Starmer may be right not to wade into Trump’s war in Iran – but has proven to be a prisoner of his own MPs
TThe words of Dame Emily Thornberry, Labor chair of the House of Commons foreign affairs committee, urging Keir Starmer not to lose heart on Iran following Donald Trump’s repeated personal attacks, were illuminating.
he said Independent: “We must stick to what we believe is right.”
It was notable that the Prime Minister spoke of a collective “we” rather than himself. The key message is that this is a government that does not rely on the judgment of an individual leader but acts on the collective opinion of MPs.
His words highlighted, perhaps unwittingly, that Starmer’s problem is that the more Labor MPs tell him he is doing the right thing, the more he becomes like his prisoners.
Rapidly evolving events in Iran, Trump’s Epic Rage and attacks on the UK’s sovereign bases in Cyprus have brought the prime minister’s decision-making and motivations into the brightest light.
It also exposed his own tenuous position in No 10, where conspirators rallying around rivals seeking to replace him underlined how the fight to save his premiership had overshadowed everything he had done.
After all, this year we celebrate the 375th anniversary of the publication of the work of British political philosopher Thomas Hobbes. Leviathan, here he summarized the cornerstone of the administration: “Defense of the nation is the first duty of the government.”
If a prime minister cannot make these decisions clearly without causing trouble to others, it means he cannot govern.
This was inadvertently illuminated when Starmer posted a video of his week on social media on Friday dealing with incredibly difficult war-related decisions.
The video was intended to provide justification for Trump’s cautious middle-ground approach to the conflict: initially refusing to participate or allowing the US to use UK bases, then authorizing defensive action and giving Trump permission to use RAF bases for this purpose.
He expressed his interpretation of international law, Britain’s national interests and a reflection on recent history regarding the Iraq War.
His statement in the House of Commons on Monday last week showed huge anger and disdain from the Conservatives and Reform right, but underlined the almost universal approval he has received from Labor MPs who have never united so enthusiastically behind him at almost any other time during his premiership.
In fact, such was the warmth and praise for his leadership and principles that you would have believed that talk of a new leader had perhaps become more fanciful after the local and devolved elections in May.
However, leaks from the national security meeting later emerged. Audience, This essentially suggested that Sir Keir wanted to allow Trump to launch attacks on Iran using bases at Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford. Worse still, the potential leadership candidate appears to be stopped by just four cabinet ministers, including Ed Miliband.
Given his politically precarious situation, Starmer would not survive the resignations of four cabinet ministers and the inevitable backlash from the Labor backbenchers.
If this had happened, we might already be in a leadership race.
This sheds a completely different light on the Prime Minister’s actions, making him appear once again to be a prisoner of his own party after his very attempt to reform benefits, scrap pensioners’ winter fuel payments or not lift the two-child benefit cap.
In fact, the two child benefit ceiling situations are an interesting parallel. After being forced to call it quits by his supporters, Sir Keir was running around to see the benefits of the move as if it had been his idea.
Apparently, Trump is doing the same to avoid supporting Trump on Iran, even though he secretly wants to.
In this case, it helps Tony Blair, the author of the Iraq debacle that clouded Labour’s foreign policy, to be so critical of the decision-making process regarding Iran. Unfortunately, the report also underlines that Blair had the power to persuade MPs in 2003 and survive the two cabinet resignations of Robin Cook and Clare Short.
Starmer does not have this power. And for a prime minister who won a huge majority just 20 months ago, this is already a painful situation. This is similar to the situation in which Rishi Sunak found himself in an embittered, divided Conservative Party, but that was after a dozen years of government.
The Iran war has at least left Labor MPs making a decision on Starmer’s future until after local and devolved elections in May; At this point his fate may be decided. The only question may be whether his replacement is another prisoner of Labor MPs or someone who can break free from the shackles and become leader again.
