Whisper it, but Starmer might be getting it right on Iran

At first glance, Keir Starmer’s response to Donald Trump’s war on Iran looks like a summation of everything that is wrong with his government. Instead of a clear, marketable decision, Starmer has managed to find an extraordinarily nuanced and complicated position.

The UK forbade the US from using its military bases to launch its first strikes against Iran over the weekend, largely on the basis that those first strikes had no basis in law – Donald Trump had made no attempt to get Congressional approval for the invasion, had no UN authorisation for it, and had offered no consistent public justification for his actions.

Trump has been upset by that decision. He has publicly criticised Starmer, going so far as to say he’s “no Winston Churchill” – a huge shock to everyone who thought he was. Both the Conservative Party and Reform, along with most right-wing papers, have jumped on these attacks, lambasting Starmer for not joining these initial strikes.

But rather than carve out a clear anti-war position, on Monday Keir Starmer appeared to engage in yet another u-turn: the US could, he said, now use UK bases for strikes, provided that they were against Iranian missile launch sites. The UK might also participate in those strikes.

Starmer’s decision here was grounded in international law. The first strikes by the US and Israel were illegal. Very few people are trying to argue otherwise: supporters are merely saying that this doesn’t matter, and that international law is a relic of a bygone era. But once the US and Israel have started a conflict that puts British bases, interests, allies and citizens at risk, the UK has a legal right to defend itself.

To a lawyer like Starmer, the UK’s position is entirely consistent and coherent. The danger is that to everyone else it looks completely indecisive and unprincipled. Starmer’s opponents on the left were quick to condemn him for not criticising the US’s actions in clearer terms, and for not banning the use of UK facilities entirely.

Once again, Starmer seems to be stuck in the middle, neither on one side nor the other. The difference is that this time, he may well actually be exactly where the British public are on this issue – for once, it might be the parties with the apparently clearer positions who are out of touch.

The idea of going to war with Iran is vastly unpopular with the British public, who neither support the US’s war nor want the UK to be part of it. Wars like this only get less popular over time, so the Conservatives and Reform appear to have locked themselves into a position that most voters – including many of their own – hate. Kemi Badenoch and, to an extent, Nigel Farage seem to have hurled themselves into a trap of their own making.

But similarly, the UK has bases within range of Iranian counterattack, and Iran is launching missiles in all directions – it has hit at least 12 of its neighbours so far. There is no major constituency within the British public that wants to see Keir Starmer ignore a risk to the lives of UK military personnel or civilians.

Suggested Reading

Iran, Trump and the US right’s post-modern swerve

Jay Elwes

Intercepting missiles, and striking back against the sites that launch them, is clearly essential. The UK can’t do what other countries could and opt out entirely, because we’re in the strike zone.

You can easily argue that we could have done it better. It looks outright embarrassing that we are only sending one destroyer to Cyprus, and even more so that it won’t get there for a week.

In practice, the ship was undergoing maintenance that required welding, and given that this throws up lots of sparks, weapons and ammo are unloaded from a ship when this happens. That means that the ship is having to have its repairs rushed so that its weaponry can be put back on board. It might be embarrassing that this is the ship we have nearest to being ready to go, but Keir Starmer isn’t really to blame for decades of under-investment in the UK military.

Behind the scenes, the UK had already sent anti-missile and anti-drone defences to the region, and made arrangements with allies (which appear to have worked so far) to help cover gaps in the UK’s defences against Iranian retaliation. He is sending helicopters equipped with cutting edge anti-drone technology. He seems to be doing what you’d want.

Keir Starmer has a habit of finding sludgy middle ground at a time when the public want clarity. But on this issue, it seems like Starmer might be exactly where the public is. Sometimes, as a nation, we are somewhat centrist too. Most of us didn’t want to be fully involved in this war. Few of us want to see British bases left exposed to danger. Starmer might, for once, be the man in politics who is most in touch with the public mood.

There is still plenty of time for Starmer and Labour to turn triumph into disaster. It wouldn’t be the first time. But for now – whisper it – Keir Starmer might just be getting this one right.