments. A significant portion of the Royal Navy's available vessels will be involved in the carrier strike group's forthcoming deployment to the Indo-Pacific in 2025.

Looking further ahead, the UK has indicated plans to send an attack submarine to Australia from 2026 onwards as part of a wider agreement to develop its next generation of attack submarines with Australia and the US (AUKUS).

The full report can be seen and downloaded here: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10204/

Birmingham bin strike - Photo: NSSN

Rubbish has built up in the streets across Birmingham as refuse collectors escalate their actions, with the commissioner-led Birmingham City Council and its private agency, Job & Talent, deliberately replacing permanent workers with temporary agency staff in an attempt to break strikes.

Almost 400 workers have been striking since January with intermittent walkouts. The workers escalated their action into an indefinite strike on March 11, over the council's scrapping of the Waste Recycling and Collection Officer (WRCO) role, causing pay cuts of up to £8,000 to 150 workers. Birmingham City Council declared a "major incident" on March 31 to in response to the mountains of uncollected waste, but this has in no way addressed the concerns of the bin workers. The health risk to the public is escalating and fuelling general public discontent. The effects of the action underscore the necessity for investment in such basic services, without which there is simply chaos.

On March 31, Unite the union issued a statement in which it said that Birmingham council is prepared to throw much more cash down the drain with its disgraceful strike-breaking major incident plans than it would cost to resolve the dispute. This is an attempt to crush any opposition to attacks on jobs, pay and conditions that are set to extend to other workers across the council.

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: "Birmingham council could easily resolve this dispute but instead it seems hellbent on imposing its plan of demotions and pay cuts at all costs. If that involves spending far more than it would cost to resolve the strike fairly, they don't seem to care. We can only conclude that this massive pay cut for hundreds of refuse workers is only the start and this is really about stamping out any future opposition to its plans to unleash austerity 2.0 on Birmingham. I urge Birmingham council to rethink this disastrous strategy and to find a way forward that doesn't involve workers and communities having to pay for politicians' mistakes. Unite will never accept attacks on our members and we will continue to defend Birmingham's refuse workforce to the hilt."

Unite points out that the council is already spending vast amounts extra on expensive agency worker fees within the waste service. Pay and conditions for refuse workers, most earning little more than the minimum wage, had already been cut before the current dispute, including £1,000 in shift pay. Around 150 workers are directly impacted with pay cuts of up to £8,000 by the removal of the WRCO role, which also ends fair pay progression for hundreds of others. Last week, the council confirmed that pay for HGV lorry drivers in the waste service is also at risk of being cut. Throughout the dispute, the council has repeatedly smeared the behaviour of workers on peaceful picket lines and given artificially low figures about the number of workers who are impacted.

Unite said that it believes the government is also being misled by the council and the commissioners regarding the dispute, following a statement on the major incident announcement by minister of state for local government, Jim McMahon, in parliament on March 31. This is reflected by the fact that the council announced its major incident plans, which it had not informed Unite about, while it was in official negotiations with the union.

The dispute has underlined that people need control over their livelihoods and living conditions. The fight of the bin workers for their claims and their rights is also directed towards this end. Enough is Enough! Stand with the striking bin workers!

(National Shop Stewards Network; Unite)

Note
For previous coverage, see: https://www.rcpbml.org.uk/wwie-25/ww25-07/ww25-07-06.htm

The Cuban Embassy in the UK reports:

A Havana billboard reads: Twelve hours of blockade is equal in cost to all the insulin needed to treat the country's 64,000 patients for a year

"On March 15, the Cuban spirit of solidarity and resilience was celebrated at the Cuba Vive Medical Appeal event held at Warwick. Organised by the Cuba Solidarity Campaign and supported by the National Education Union (NEU), the evening brought together friends of Cuba to raise funds for vital medical supplies, while enjoying a vibrant night of music and shared purpose.

"The Cuban Embassy was proudly represented by Press Counsellor Orestes Martínez García, who conveyed the Ambassador's gratitude to the organizers and participants for their unwavering support.

"In his remarks, Martínez highlighted the unjust challenges Cuba continues to face due to the US blockade, which severely restricts access to essential medicines and medical equipment. He also condemned the absurd inclusion of Cuba on the US State Sponsors of Terrorism list, emphasising that Cuba's only "crime" is defending its sovereignty and sending doctors to the world's most vulnerable regions, not weapons or war.

"The event featured inspiring speeches, including from NEU representatives and members of the 2024 NEU Delegation to Cuba, who shared their experiences witnessing the resilience of the Cuban people firsthand.

"The Cuban Embassy extends its deepest appreciation to the Cuba Solidarity Campaign, the NEU, and all those who contributed to the success of this event."

On April 4, the Cuban Embassy in the UK reported that a vital shipment of medical supplies had arrived in Cuba, thanks to the Cuba Solidarity Campaign, the Cuba Vive appeal, and trade unions such as Unison, and the NEU. These supplies will support Cuban hospitals and healthcare workers.

Cuba Vive is a medical aid appeal to send life-saving medicines, surgical and other vital medical aid to Cuba. Cuba's commitment to health as a human right has helped the country achieve world-renowned health services for its people despite 62 years of the illegal US blockade.

Vive Cuba and its Indomitable People! End the Illegal US Blockade!

On March 20, US Forces Korea command announced in a press release that they had "successfully" concluded along "with the Republic of Korea (ROK)" their annual war exercises "Freedom Shield 2025" on the borders of the Democratic Republic of Korea (DPRK). The statement said these war exercises were "conducted from March 10-20, 2025", yet already on March 6 it was reported that in preparations for "Freedom Shield 2025" two South Korean Air Force KF-16 jets, where the US occupier of South Korea holds the prerogative of command, "negligently dropped a total of eight Mark-82 bombs on a south Korean civilian-populated area in Pocheon, Gyeonggi Province, injuring 43 people". This was 16 miles from the DPRK border using the same bombs that the US is sending to Israel for its genocide in Gaza. While Freedom Shield 25 has concluded, the Korean Marine Exercises Program (KMEP) under the leadership of the US forces Korea will continue throughout the year.

Workers' Weekly is publishing extracts from an interview made with Dr Dermot Hudson, Chair of the Korean Friendship Association UK (KFA UK), posted on March 30 by the YouTube channel Flame of Liberation. In this interview Dermot spoke about these US exercises and his thoughts on what the return of Trump means for the DPRK.

Exercise "Freedom Shield 2025"

Asked to comment on these exercises Dermot Hudson said: "I can talk about that in fact Freedom Shield 2025 has actually been held for a slightly longer period than last year. It is also on a bigger scale than last year. Trump did not cancel the exercise and, as I'm sure you're aware, Trump is someone who can actually move very fast. He can sign presidential orders at the drop of a hat. He is not like sleepy Joe [Joe Biden - Ed.] and he can react to situations very quickly, but he chose not to do so. I think this is proof, if any proof was really needed, that he is continuing the hostile policy of US imperialism towards the DPRK."

Dr Dermot Hudson, Chair of the Korean Friendship Association UK

Dr Hudson went on to speak about the dangerous threat and scale that the exercises held for the DPRK and how they were changing under Trump's diktat as US President. He said: "Now these exercises are very big in scale and I think that one thing that hasn't been mentioned so far is that it's not just the US, or South Korea, but it's actually nations from the so-called 'United Nations Command' [2] in South Korea. Now that was originally the United Nations Command in Korea but it's really a US-controlled entity. And for many years it was described as a body that had no real meaning and its function was ceremonial, or even people didn't realise it existed. But it is basically composed of those satellite countries of the US, like Britain, France, Philippines, Thailand, Colombia, just to name a few countries. Also, Australia and New Zealand not to forget those that all fought against the DPRK with the US imperialists in the last Korean War - the Fatherland Liberation War. These were part of the so-called UN forces which were basically a coalition that was cooked up by the US because they were able to railroad a resolution through the UN Security Council in the absence of the Soviet delegate."

Dermot Hudson continued: "So this structure was created, the UN command, and for many years it wasn't very obviously active but in the last 15 years the US has been moving to revive it and this is quite sinister because what they're really trying to do is to create a multinational force to fight against the DPRK. The aim is to intervene against the DPRK like they did in Iraq and also like is being vaguely talked about in creating another 'Coalition of the Willing' to fight against Russia in Ukraine and the Donbass. So you've also got this entity that exists on the Korean Peninsula."

Dermot continued: "With 'Freedom Shield 2025' you've actually got more than a dozen armed forces involved in it, so it's quite big in scale and quite deep in scope. And of course as I've always argued and we've always said in KFA UK to people who say, 'oh but it's just an exercise, or it doesn't matter, or they always do this', well, the point of holding military exercises which cost money - and of course with the Trump regime and his acolyte Musk where finance has become a very important subject, you know they are not holding these exercises for fun. They are being held with real reason and the whole point of such exercises is to rehearse for war, to practise the invasion of the DPRK and regime change. Last year these exercises included the so-called decapitation strikes aiming at taking out the supreme leadership of the DPRK as well as strikes on its nuclear facilities. So these so-called exercises are very real aggression."

Protests against the US and internal crisis in South Korea

9th Plenum of the Workers' Party of Korea, Pyongyang, Korea

Asked to comment on the huge protests against the government and against the US in South Korea, Dr Hudson talked about the fact that "South Korea is in a state of very deep internal crisis, an incredibly deep internal crisis. This of course makes the situation even more dangerous because they could try to launch a war to distract people from the very deep contradictions in South Korea."

He continued: "These contradictions were ripped open last December when the puppet ruler Yoon Suk Yeol took it upon himself to declare martial law and this to a lot of people came out of the blue - it was a shock." Dermot Hudson went on to explain that this fight between the liberals [represented by the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) - Ed.] and the conservatives [led by the People Power Party (PPP) - Ed.] was not that one faction was democratic and the other was fascist, and that the liberals had stopped martial law. They both "supported US imperialism in South Korea", he said, and the liberals had never "repealed a very repressive law that makes it illegal to support the DPRK, or to advocate communism, and this was kept in force. And of course very significantly they never demanded that the US troops leave South Korea which they could have done but they did not."

Dermot Hudson commented on why Yoon was immediately forced to reverse his decision to impose martial law. He said that "the real reason was that he (Yoon) hadn't asked his real masters the US whether he could declare martial law" and that "Trump might take a different line but I think Biden thought that there would be no advantage of having an old fascist regime in South Korea that would actually end up creating more problems for the US than it would solve and in fact it would have ruined the very carefully crafted and carefully engineered image of South Korea that's been built up by the US and corporate propaganda machine over, many years of the image of prosperity of a liberal democracy." For this reason, he said, "Biden was I think more than happy to throw Yoon under a bus and after reversing martial law Yoon found himself impeached and even arrested."

Dr Hudson said that "with regard to the mass protests, I think that they reflect the anger of the South Korean people against US domination" and "that the South Korean people don't want another sort of military fascist regime in power in South Korea. I think those big protests reflect that." He later emphasised: "With the situation in South Korea there's a tremendous amount of turmoil there were just seeing massive demonstrations in South Korea with I believe it was two million people protesting. There is huge opposition to Yoon and what he represents and moving the country back into a more openly authoritarian direction but there's also major opposition to the US occupation."

What Does the Return of Trump Mean for Korea

Countering US-ROK military provocation

Asked about the significance of Trump's previous meeting in his first US Presidency with Kim Jong Un, Workers' Party of Korea General Secretary, and now Trump's new intentions towards the DPRK in his second term of office, Dermot Hudson started by saying that, on the first meetings with Trump, "I think it's one that ultimately only future historians will be able to answer. I think there's a number of interpretations. One of them was that it was just simply a photo-op for Trump, showmanship and that he was trying to make himself look very important and big - that I am the first US President to actually meet a DPRK leader. However, I think there are other explanations. I think it was very much the case that he was trying to trick the DPRK, to lure them into unilateral disarmament." He continued, "In fact, I believe in second summit the demand was put forward for the DPRK to dismantle all its nukes and intercontinental ballistic missiles, and not just that but basically to open up and reform and introduce the capitalist system in into the DPRK. I think Trump thought he could sell capitalism to the DPRK. That is how I see it."

"Another factor," he said, "is that he could have also been trying to use this to frighten the South Korean puppets into paying more for the US forces in South Korea, because what a lot of people don't realise is South Korea is not only occupied by US troops, but they pay for the privilege of having US troops on their soil. They pay, I think about $1 billion a year. One of the things when Trump became President for the first time is he thought South Korea did not pay enough, that they should be paying more for it, and he could have been seeing this as a way of panicking the South Korean puppets into paying more. I think what would have gone through their heads - and in fact a lot of people's heads - was will the US troops be pulled out of South Korea, will South Korea itself be thrown under a bus by the US because of the negotiations with the DPRK. So I think that's one aspect to it."

"Then of course," Dr Hudson said, "there is the theory that the Deep State sabotaged Trump's engagement with the DPRK and that peace with the DPRK was blocked. But I think it was more likely that Trump himself did not have an honest purpose in engaging with the DPRK and I think you can actually see today with his stance on a lot of different questions, for instance the negotiations with Russia, that he is quite capable himself of putting forward very stringent and drastic demands on a negotiating partner. I think Bolton [John Bolton, former national security advisor - Ed.] was just there to reinforce it so I don't see Trump's engagement with the DPRK as particularly sincere. I think the main change he brought about was to cancel the bigger exercises in South Korea, but as he said at the time they are expensive. In fact the smaller scale exercises continued. It wasn't the case that all exercises were halted, and of course US troops remained in South Korea" and the provocations of the South Korean puppets continued and were stepped up Dermot Hudson concluded.

Speaking about the present, Dr Hudson said that as far as regarding relations with Korea is concerned, Trump "no longer has people like Bolton and other people that he claims he doesn't like. His government is full of loyalists and we're seeing that he's going forward with these aggressive military operations, war games, against the DPRK. So I think we'll see this in the next four years of his Presidency, but I think it's pretty obvious what his intentions are with regard to all these things."

Censorship imposed on KFA UK and life in the DPRK

Dermot was asked about the broad attack on freedom of speech and the censorship of the KFA UK and other pro-DPRK channels with no accountability from the big corporations carrying out this censorship.

Dermot pointed out that KFA UK was using sources from the DPRK "and then suddenly on March 4, with no warning, no consultation, no negotiation, a thing flashed up on my phone that 'your channel has been disabled because you're breaking the US sanctions policy'. Now it wasn't clearly explained what sanctions we had broken. We only can assume we've apparently broken the US sanctions against the DPRK simply by showing content from DPRK media. We weren't actually importing DPRK goods, or trying to promote them on the channel! It was simply because we used videos from the DPRK. This was enough to get the channel deleted and it was never clearly explained which sanctions we had broken. As far as I'm concerned, US sanctions have no legal force in the UK. US sanctions stop at the US border they don't apply to third countries and not only had the YouTube channel been deleted, but the whole Google accounts associated with the channel had been deleted, so we lost an email address that we'd us ed for emailing members. I'd been writing a book that was on the Google docs attached to the account. So two months of work was wiped out by Google and there was no appeal system. I tried to contact Google about five times but there was no reply but a total brick wall."

"We had similar experiences with Facebook a few years ago when they very suddenly without warning, or consultation actually deleted the old KFA UK Facebook page which had built up a big following of about 12,000 followers probably making it the biggest English language pro-DPRK Facebook page. It was just wiped out overnight again we lost videos and pictures that we had on it and you know there are patterns to this because the propaganda in a number of countries against the DPRK is hotting up again particularly in the UK and some European countries."

Dermot continued: "They are trying to censor pro-DPRK voices in order to create a false narrative to create an impression that there is no support for the DPRK. They don't want people seeing actual videos from the DPRK - anything that is actually factual. A lot of the videos on KFA UK channel weren't militantly ideological. They were just showing the reality of the life in the DPRK. A few years ago there were several different YouTube channels run by DPRK citizens. One featured a girl university student who would just give very factual reports about life in Pyongyang, what was happening. Then there was a young girl at primary school. She also had videos about her life - again nothing very ideological, just showing family life - and YouTube deleted those."

In conclusion, Dr Dermot Hudson thanked the host of the channel interviewing him and for their solidarity drawing attention to the issue of the censorship of KFA UK. Dermot said he still had his own YouTube channel but that they may start another KFA UK YouTube channel and or re-activate a channel on Rumble. He said that KFA UK can easily be found via their website, Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter, and that they also have a KFA UK channel on Telegram. [3]

Notes
1. What Does the Return of Trump Mean for Korea? - Dermot Hudson KFA-UK,
The Flame of Liberation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQk6J83y_KY
2. Other Participating Nations:
Besides the US and ROK, Freedom Shield involves service members from other United Nations Command (UNC) Member States, including Australia, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, France, Greece, Italy, New Zealand, the Philippines, Thailand, and Great Britain.
3. KFA UK website:https://www.kfauk.com/news/
KFA UK Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kfauk1/
KFA UK on Telegram: https://t.me/s/kfa_uk
KFA UK on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/UKKoreanFriendshipAssociation/
KFA UK on X: https://x.com/Korea_Friend_UK