MAY v CORBYN - WHO'S WINNING NOW ?

Nine months ago, few gave Theresa May any chance of surviving as Prime Minister for more than a few months at most. Jeremy Corbyn, having brought the Labour party close to winning June's general election, was seen as Prime Minister in waiting. What a difference 9 months can make.

Today, Theresa May is still in office and seems to have regained control of her party, as well as having made significant progress in negotiations with European bureaucrats over the arrangements to be put in place after the UK leaves the European Union. Additionally, she has now shown herself to be a strong an determined leader in her reaction to the appalling use of a nerve agent in Salisbury and has made the decision to send British armed forces into action against the barbaric regime in Syria. Mrs May now seems secure in her role for at least the next 2 to 3 years, with there being little sight of any realistic challengers from within her party.

Conversely, Jeremy Corbyn has had an increasingly difficult time. There's been all manner of infighting within his party as he has attempted to remove all of his opponents and replace them with his likeminded supporters, in a style reminiscent of the dictatorships of Russia, China, North Korea and those other left wing dictatorships of which Corbyn is such an admirer. He's been mired in accusations of anti-Semitism, both personally and within his party, and has failed so far to quell these. While Mrs May has appeared Prime Ministerial, Corbyn has prevaricated and procrastinated over the attempted murder in Salisbury and has been less than supportive of government actions both in relation to this case and in the matter of the recent attacks on Syrian chemical weapons facilities, preferring to waffle about the need to have a dialogue with Russia as if this hasn't already been tried and failed.

At this stage in a parliament, it would be expected that the main opposition party would be well ahead and the Prime Minister would have falling support, but it's not like that today. While opinion polls continue to show the Conservative and Labour parties too close to separate, Mrs May's personal ratings are rising, Corbyn's are falling; Mrs May has grown into her roll while Corbyn has surrounded himself with inexperienced, likeminded acolytes who have failed to make any real mark. Labour's 'big hitters' have almost all migrated to the back benches, distancing themselves from a leader whom they see as being extremist and unrealistic.

There will be local elections taking place on 3rd May and it will be interesting to see how the parties fare in these. Anything less than significant gains for Labour will be a failure for them and the pressure on Corbyn will mount. His popularity may already have peaked and it may well be downhill all the way from here.

TRUMP v PUTIN : WHO WILL BLINK FIRST ?

Thinking more about the events occurring in Syria, I've begun to wonder whether comparison with the Cuban missiles crisis of 1962 is wholly appropriate.

In 1962, the US President was John Kennedy, a very flawed man but not an unpredictable one; neither was he a 'one man band'. Similarly, the Russian leader, Nikita Khrushchev, was a seasoned politician who had spent many years rising through the ranks of the communist regime. Neither Kennedy nor Khrushchev was likely to make a truly rash decision and, in the end, sense prevailed and Khrushchev withdrew his missiles.

Contrasting that with today is worrying. In Donald Trump, the USA has probably the most unpredictable and arrogant President of modern times while, in Russia, Vladimir Putin is vain and arrogant as well as being a serious bully and tyrant set on re-establishing Russia as a major world power. Neither of these men will want to be seen to back down, so what will happen ?

Clearly, the Russians will respond to the West's bombing raids though their response could be diplomatic rather than military; perhaps we are in for some more diplomatic expulsions. Alternatively, might President Putin choose to launch his own assault elsewhere, maybe another threat towards Ukraine or by massing troops on the borders of the Baltic states. Whatever Putin decides to do is unlikely to reduce the current tensions and whatever he does is likely to result in more bombast from his US counterpart.

The next few days and weeks may well see the development of the most frightening scenario than has existed since 1945.

IS WORLD WAR THREE AROUND THE CORNER ?

The announcement that the USA, UK and France have launched bombing raids on targets in Syria came in the early hours of this morning. The raids were in response to chemical weapons attacks by Syrian government forces on their own civilians and came after attempts to organise an international investigation into events in Syria were vetoed by Russia at the United Nations. That this seriously increases still further the tension that exists between Russia and the Western world hardly needs to be mentioned.

Following on from the attempted murder of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury in March and the previous suspected use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government, solidly backed by Russia, matters are now escalating rapidly. Presidents Trump and Macron and Prime Minister May, supported by the EU and NATO, have clearly decided that the situation in Syria is too dire for them not to intervene, regardless of the attitude of the Russian government. Where this will lead is anyone's guess.

Way back in 1962, there was a 'stand off' between President Kennedy and the then Russian leader, Nikita Khrushchev over the location of Russian missiles in Cuba. Kennedy stood firm and the missiles were withdrawn, but not before the world came closer to a nuclear war than at any other time. The present crisis in Syria has not yet reached this level but much will depend on the reaction of the Russian President, Vladimir Putin.

Putin, who appears to have considerable public support, is the most powerful Russian leader since the bad old days of the Cold War. His control of the state seems to be total and his ruthless removal of opposition politicians has echoes of the behaviour of the likes of Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev. Putin is a vain man who became a colonel in the Russian secret police, the KGB, before the collapse of the Communist regime. After this, he quickly moved into the political sphere and has been the effective dictator of Russia since 2000; he has become increasingly bellicose and most recently has provided support to the brutal regime of President Assad in Syria. Unsurprisingly, the Russian ambassador to the US has said that the attack on its ally "will not be left without consequences".

Will Putin back down and risk losing face ? Will he really launch any form of military response against the Western states involved in the attacks ? Is it possible that the world is on the verge of an all-out war for the first time in more than 70 years ? With the Russians carrying out a nerve agent attack on the streets of Britain and supporting chemical weapons attacks in Syria while vetoing diplomatic attempts to investigate these appalling incidents, it suggests that they are determined to test the resolve of the West.

Now, the West has responded and the next move is up to Putin. Let's hope that he shows at least some semblance of sense and pulls back from the brink.