Engage with progress through technology and trade!

2nd Edition My business involves assisting foreign companies with trade and investment in Russia . So I have a more than passing interest in Russia’s international relations. At times, because my office is in the provincial city of Saratov rather than in Moscow, I have perspectives on Russia that do not seem available to journalists and embassy staff based in the major cities. I’m writing about the attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Julia because the British media seems to have closed far too quickly on a single line of enquiry that is very convenient for the government. The attempted Skripal assassination The following link to John Helmer’s Dances with Bears sums up most of the evidence made public by the police. Since the Anti-Terrorist unit took over the investigation from the local police force and Scotland Yard no new evidence has been revealed. So, let’s discuss this in terms of the detective story triad of means, opportunity and motive. Motive

There is a more up to date, better version of this at the UK Houses of Parliament. https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/12422/html/ This analysis is aimed at businesses considering what opportunities are available beyond the EU following Brexit. It uses the gravity model of trade to show that the potential of Russia as a trade partner beyond the EU is second only to the US. It shows that the UK already tends to trade above potential with English speaking countries. It trades well below potential with Russia, Indonesia and Argentina. The shortfall with Russia is such that meeting average performance is worth more than any deal in Asia. The Gravity Model of Trade ( http://www.nber.org/papers/w19285 ) is one of the more robust models in economics. It is based on the observation that levels of trade between countries depend on the size of the economies and the inverse square of the distance between them. Double the distance between a pair of countries and the potential for

There are only two "benefits" from Brexit that might be concrete rather than flag waving vapourware about "sovereignty" without power. One is changing the source of unskilled immigrants from Eastern Europe back to the Commonwealth which will be addressed in another blog. The other benefit might be cheap food. After two major wars where political survival depended on convoys of food crossing the ocean, British farmers have been heavily subsidised. The Common Agricultural Policy of the EU replaced earlier forms of subsidy and now the average UK subsidy is about the same as the average UK farm's net income (link at bottom). Senior Leavers from the Tories and UKIP have promised to maintain these subsidies (so much for £350m to the NHS anyway). However, there two other forms of protection for farmers. Tariffs and regulations. Tariffs are far more significant. There are tariffs against imported food to protect EU farmers from low cost foreign products. Althoug

Surely the obvious choice for the UK's international partnerships should be countries of the British Commonwealth. Some are settled by British people with as near identical ties of culture and law as can be imagined. Many others have inherited legal and business practices and the English language from the days of Empire. Commonwealth countries more or less by definition, have more positive than negative attitudes to the UK. Only the French have something similar. The Spanish, Portugese and Dutch have no such thing. The Russian experience to try to create something similar through various measures has had very partial success. The British Empire was largely about trade, not conquest and tribute. Most conflict took place as a struggle for power between local elites when the British were withdrawing. We have fought and died together in the same causes. Until 1968, we had total freedom of movement for Commonwealth citizens. There are ties of shared blood sacrifice between Britain

This is a work in progress. There will be additions and alterations. What is this list about? English historians usually do not write the histories of the other members of the UK as if they were separate entities and, a few nods to Scotland aside, the progress they make is ignored. One field that suffers is the role of Wales in the industrial revolution and beyond. Wales took perhaps the earliest part in the industrial revolution. The physical evidence of prior prosperity is there to see for example, in the big medieval ironworks in South Wales built by Cistercian monks. The copper industry was already active on an industrial by the 17th C both around Swansea Bay and in North Wales. In the late 18th C the iron industry exploded upon the world especially around Merthyr Tydfil. The world's first passenger railway and steam locomotive were from Wales as was the precision engineering to make the steam engines. This early activity led to invention and innovation of world significance.

When serving my apprenticeship, I was the Young Liberal representative on the Keep Rugby in Europe campaign in 1975 for the first European referendum. We discussed every issue discussed in 2016 except for immigration, then seen as a Commonwealth issue. Although the formal vote was about trade, Peace was a significant part of the discussion. so was the end of the nation state. It is material to note that the generations that actually fought in the two World Wars helped to provide a 2:1 majority for Europe. They were largely gone in 2016. So, it is not true to claim that 1975 was about a trade deal. It is one of the many lies promoted by the UKIP Leavers in particular. The end of the nation state was discussed at serious length. Enoch Powell himself was gracious enough to acknowledge the point as the results came in. (Link at end). UKIP campaigners lied directly about the content of the 1975 referendum campaign saying that it was exclusively about the Common Market. For many voters I m