As I anticipated and always presumed would happen, Keir Starmer gave the USA permission to use UK bases to support its attack on Iran yesterday.
Within an hour or so, there had been a counterattack on a UK base in Cyprus.
There is no reason to think that this will end well, largely because nobody knows why it has begun, and therefore no one has any idea what the endgame will be.
The one thing that we can be sure of is that if regime change is the plan, it is unlikely to succeed, because anything really acceptable to the people of Iran is unlikely to be acceptable to the leaderships of the USA, Israel and the UK. History has already proven that.
There is, however, another obvious question to ask at this moment, and that is, why did Starmer cave in so easily when, during the day, his defence minister, John Healey, had been sitting on the fence, not least because it is widely thought that an opinion has been offered by the government Attorney General that this is an illegal war?
I think the answer is obvious. It is that Keir Starmer needs this war as badly as Netanyahu and Trump do. He will, of course, claim that the Labour Party cannot possibly consider changing its leader during a period of war, and that he must, therefore, be allowed to remain in office.
We can only sincerely hope that they see through the crude stupidity of any such appeal.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Britain changed Prime Ministers during both World Wars
The argument about not changing PM at a time of war is not a strong one. It didn’t work for Neville Chamberlain.
Given the detailed military planning that has preceded this war, the circumstances that would trigger agreement to use Fairford and Diego Garcia were identified some time ago, in the full knowledge that the triggering events would happen. So this isn’t an opportunistic move by Starmer to save his skin. He’s been working on this for quite a while. Isn’t it rather telling that so much planning can go into saving one’s skin, but none at all into delivering manifesto commitments.
Probably absolutely correct, Starmer desperately needs a war or anything extreme to keep his prestige, privilege and position. How salient could the underlying threat of Trump cutting off U.K. access to Visa and Mastercard systems be in the scheme of things. Perhaps we should be urgently escalating adopting a European wide system or a wholly U.K. one for transactions here. I’m not sure of which way would be better all round but a demented madman in US surrounded by what looks like psychopaths or sycophants is something we should be getting away from quietly and super fast. Just a thought.
Well, well . . . Sir Thirty-Four Per Cent is ramping up his campaigning for the Greens. Fine by me.
If only. A war footing would only damage the Greens’ standing. Remember how gung-ho and nationalistic our country can be when it comes to war, and how easy it will be for the media to drown out dissent. Messages of hope won’t stand up against “our brave boys doing their duty” jingoism. Perhaps a war is convenient. Remember, the only people Labour would hate losing to more than Reform is the Green Party. It would mean they had completely failed their masters. No cushy jobs for them post-government.
Yes, Starmer is the ultimate cynic and has already done Israel/USA dirty work by removing Jeremy Corbyn.
In a way the longer Starmer and Co stay in power, the bigger the reaction when it comes. Time is up for this crew, not if just when.
Great work Professor Murphy.
It depends on how long this latest illegal assault on the benighted – by the West – Middle East lasts, as Starmer is safe until after the May elections as no-one else in Labour wants to carry the can for that looming disaster. As “regime change from the air” is a novel and probably impossible concept, and Trump will undoubtedly get bored with the whole thing very quickly, it’s hard to see this lasting very long. Are there going to be American “boots on the ground” in Iran? It’s unlikely, in my view. Already the MAGA crowd are screaming betrayal; the only way out for Trump to avoid even bigger losses in the mid-term elections is to get out of this quickly, knowing it’ll be forgotten by November.
On so many points, Starmer again gets it wrong, but if he thinks this situation could save him, he overlooks the point that British history has two wartime situations when the PM was replaced – Churchill replacing Neville Chamberlain in 1940, and more pertinently, John Major replacing Margaret Thatcher in the midst of the 1st Gulf War, in November 1990.
There is a view that his efforts on the international stage stand out from the rest of his lacklustre premiership – I am being kind! – but even there he says stupid things and makes impossible commitments.
Thank you for the prompt. My letter is with my MP already. Starmer is no better than Blair who he seams to be trying to emulate.
Do we think Starmer gave permission, or was permission assumed while he said nothing.
Everywhere I go these days there are Brits who know someone who has been to Iraq or Afghanistan and not come back or came back changed and found indifference.
There is also a lot of soul searching as to ‘What was that for?’ – the pointlessness of it.
And yet here we seem to be going again. I know that we can get a bit fed up with our fellow citizens when in comes to fiscal affairs, but I think a lot Brits feel really down about the Middle East and do not understand what we are involved for – I think that they are very sceptical and I think that Starmer has no idea that this is so.
To what extent are these Trumpian assaults proxy wars on China? Iranian oil goes to China. Venezualan oil, China.
John, I guess that the inconvenience will be temperary for China vis-a-vis supply of oil. China will simply shift to buying oil from Russia and in so-doing help to finance Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.
Yes, I expect very little of consequence in that direction, since the main thrust of this is deflection or enabling profits from chaos.
The whole business about ‘not giving permission’ about 10 days ago was weird. I don’t think there was an official announcement about ‘denying permission’ – it seemed to be one of those ‘the BBC understands that’ off the record stuff. We all know that the US will use any of its British bases whenever and however it wants. We are a vassal state – they have so much leverage – political , military, intelligence , economic .
Starmer’s whole approach to Trump had been never to publicly disagree or to ‘deny permission’, so it still seems bizarre this was briefed. There was no need for either ‘the request’ or the ‘refuse’ to be made public.
The whole propaganda exercise seems to have gone askew – in the build up to the war – I’m sure it was reported that US planes had indeed used British bases en route to the Middle East, and this was during the period that ‘permission had not been given’ .
Starmer seems to now have got the worst of all worlds – being seen to be dragged into yet another US catastrophic military adventure. Presumably he thinks he has conveyed the impression that the UK is independent of the US and so can choose to go to war or not.
Richard may be right in saying Starmer thinks a war is what he needs right now. It seems that even the US public are against this war, so it could well be the same with the British public.
All Starmer has done is to push his tottering government nearer to collapse under the weight of its own internal contradictions.
“see through the crude stupidity of any such appeal.”
May. LINO wipe out. It would be nice to think no LINO MPs in either the Welsh or Scottish parliament.
Starmer: a vile cipher & US poodle, a traitor putting British lives at risk for a poltroon (tRump) and a genocidist (Net&yahoo).
LINO delenda est.
Adding, there was one PM in one European country that:
a) condemned the attack by Israel and the USA
b) prevented the USA using bases located on its territory
Spain.
Oh and the PM is a real socialist as opposed to a zionist/neo-libtard (said label applying to Starmer).
Full marks to Spain.
Unforunate typo in first sentence: “Keir Starmer gave the USA permission to use US bases…” !
Sort of.
I have edited, but both are right.
“they”???
Rank and file of the Labour Party????
I’ve not seen any evidence that Starmer thinks strategically. He just seems to do what he’s told. Mcsweeney is now gone, so I guess he just said yes without thinking it through. His actions leave us very vulnerable and I can’t see British opinion being on the side of us joining in. Are there enough Labour MPs with backbones to stand up to him? It’s all very worrying and can’t end well.
Perhaps you’re right that McSweeney might have – or would have – dissuaded Starmer from joining in on Operation Epstein Fury, but I wish the evidence for that were stronger.
It would be naive to think that removing McSweeney has removed the power structure that was behind him. Look behind McSweeney to Mandelson, Blair, and the funding source of his “think tank”, billionaire US tech oligarch (and arch Zionist) Larry Ellison.
Starmer is still the useful idiot.
I’ve no idea what Mcsweeney would have done. My point is Starmer has no plan so just allows himself to be pushed around. He is essentially a weak man who thought he wanted power.
The BBC is reporting a total of 102,000 Britons have registered their presence in the Middle East with the UK government, presumably because they want to come home as quickly as possible if there is an evacuation from the region.
Of course, many of those trapped are holidaymakers, passengers transiting through or people on business visits, but it’s also likely that many are “expats” who have chosen to make their homes in places like Dubai.
Isn’t there any irony here – these are folk who have decided to leave the UK, in many cases for tax reasons, asking the British state for help, which would involve using public, or “taxpayers” money, when their dream tax-free life suddenly falls apart?
This morning, one of France’s leading Zionists, Meyer Habib, screamed on X that there are 200,000 French in Israel and in need of help.
It was pointed out in reply that they are dual citizens who emigrated voluntarily.
Last month, Israeli tv channel reported that France has supplied the second largest contingent to the IDF. It was not mentioned that the contingent includes IDF spokesman Colonel Olivier Rafowicz and his deputy.
The colonel’s wife heads a PR firm in Paris. Its latest output is a whitewash of right wing leader Jordan Bardella.
The BBC is reporting this morning that the Iranian missiles are likely to have been fired before the prime minister made his announcement.
Maybe
That also assumes that the ‘drone attack’ came from an Iranian or similar source; those of us old enough will know such incidents are manufactured as justifications (Gulf of Tonkin, Reichstag Fire etc).
Who can honestly believe anything the BBC says nowadays. The institution is not independent and has had its day.
Harold Wilson said of not opposing the Vietnam War more strongly: “You don’t kick your creditors in the balls.”
However we feel about it, Britain is sadly dependent on the US, and realistically it’ll take a long time (decades?) to extract ourselves from that; so any PM has to play along. But if he feels it is wrong (as I hope he does), he should at least express himself to the US through appropriate channels, and even in public.
It is frustrating…
Paul
On the 11th I am giving a talk on Gertrude Bell who did a lot to set up Iraq. She had to work in an Imperial framework which made Iraq a mandate state but she did listen to the Arabs. She wrote laws to protect their antiquities (she was an archaeologist as well ) and set up schools for girls along side the administration work. One of her biographers concluded ‘Possibly the only English politician the Arabs remember with any degree of affection.’
She, like T E Lawrence, was against the Balfour Declaration.
My take on the history since then is that the Western politicians do not listen to the people who know the region. 1956 Suez expedition. 2003 Invasion of Iraq. In February 2024 eight hundred officials ( former ambassadors etc) in the EU, UK and US signed a statement saying the Israeli response to Oct 7th was disproportionate, their countries were in danger of complicity in war crimes and they were not being listened to. I have seen no discussion of this.
And coincidentally sorting stuff in the attic came across an old Independent newspaper of March 2003 with an article by Robert Fisk Headline For centuries we have been “liberating” the Middle East. Why do we never learn?’
Simple understandings of the Middle East don’t usually hold up when subjected to facts. It is complicated.
But in 1911, observing the Crusader castles. Gertrude wrote ‘The West can always conquer. It can never hold.’
As a generalisation I think it still holds water.
Thanks
And that conclusion is so apt.
Over the past forty years, Arabists have been weeded out of the Foreign Office and State Department. You may wish to refer to what Oliver Miles said about the Iraq war enquiry.
There are Jewish community groups in Whitehall and the local government of big cities that act as the eyes and ears of the Israeli embassy and influence appointments.
The new head of MI6 was appointed over three more senior colleagues, all with field experience, and Barbara Woodward, ambassador to the UN and a China specialist. Blaise Metreveli headed the technical team, Q in the Bond series, and cooperation with US and Israeli tech.
The former ambassador to the UN and head of MI6, Sir John Sawers, and new cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, have links to Palantir.
I should have said thank you.
I would expect that the logic for Starmer (and to be fair, the rest of Europe and Canada, disappointingly) is that while they cannot get involved in initial combat activities, as this is clearly an illegal war, they can offer some support. That support will gradually evolve into base usage, shooting down missiles and, I worry, future combat operations.
I think the calculation is that if they show the US they remain trusted allies, the US will possibly increase support Ukraine and Europe against the Russian threat.
This is beyond stupid. They never learn. If this Iran adventure somehow works out in Trump’s favour (which I think is unlikely but not impossible) then he’ll be right back to playing footsie with Putin. If it doesn’t, we’re all in for a tough time, and the smart play was to completely distance yourself from it.
Our current leaders are moral cowards, but worse, not even smart pragmatists.
Despite all the meticulous military preparations and scenario planning; the statements from the Iran regime about reprisals; the extensive knowledge about Iran’s capabilities, and the insights of US, UK and Israeli Intelligence organisations, UK citizens weren’t warned against travel to the UAE until 28 February. And now there are tens of thousands stranded. How could this be? How on Earth could this be? Too busy looking after Number One?
And in other news, half a million people discover their travel insurance doesn’t cover acts of war.
🙂
I see the US is framing their attack on Iran as self defence on the basis, they claim, that Iran has been at war with them for 47 years. So, they are playing the victim game just like Israel.
DARVO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARVO
It’s perhaps worth reminding ourselves that Starmer has been consistently pro-Israel. In that light, supporting joint Israeli-US operations makes perfect sense.
How fortunate for the rich economic migrants now turned refugees – sorry – returning expats – as they look for people smugglers – sorry – private jet brokers – who can organise passage in small boats- sorry – small jets – that having paid up to $350,000 pp for flights out of Riyadh, they are not hindered by closed land borders or UK Border Patrol as they make the 10hr road journey to Riyadh airport.
But good news, those refugees unable to leave Dubai are being put up in hotels just like in the UK…
Meanwhile, back in Blighty, such woke nonsense is not tolerated, as Shabana Mahmood has made clear because of British values or some such…
We breathlessly await Isobel Oakeshott’s next Telegraph report from the refugee -sorry – (white) expat front line.
Apologies for the rant – it helps stop me screaming.
Understood
So Trump is criticising Britain for not participating in the war.
Yet Britain is allowing the US Air Force use US bases in Britain.
Roughly 15% of the value of every F-35 built globally consists of British-made components.
The Mk 45 Naval Gun found on almost every U.S. Navy destroyer is manufactured by BAE Systems.
It reminds me of the person who provides the getaway car, who is considered as guilty as the perpetrator.
But bullies never see it that way.
Much to agree with.