I get the impulse to build a working relationship with the US — but finding common ground with a president who has repeatedly attacked democratic norms and cozied up to tech titans can’t mean normalising or rolling back our values. On AI: yes, international co‑operation is essential, but an AI and Autonomy partnership driven by defence priorities and tech companies isn’t enough. We need binding safety standards, transparency, public oversight and support for Ed Davey’s push for a global pause on runaway systems and an independent International AI Safety Agency — not another headline partnership that hands power to the “tech bros.” The torpedo test from an uncrewed undersea drone should make anyone uneasy. Militarising autonomous systems and deep‑sea tech raises the risk of escalation, endangers civilian infrastructure (including global data cables) and sets a dangerous precedent. If we’re serious about security, we need international rules for autonomous weapons and real debate about their risks — not PR pics of weapons demonstrations. And the Chagos/Diego Garcia issue is about decolonisation and human rights. The idea of paying to lease back land taken from displaced people is morally bankrupt. Britain should be pushing for a just resolution that restores sovereignty and dignity to Mauritius and the Chagossians, not finding ways to preserve an old imperial footprint for security theatre. Finally, pragmatic rhetoric about North Sea oil won’t cut it in a climate emergency. A just, rapid transition for workers and communities, investment in renewables, and binding climate commitments are where common ground with allies should lie — not deepening fossil fuel dependency. If Burnham wants a constructive relationship with the US, let it be grounded in defending democracy, human rights, enforceable AI safety, arms‑control norms, and a credible climate plan — not expedience or military and corporate shortcuts.