The Spectator

The world does not hold its breath during US-Russia summits as it did in the days of Kennedy and Khrushchev or Reagan and Gorbachev. But they are still important moments of (mostly choreographed) dialogue. Without Moscow’s co-operation, Barack Obama will find it far harder to make progress in Afghanistan or in his diplomatic strategy to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons programme. On top of this, Russia still has the capacity to create huge problems in Eastern Europe and Central Asia for the United States. It must be prevented from becoming a more chauvinist and aggressive power — otherwise Washington will be forced to choose between conflict and breaking its promises to the fledging democracies on Russia’s borders.

Here are some of the posts made on Spectator.co.uk over the past week: Matthew d'Ancona reports on a poetic evening at 22 Old Queen Street. Fraser Nelson reveals why the Tories' Californian strategy should be taken seriously, and marks a welcome rejection of assisted suicide. James Forsyth notes the waning authority of the Iranian regime, and says that the Tories must be prepared to launch a reverse march through the institututions. Peter Hoskin tracks the latest in the Andy Coulson story, and wonders whether Nick Clegg is out of love with the Tories. Lloyd Evans cuts through the jargon. Daniel Korski observes that there are no Brits in Europe's likely new line-up. Martin Bright highlights some Iranian solidarity. Clive Davis reveals one way to save a local newspaper.

On the Iraq inquiries Sir: Lest myths become accepted as facts, may I correct two aspects of John Kampfner’s article (‘The secret Iraq deal’, 27 June) about the Iraq Intelligence Review, which I chaired. First, a myth has grown up that the Review’s criticisms of the government were originally more trenchant but were watered down following government pressure. The facts are that, as fair procedure required, we gave those affected by our criticisms an opportunity to respond and make some verbal amendments in response to their representations. But I do not recall any instances in which these affected the substance of the criticisms.

The full audio of The Spectator’s debate on grammar schools with David Davis and Stephen Pollard speaking for them and Charles Clarke, Fiona Millar and Simon Jenkins opposing is now available online. You can listen here.

A nuclear Iran Sir: Should there be any doubt, following James Forsyth’s article (‘What to do about Iran and the bomb’, 20 June), that the Iranian government intends to build atomic weapons, it is answered by the forest of anti-aircraft weapons protecting their uranium enrichment plant at Nantaz. When in the area two weeks ago I saw battery after battery of anti-aircraft weapons, manned, every kilometre in from 25 kilometres from the plant along the route they have assumed a foreign air strike would come, and more on the exit. The plant itself is protected by an impressive paraphernalia of watch-towers, wire and berms. Peaceful atomic work does not require such protection. Nantaz symbolises the current Iranian tragedy.

Welcome to the latest CoffeeHousers' Wall. For those who haven't come across the Wall before, it's a post we put up each Monday, on which – provided your writing isn’t libellous, crammed with swearing, or offensive to common decency – you’ll be able to say whatever you like in the comments section. There is no topic, so there’s no need to stay ‘on topic’ – which means you’ll be able to debate with each other more freely and extensively. There’s also no constraint on the length of what you write – so, in effect, you can become Coffee House bloggers. Anything’s fair game – from political stories in your local paper, to chat about the latest football results.