Trump plays the Gulf card: President's deals in the Middle East should be a wake-up call for Britain, says ALEX BRUMMER
President Trump's trip to the Arabian Gulf is a curious mixture of commercial deals, diplomacy and promotion of family interests.
Dollar bills have been written all over it, with $600billion of orders from Saudi Arabia and more billions to be added in Qatar and the UAE.
The immediate biggest beneficiaries are investors in AI chip leader Nvidia. A deal with Saudi start-up Humain saw Nvidia stock rocket, valuing the company at more than $3trillion.
The rapprochement with Riyadh and for that matter the whole Gulf region will be tracked closely in London.
Trump's success with the 'Abraham Accords' in his first term, when Dubai and other Gulf entities signed peace and business deals with Israel, has not blunted his ambition.
Despite disruption from Israel's battle with Hamas in Gaza, the White House believes it can eventually bring the modernising Saudi leader Mohammed bin Salman within the tent.
Britain has been the Western democracy closest to Saudi Arabia, supported by royal visits. BAE Systems has been operating in the region for 60 years.
It employs 7,000 people on the ground, now mainly local, charged with keeping UK-made Typhoons and Tornado fighter jets in the air. Plans for further, more advanced fighter sales are in abeyance.
America is making defence inroads with the sale of air-to-air missiles and precision-guided weapons. In the past the UK has been a dominant defence supplier to Gulf states fearful of being seen as compromised by closeness to the US.
Qatar is seeking a deal for F-15 fighters and the UAE hopes Trump will reverse a decision by Joe Biden to halt the sale of F-35s, components of which are made in the UK.
Trump's tilt to the region is a shot across the bows. It ought to be a signal to Keir Starmer, Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Labour that Britain needs to intensify its defence diplomacy in the Middle East or influence, exports and jobs are at risk.
Smoke signal
Imperial Brands is generally shunned by UK investors fearful of involvement in the nicotine industry.
Yet the tobacco group, known for its Winston and Gauloises brands, has proved a terrific investment since German chief executive Stefan Bomhard took the helm.
His unexpected departure, at the end of the year, brought shares down with a bump. Under him, market share has risen in key markets, despite price increases.
There have been improved returns for 'next generation' products – vapes and heated tobacco.
Some £9.8billion has been returned to shareholders and market value is up from £14.4billion to £22billion.
Bomhard is seeking the quieter life after leading Inchcape and Imperial, having been mentioned as a potential chief executive for Reckitt or Unilever.
Instead, he is opting for small town life in Bavaria. He will be succeeded by finance chief Lukas Paravicini.
Change at the top is often welcomed. At Imps it foments anxiety.
Premium shadow
Aviva's all-British £3.7billion takeover of motor insurer Direct Line has caught the eye of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The reference is not likely to cause sleepless night for chief executive Amanda Blanc.
Together, the motor share of the merged company, at around 20 per cent, will still be smaller than rival Admiral.
Generally, the CMA doesn't ask for structural changes unless a 25 per cent threshold is reached.
Car insurance is highly competitive, with 17 firms on the most-used price comparison sites. Nevertheless, a market powered by two behemoths would make it easier to drive surging premiums higher.
Comeback kids
Former GSK boss Andrew Witty is making an unrehearsed exit from America's medical giant United Health.
His departure comes amid turmoil as it grapples with government investigations, surging medical costs and the public reaction to the murder of the boss of insurance offshoot Brian Thompson in Manhattan.
Former chief Stephen Hemsley takes back the reins in what is becoming a Wall Street habit following in the steps of Starbucks, Walt Disney and P&G.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Telegraph
British citizens among 9,000 immigrants to be sent to Guantanamo
At least 9,000 undocumented immigrants, including British citizens, are to be sent to Guantanamo Bay detention camp, according to reports in the US. The first transfers are due to start within days, as the Trump administration ramps up its campaign to deport illegal immigrants. In January, Donald Trump announced plans to house 30,000 migrants in the notorious camp on Cuba, which was previously used as a military prison to house combatants captured during George W Bush's 'war on terror' following the September 11 attacks on the US. According to documents seen by Politico, the plan is to hold the migrants at the camp for a short period before deporting them back to their home country. Guantanamo currently holds roughly 500 people. This move represents a further toughening of the administration's immigration policy, which has seen masked snatch squads lifting suspected illegal immigrants off the streets. The official reason for detaining migrants at Guantanamo is to free up space in migrant detention centres in the US itself, especially with the White House setting a target of 3,000 arrests a day. However, critics say the administration believes using Guantanamo will serve as a deterrent for new illegal immigrants and encourage those already in the country to self-deport. An estimated 800 Europeans are on the list of potential Guantanamo detainees, with the Washington Post saying they include British and French citizens. It is a move which has reportedly alarmed European diplomats, given that they have previously co-operated in the repatriation of their own citizens. 'The message is to shock and horrify people, to upset people,' one State Department official told Politico. In Washington, a court is considering a plea to outlaw the use of Guantanamo to house migrants, with the American Civil Liberties Union claiming they are being held in dire conditions in a rodent-infested camp, where detainees are denied a weekly change of clothing and adequate food. In its writ, the ACLU accused the administration of using Guantanamo 'to frighten immigrants, deter future migration, induce self-deportation, and coerce people in detention to give up claims against removal and accept deportation elsewhere'. This was denied by the US Justice Department, which told the court that Guantanamo is being used as a temporary staging post. Previously, nine British citizens were held at Guantanamo, of which five were repatriated in March 2004. A further nine who had residency status in the UK, but not citizenship, were also held at the camp.
Powys County Times
33 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
US marines deployed to LA have not yet responded to immigration protests
US marines that deployed to Los Angeles on orders from President Donald Trump have not yet been called to respond to the city's immigration protests and are there only to protect federal officials and property, a commander said. The 700 marines and another 2,000 US National Guard troops were sent to LA on Monday, escalating a military presence that local officials and governor Gavin Newsom do not want and that the police chief says makes it harder to handle the protests safely. Marine Corps Gen Eric Smith told a budget hearing on Capitol Hill that the battalion has not yet been sent to any protests. The marines were trained for crowd control but have no arrest authority and are there to protect government property and personnel, he said. It came as Mr Newsom filed an emergency request in federal court on Tuesday to block the Trump administration from using the National Guard and Marines to assist with immigration raids in Los Angeles. The governor's request said it was in response to a change in orders for the Guard. The Guard members were originally deployed to protect federal buildings. It was not clear if the change in mission had begun and Mr Newsom's office did not immediately say how the state was notified about the change. Mr Trump doubled the number of Guard troops being deployed soon after the first wave of 2,000 began arriving on Sunday following days of protests driven by anger over the President's enforcement of immigration laws that critics say are breaking apart migrant families. The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor. This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward… — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 9, 2025 Mr Trump left open the possibility of invoking the Insurrection Act, which authorises the president to deploy military forces inside the US to suppress rebellion or domestic violence or to enforce the law in certain situations. It is one of the most extreme emergency powers available to a US president. 'If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it. We'll see,' he said on Tuesday from the Oval Office. 'But I can tell you last night was terrible, and the night before that was terrible.' The demonstrations continued on Monday but were far less raucous, with thousands of people peacefully attending a rally at City Hall and hundreds more protesting outside a federal complex that includes a detention centre where some immigrants are being held following workplace raids across the city. The protests in Los Angeles, a city of four million people, have largely been centred in several blocks of downtown and a few other spots. At daybreak on Tuesday, guard troops were stationed outside the detention centre, but there was no sign of US marines. Obscene slogans were directed at Mr Trump and federal law enforcement remained scrawled across several buildings. At the Walt Disney Concert Hall, workers were busy washing away graffiti on Tuesday morning. In nearby Santa Ana, armoured vehicles blocked a road leading to federal immigration and government offices. Workers swept up plastic bottles and broken glass near buildings sprayed with graffiti. Mr Trump has described Los Angeles in dire terms that Mayor Karen Bass and Mr Newsom say are nowhere close to the truth. They say he is putting public safety at risk by adding military personnel even though police say they do not need the help. Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell said in a statement that he was confident in the police department's ability to handle large-scale demonstrations and that the Marines' arrival without coordinating with the police department would present a 'significant logistical and operational challenge'. Mr Newsom called the deployments reckless and 'disrespectful to our troops' in a post on the social platform X. 'This isn't about public safety,' the governor said. 'It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego.' The protests began on Friday after federal immigration authorities arrested more than 40 people across Los Angeles and continued over the weekend as crowds blocked a major road and set self-driving cars on fire. Police responded with tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades. Demonstrations spread on Monday to other cities nationwide, including San Francisco and Santa Ana, California, as well as Dallas and Austin, Texas. Authorities in Austin appeared to use chemical irritants to disperse a crowd that gathered near the state Capitol. The Trump Administration's escalation and provocation in California inflames tensions and incites violence. Now, the President of the United States said he would arrest a sitting American governor just for disagreeing with these actions. This is a hallmark of authoritarianism… — Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) June 9, 2025 Texas governor Greg Abbott posted on social media that more than a dozen protesters were arrested. The Pentagon said deploying the National Guard and Marines costs 134 million dollars (£98.8 million). That figure emerged just after US defence secretary Pete Hegseth engaged in a into a testy back-and-forth about the costs during a congressional hearing. Mr Hegseth said the department has a budget increase and the money to cover the costs, and he defended Mr Trump's decision to send the troops, saying they are needed to protect federal agents doing their jobs. Meanwhile, Democratic members of California's congressional delegation on Tuesday accused the President of creating a 'manufactured crisis' with his orders to send in troops. Nancy Pelosi contrasted Trump's actions with his handling of the January 6 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol when law enforcement officers were beaten. 'We begged the president of the United States to send in the National Guard. He would not do it,' Ms Pelosi said. California's attorney general Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit over the use of National Guard troops following the first deployment, telling reporters that Mr Trump had 'trampled' the state's sovereignty. He sought a court order declaring Mr Trump's use of the Guard unlawful and asking for a restraining order to halt the deployment. The President said the city would have been 'completely obliterated' if he had not deployed the Guard. US officials said the marines were needed to protect federal buildings and personnel, including immigration agents. A convoy of buses with blacked-out windows and escorted by sheriff's vehicles arrived overnight at a Navy facility just south of LA. Despite their presence, there has been limited engagement so far between the Guard and protesters while local law enforcement implements crowd control. On Tuesday Mr Trump visited Fort Bragg in North Carolina to mark the 250th anniversary of the US Army and addressed the troops in a speech. 'We will liberate Los Angeles and make it free, clean and safe again,' he said. Mr Trump said that Los Angeles would burn to the ground if he had not sent in military forces. A Trump administration order restored the name of the special operations forces base back to Fort Bragg. It was part of an effort to turn back a Biden administration move in 2023 to remove base names that honoured Confederate leaders. The North Carolina base had been renamed Fort Liberty.
NBC News
37 minutes ago
- NBC News
Trump administration ends DHS program designed to thwart terror attacks
The Trump administration is planning to eliminate a Department of Homeland Security terrorism prevention program that former government officials and experts say has helped thwart attacks in the United States. The DHS budget submitted to Congress last month cancels the $18 million terrorism prevention grant program, saying it 'does not align with DHS priorities.' 'That line should be quoted after every future mass casualty event in this country,' said a current senior DHS official who declined to be named, citing fear of being fired. Former DHS officials say they believe the modest program, which costs about 4% of the military's marching band budget, has stopped violent attacks. It is designed to prevent a type of terrorism that has become increasingly common: lone-wolf attacks by individuals who are not members of an organized group. Examples include the recent firebomb attack in Boulder, Colorado, on demonstrators marching in support of Israeli hostages; the murder of a young couple outside the Capitol Jewish Museum; the killing of 14 people in a New Year's attack in New Orleans; and the shooting of a United Health Care executive in Manhattan. 'When people say, 'You can't prove prevention doesn't work,' I ask them, 'Do you go to the doctor? Do you have a smoke detector in your home?' Then you believe in prevention,' said Bill Braniff, a Biden administration appointee who oversaw the program as the director of DHS's Center for Prevention Partnerships and Programs. John Cohen, a former senior DHS counterterrorism official in the Obama and Biden administrations, said the threat is growing. 'Why was DHS created? To help the nation be better prepared to stop terrorist attacks following Sept. 11,' he said. 'We have had since January a number of school shootings and four terrorist incidents — all by people who fit those behavioral profiles.' The White House and DHS did not respond to requests for comment. The program, formally known as the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention Grant Program, recently drew scrutiny when ProPublica published an article about Braniff's successor, a 22-year-old former Trump campaign worker with no relevant experience. But the larger issue, experts say, is that the program is being zeroed out. They call that a short-sighted decision in an era when alienated loners are attempting mass violence attacks at a greater frequency than ever. 'Do I know for certain that we helped to avert school shootings and mass casualty attacks? I am 99% sure that we helped to avert a number of them,' said Braniff, who now heads the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab at American University. Interest in and demand for the program is high and spans the country. In 2024, DHS reported receiving 178 eligible applications from 47 U.S. states and territories requesting $98.9 million for $18 million in available grants. The money funds state and local programs designed to help identify people who are radicalizing and potentially violent. They included school-based threat assessment teams, mental health teams and programs designed to inoculate children against extremist messages on social media. Specific examples are difficult to cite, in part because many cases are confidential, and in part because it's difficult to draw a straight line between a government program and a thwarted attack. But DHS documents cite a 2022 case as an example of how they believe the program helped stop a school shooting. After an outreach campaign at Palm Beach State College in Florida urging students to be vigilant about online threats of violence, a student anonymously reported to authorities about online posts threatening a mass shooting. Among the posts, according to court records, were threats to commit a 'massacre,' and an inquiry, 'who's selling an AR-15?' Authorities arrested and charged a young man, who ultimately was sentenced to probation and also was the subject of a risk protection order, records show. 'This is not the time to be ending that office,' said Cohen, the former senior DHS counterterrorism official. 'This is the time to be expanding activities that are designed to detect emerging threats."
