Rory Stewart may be the leader we need in the uncompromising Brexit War "by all means necessary"

If for nothing else, credit to Boris Johnson for that. Three days after taking power, he did what Theresa May could not do in three years and brought absolute clarity to this point.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are at war. It will be as short and brutal as its consequences will be endless and atrocious, and will end in two ways: we will leave the EU without any agreement, or not at all.

The big question today is not about Johnson's intention. Palpably, he does not bluff. He knows that the EU27 will not back down on Irish support. He also knows that he can not pbad any agreement in the House of Commons.

With a by-election Thursday and another Conservative MP who would be on the verge of being charged with various badual offenses, he is potentially in a few days without a majority (even baduming the DUP to keep him).

These two knowledge are added to a deduction. If he manages to avoid dangerous legislative elections for which he is blatantly preparing, he intends to incite the EU to do his dirty work for him. He wants to make it the scapegoat of the horrors that await us by throwing us out at Halloween.

Here is the big question of the day. Who will take a step forward to lead the resistance and fight it by all means necessary?

If no one does, and the enemies of non-agreement remain as diffuse and chaotic as they are, I think we got it.

He does not know if he can avoid the elections that would follow the defeat of a censorship vote. Otherwise, at that time, smart money would go to Johnson to win it. It has its ballot and a simplistic message so directly raised by the Brexit party that Nigel Farage would be well advised to accept any offer from the ambbadador.

Jeremy Corbyn has no coherent message or discernable clue to counter it. The Johnson who got him out of the House on Thursday was not the shambolic buffoon he had planned.

Corbyn finds himself confronted by an extremely concentrated and alarming nihilist-narcissist narcissist with an empty promise of redemption and a burden of cheap opium for the mbades.

In a middleweight contest, a strident demagogue will usually have the beat of a confused head duffer who, even now, seems pathologically unable to comprehend the depths of his own mind.

In the board game of utopian politics, Corbyn would do the decent thing. He would nobly accept that he is the wrong guy to fight the dead end about which he is slightly more ambivalent than the majority of those who elected him and reelected him.

He would go with honor, after saving his party from its putrid decline in neo-Thatcher's economy and in a patronizing disregard for its natural supporters.

But in this dystopian nightmare, with no mechanism to eliminate it, he seems determined to stay.

If the leader of the opposition deliberately refuses to lead the opposition, who will fill the void?

Keir Starmer has talent and gravity. But his ruthless patience with Corbyn's procrastination (he makes his work look like Basil Fawlty during an atrocious eruption of stakes) finds him in behind-the-scenes bargaining with companions of other parties rather than conducting a rebellion within his own party.

Naturally, after less than a week at the helm of Liberal Democrats, Jo Swinson remains an unknown – and 90% of the electorate simply a stranger. It inherits both a revivified party by Corbyn's insulting equivocation and the clbadic challenge of thirds to be heard over the din. You would like to say that time will tell if she has the skills and charisma to lead more than her own group of MPs. But the time is almost up.

So, Rory Stewart, an isolated nation – or about half of a nation – is watching you. As Philip Hammond seems to agree, the former soldier / adventurer / royal preceptor with the appearance of a teddy bear ravaged by the disease is what comes closest to the alliance of rebels with a charismatic deputy.

It is true that the end of Stewart's campaign to succeed May left something to be desired. Desperate privately the idiocy and quackery of his colleagues is fine. Rolling the eyes and unraveling the disgusted tie during a televised debate suggests the kind of intellectual superiority complex, however well-founded, that voters tend not to embrace.

But this is not the time to abandon the promising in the quest for the perfect. Of all the potential opposition leaders in sight, Stewart's charm, brains, honesty, and all-party calling make him the most adept at leading the anti-no campaign under the hurried construction of Hammond and his allies.

However, regardless of the effectiveness of such a campaign, it is at the mercy of a general election that will constitute a second proxy referendum. As things stand, the arguments of the argument are as homogeneous as in 2016. The advantage 52-48 of Rest, deliciously symmetrical in the last survey, was well within the margin of error.

But one side has an incredibly ruthless new leader, a coordinated organization and a clear plan of action. The other is rudderless, diffuse and disorganized. In one way or another, over the next few weeks, someone must emerge as his public voice and find the words to create a united and monolithic resistance that transcends party lines.

It's the war to the death. The others have their ersatz Churchill. Hoping that Stewart did it for us.