“HE’S bluffing until he isn’t.”

Those were the scarcely reassuring words of the former British ambassador to Washington, Kim Darroch, discussing the dangers of Russian President Putin’s possible response to British missiles being fired into Russian territory.

Yet doing just that is still the preference of the Keir Starmer government and the purpose of the Prime Minister’s visit to Washington to confer with President Joe Biden last week.

The mere fact of the trip was revealing in itself. Britain is supplying Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine for use in its war with Russia.

Ukraine wants to fire those missiles at targets within Russia itself. Starmer says how they are used should be up to the Kiev government.

Yet still he is unprepared to give the go-ahead without approval from Washington, even though these are not US munitions being used.

That exposes that this is a war being run by the US, with its own judgements the determining factor in any decision, and that Starmer is unwilling to act without a green light from those controlling the conflict.

It also reveals the subservience of the new government to Washington. The idea that a minor difference over licences for arms exports to Israel betokens a turn towards an independent foreign policy is entirely unrealistic.

Far from being eager to use Brexit as a stepping stone towards an autonomous role on the world stage, Starmer aligns firmly with those who sought all along to use Britain’s departure from the European Union to intensify subordination to Washington.

Moreover, where there are differences of emphasis, Starmer is on the wrong side. He appears even more belligerent towards Russia than the Biden administration thinks is wise.

After all, if Putin’s talk about treating the firing of Nato missiles into Russia as an act of war is not just bluster, and menaces Britain as a result, it will be the US that will have to try to pull Starmer’s chestnuts out of the fire.

And the Democrats are locked in a tight election race with Donald Trump and his running mate JD Vance, who state that they will work to bring the conflict in Ukraine to a speedy end if elected.

True or not, it makes the war an election issue, one which Biden and Kamala Harris will not want to see further inflamed before polling day, given that sending stupendous amount of military and financial assistance to Kiev is far from popular.

Darroch’s words are the wisest. “We really don’t want to escalate this,” he told the Financial Times.

Let Starmer take heed. He is leading the British people into the firing line while prolonging a war which cries out for a diplomatic solution.

It’s official: Brits prefer communism

NEITHER socialist revolution nor the advent of fascism have ever been a matter of opinion polling, as opposed to class power.

Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that a YouGov poll shows British voters vastly prefer communism over fascism, if that is what the choice comes down to — as in the end it may do.

The young strongly favour the communist option, Greens, Labour voters and Lib Dems overwhelmingly so, once “don’t knows” are discounted.

Even Tory voters slightly prefer the idea of each contributing according to their capacity while receiving on the basis of need to “the open, terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinist and most imperialist elements of finance capital,” in the words of the Communist International’s landmark definition of fascism.

Put like that, who wouldn’t? One is embodied in the principles of the NHS, the other in setting fire to mosques and asylum centres. The British public aren’t fools.