Winston Collinge 🌻 🇺🇦

Member of the National Trust & RNLI. Fully 'woke' British.

[David Henig 🇺🇦 @DavidHenigUK]

The tangled webs of the modern globalisation that ensure a permanent UK-EU negotiation. I'm hearing from both sides that there are possible ways forward on steel, but as I've said many times before, that UK lobbying is regarded as very poor. https://t.co/lqfbkFlpSv

[Nicholas Drummond @nicholadrummond]

Another great soundbite from the late, great Sir Alex Younger, Britain's former spymaster. A highly respected apolitical advisor who was neutral and measured in his analysis. Here he is talking about Brexit, Putin, Xi, and Trump and... the need for Europe to re-arm.

[Lord Bebo @MyLordBebo]

🇫🇮🇨🇦 Finland's Alexander Stubb proposes expansion of EU from current 27 members to 40, including Canada

"Wouldn't it be wonderful if Canada became the 28th state of the European Union, rather than the 51st state of the United States?"

He'd like to see UK, Norway, Iceland and the Western Balkans join the Union

[Mark English @EULondonMark]

Given way the EU is covered in media I understand why lots of Brits think it's all about Brussels. But actually more power lies in the member states. Not being one when the rest of Europe is inside = giving up - not taking back - control.

[Mike Galsworthy @mikegalsworthy]

Europe is starting to invest massively in its own manufacturing, defence and tech.

The UK should get right in there.

[Mykhailo Rohoza @MykhailoRohoza]

D7: A New Geopolitical Player?

Former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has proposed the creation of a new alliance of democracies — D7, the “Democratic Seven.” The proposed members are Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, and the United Kingdom.

Together, these economies generate roughly $36 trillion in GDP — about 30% of global economic output. They possess enough economic weight to resist coercion even from the world's largest powers.

D7 is envisioned not as a closed club, but as an advanced core surrounded by concentric circles of associated members and partners. Countries could participate in specific initiatives according to their interests, creating flexible coalitions through what Rasmussen calls “variable geometry.”

The idea did not emerge by accident.

The international environment is changing rapidly. An increasingly coordinated axis of authoritarian states — Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea — is becoming more visible. The war against Ukraine has highlighted this trend: North Korean ammunition and troops, Iranian drones, and Chinese technological and economic support have all contributed to Russia’s war effort.

At the same time, U.S. foreign policy is evolving. Washington increasingly acts according to immediate strategic interests rather than as the unquestioned leader of the democratic world. Global trade disputes, sanctions, protectionism, and technological competition continue to intensify.

Against this backdrop, Rasmussen argues for a flexible coalition of advanced democracies capable of jointly protecting their economic, technological, and security interests.

In effect, D7 would represent a new architecture of democratic influence that is not entirely dependent on American leadership.

What Would D7 Do?

1. Create a democratic trade alliance.
2. Coordinate protection against economic coercion.
3. Align technology policies.
4. Invest jointly in artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and space exploration.
5. Secure access to critical raw materials.
6. Develop new defense cooperation mechanisms modeled on support for Ukraine.
7. Build an alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative.

The proposal's authors openly acknowledge that D7 should be capable of functioning even without direct U.S. participation if Washington continues reducing its global leadership role. At the same time, the door would remain open. The United States could participate as an associated member in specific coalitions or eventually join the core of D7 should its political direction change.

Why Does It Matter?

The world is gradually moving away from the era of a single superpower toward a system of multiple competing geopolitical centers.

For decades, the security and prosperity of many countries were built around American leadership. Today, democracies are increasingly searching for new mechanisms to collectively defend their interests.

A particularly relevant example is the so-called “Coalition of the Willing” supporting Ukraine, initiated by the United Kingdom and France. Operating outside NATO’s traditional bureaucracy, it has demonstrated that flexible coalitions can often move faster than established international institutions.

Rasmussen proposes applying this same principle to trade, technology, investment, and geopolitics.

The Future of the Project

At present, D7 remains more of a concept than a formal organization. Yet the logic behind its emergence is highly significant.

The world is entering a period of new international blocs and coalitions. Countries are no longer aligning solely around military power but also around technology, logistics, energy, critical resources, artificial intelligence, and control of global supply chains.

If implemented, D7 could become a new center of power within the democratic world — more flexible, more technologically advanced, and more economically focused than many existing institutions.

[Andrew Hesselden @andrewhesselden]

At some point a British Prime Minister will stand up and announce a major new UK-EU agreement.

And most of the country will simply sigh with relief.

[Liz Webster @LizWebsterSBF]

Brexit delivered all pain for no gain for most.

Nigel Farage got millions from Crypto billionaire.

[Liberal Democrats @LibDems]

Our democracy is under threat. From the Kremlin to Mar-a-Lago, powerful men are trying to destroy our great country.

Our new laws would ban foreign money, block foreign ads, and stop tech giants like Elon Musk buying influence.

We need action now. Only our party is offering it.

[Scotland’s Story @80_mcswan]

If you want Baroness Michelle Mone removed from the House of Lords and to repay the £136,000,000 owed to taxpayers, please RT!

[Alex Taylor @AlexTaylorNews]

Seriously, 10 yrs after having voted to throw away its own free movement, the aggrieved articles keep coming thick and fast in the UK press↙️↘️

Working in other people's countries as if you were in your own, crossing borders freely is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 the natural state of affairs, anywhere in the world. The EU, remarkably, pools trust among its member countries and enables both of these, hassle-free

The UK media invariably presents it as "new Brexit barriers" as if the awful EU was cruelly imposing something on the poor UK. The UK benefitted from free movement, but voted to throw it away, for all of us, reverting to the normal state of affairs between countries

Stop all the victimized talk about "Brexit barriers" and "new rules" ! It's simply what happens when you leave a club which has created unique "free movement" for its members !

[Feargal Sharkey @Feargal_Sharkey]

"Andy Burnham has launched a scathing attack on 'profiteering' water companies, demanding United Utilities cancel its final dividend payment to shareholders in August."

Now there's something we could all vote for, well done @AndyBurnhamGM

Tip of the hat sir. 👏👏👏

https://t.co/mdAjIqIpPi

[Channel 4 News @Channel4News]

Economist Mariana Mazzucato says Brexit led to businesses leaving the UK, shrank market opportunities and damaged investment.

She tells The Fourcast that Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson have still not been held accountable for what she calls one of the country's biggest economic mistakes.

Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson have both denied lying to the public.

[Anthony Glees @anthonyglees @AnthonyGlees]

If CONS want more votes (& they flippin’ well should) they must ditch Brexit fanaticism & offer us closer relations to the EU. Their opportunistic espousal of Brexit shot them in the foot. All it did was validate Farage’s silly extremism & let him trounce them.

[Liz Webster @LizWebsterSBF]

🙌 👏 OMG watch Lord Spencer Livermore - Treasury Minister - the first serving minister to publicly face Brexit reality!

“Should we in due course re-enter the European Union? My personal view is that that is an inevitability. Of course the UK will re-enter the EU because it is absolutely in our national economic interest.”

He acknowledges Brexit has cost us 4–8% of GDP. Cutting a few tariffs is a drop in the ocean compared to that damage.

The reset is a start, but full rejoin is the logical destination.”

[Mark English @EULondonMark]

Whether you think the EU's entry-exit system is a) a crucial tool for security and law enforcement and/or b) causing unnecessary delays for tourists...one fact is indisputable. If we returned to the EU single market, Brits would get free movement back and EES problems would end.

[David Gibson 🇨🇦🇷🇼 @DavidGibson604]

@George2023K9 @Microinteracti1 @GaylaKilts How anyone could bankrupt a casino is beyond me. Then he did it a second time. Ho ho ho.

[Andrew Hesselden @andrewhesselden]

The EES system probably isn’t faulty. But I expect they didn’t envisage 65 million British people needing to use it when they designed it back in 2014.

Imagine the chaos that ETIAS will cause.

Is it time to @SaveFOM and restore mutual Freedom of Movement?

[David Head @DavidHeadViews]

#Brexit is for very patient British travellers.