Chris Mason: The UK's position on Iran is clear but will the US listen?

The prime minister has spoken to President Trump in the aftermath of America's attacks on Iran.But, in the end, the call beforehand demanding a yes or no answer didn't come.That is not to say it might not in the days and weeks to come.The British government is making it known that while it was told in advance what Washington was about to do, it didn't take part and wasn't asked to.And so there wasn't a call from President Trump asking the prime minister whether the UK would be involved, for instance via authorising US warplanes to use the UK military base at on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.Having repeatedly pressed publicly for "de-escalation" as Sir Keir Starmer puts it, and questions seemingly being raised privately within government about the legality of getting involved, saying yes to a request for help from the White House might have been difficult.But saying no would have been difficult too, after months of assiduous effort put into developing a good relationship with President Trump.Washington acting alone and choosing to send its planes direct from America meant that massive, binary decision from Sir Keir wasn't needed.But, depending if, how and when Iran chooses to retaliate, some of these trade-offs could soon return.
For now, though, how should the UK's approach be assessed?In short, the government wills the ends America is pursuing, but is conspicuously not endorsing the means.In other words, it doesn't want a nuclear armed Iran.But neither is it saying it supports Washington's means of trying to remove that outcome - bombing Tehran's nuclear facilities.The Conservatives see this as equivocation and "moral cowardice".On Friday, the Foreign Secretary David Lammy, alongside France, Germany and the European Union, met Iran's Foreign Minister in Geneva, Switzerland - but President Trump was publicly dismissive of these efforts.A day or so later, and the attacks began.As they did, the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke to Lammy by phone.They had met a few days earlier in Washington.The foreign secretary has again spoken to his Iranian opposite number Abbas Araghchi.The UK is encouraging Iran to talk directly to the US.Iran has been making it clear for days that it won't talk to America while it is being hit by the Israelis.And Lammy has also spoken to the Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar, pressing the case for a diplomatic solution and to the foreign ministers of Egypt and Cyprus - and then spoke again to Rubio.The UK position, for now at least, is clear - the government believes a diplomatic solution from here on in is the best way to secure an Iran free of nuclear weapons into the long term.But America chose not to listen to this argument from London, Paris, Berlin and elsewhere before its air strikes.The question is whether it will now they have happened.We can expect a minister, probably the foreign secretary, to face questions on all this in the Commons on Monday afternoon.And on Tuesday the prime minister, President Trump and plenty of other Western leaders will gather in the Netherlands for the annual summit of the Nato military alliance. They will have plenty to discuss.
Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Independent

33 minutes ago

• The Independent

‘Morning Joe' stands up for Trump on Iran strikes and says even Hillary Clinton would have bombed nuke sites

MSNBC star Joe Scarborough came to the defense of his one-time pal Donald Trump on Monday morning, insisting that the president's decision to drop over a dozen bunker-busting bombs on Iran's fortified nuclear facilities would have been made by his predecessors — and Trump's 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton. On Saturday, the United States joined Israel's military campaign against Iran that is aimed at destroying the Middle Eastern adversary's nuclear program, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claiming Tehran was just weeks away from developing a nuclear bomb — an assertion he's made for decades now. 'Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!' Trump boasted on Truth Social about 'Operation Midnight Hammer,' though experts say satellite imagery reveals the nation's nuclear program is 'far from destroyed.' Meanwhile, after Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth both insisted on Sunday that America wasn't looking for a protracted war that would include toppling Iran's government, the president sang a different tune just hours later. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump posted on his social media platform on Sunday afternoon. While a new poll shows Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of Trump's decision to bomb Iran and worry that it will make the US less safe, Scarborough – an early and vocal cheerleader of the Iraq War – said on Monday's broadcast of Morning Joe that any other president would have handled the situation the same as Trump. 'The president had no good options,' Scarborough declared. 'What would Monday look like if he hadn't have moved, if Iran wasn't already at 60 percent, and an ability to create nuclear weapons in a short matter of time, right? … I'm not championing either side of this.' Turning to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, the Morning Joe host asserted that the president had enough buy-in from the international community to take military action against Iran, adding that other Republican and Democratic commanders-in-chief would have felt obliged to do the same thing. 'I ask you, how difficult would it have been for any president to not take that shot if they knew that Iran was even being attacked by the United Nations?' Scarborough wondered. 'I find it hard to believe that Bush 41, Bush 43, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, you know, go down the list, any president wouldn't have felt compelled to take that strike.' Agreeing with the host, Ignatius said that Trump 'inherited' the war plans with Iran from his predecessors, adding that this would have been what they considered if they found 'diplomacy wasn't working.' At the same time, he said Trump's 'choices were debased at the moment' and the president 'had to make a decision.'Elsewhere in the show, Scarborough also invoked former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to observe that the president had only 'difficult choices' in front of him when it came to Iran. 'Henry Kissinger famously said that when you're sitting in the White House and trying to make a decision on foreign policy, the possibility of war, you're never handed a good decision and a bad decision. You're handed two very difficult choices,' he stated. 'And the president made that choice.' While Scarborough and his wife/co-host Mika Brzezinski have been loud critics of the president for years now, that wasn't always the case. Considering him a longtime personal friend, the couple provided Trump a hefty boost in the nascent days of his 2016 presidential campaign, giving the then-reality TV star free rein of their program while promoting his candidacy. Though there would be a bitter split between the Morning Joe hosts and Trump prior to his winning the 2016 election, which would include the president peddling wild conspiracy theories about Scarborough killing an intern, the icy relationship may have begun to thaw in recent months. The couple traveled to Mar-a-Lago for an off-the-record huddle with Trump after his electoral victory in November, prompting viewers to briefly boycott Morning Joe over the perceived 'kissing the ring' trip. As for Scarborough's own foreign policy views, the former GOP congressman was a fervent supporter of invading Iraq over the George W. Bush administration's claims that the country was developing weapons of mass destruction. Though he has tried over the years to selectively criticize other cheerleaders of that war without pointing that finger at himself, Scarborough spent the early months of the Iraq War raging at news outlets, media figures and politicians he felt were too negative and critical about the US-led invasion. 'These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass,' he ranted in April 2003 to then-MSNBC colleague Michael Savage. 'Isn't it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views?!'

The Guardian

40 minutes ago

• The Guardian

Zelenskyy calls Russia, Iran and North Korea a ‘coalition of murderers'

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has described Russia, Iran and North Korea as a 'coalition of murderers' during a visit to London in which he held talks with Keir Starmer on defence cooperation and how to put further pressure on Moscow. Ukraine's president arrived in the UK on Monday, hours after the Kremlin launched another big air raid on Kyiv. It involved 352 drones – half of them were Iranian-designed Shaheds - and North Korean ballistic missiles in what Zelenskyy called 'a completely cynical strike'. At least 10 people were killed and five civilian apartment blocks badly damaged. 'A large number of drones and missiles were shot down by our air defenders — but not all,' Zelenskyy posted on social media. 'Everyone in countries neighbouring Russia, Iran, and North Korea should be thinking carefully about whether they could protect lives if this coalition of murderers persists and continues spreading their terror.' Zelenskyy has supported Donald Trump's missile strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and has accused Tehran of complicity in Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, now in its fourth year. Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons arsenal in the 1990s in exchange for US, British and Russian security guarantees. These failed, however, to prevent Vladimir Putin's 2022 attack. Zelenskyy's latest trip to the UK was to discuss how to compel Russia to stop its war, Ukrainian officials said. His previous visit in March followed a disastrous meeting in the Oval Office in which Trump accused him of 'gambling with world war three' and the US vice-president, JD Vance, berated him for supposed ingratitude. Monday's discussions encompassed sanctions and the Trump administration, which has so far refused to punish Russia and has practically ended US weapons deliveries to Kyiv. Ukraine has been attempting to keep Washington onside diplomatically, despite its apparent pivot to Moscow. 'We will be negotiating new and powerful steps to increase pressure on Russia for this war and to put an end to the strikes,' Zelenskyy said of his London trip. As well as talks with Starmer, he met King Charles at Windsor castle and visited Ukrainian soldiers receiving military training in the UK. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Zelenskyy is likely to travel to this week's two-day Nato summit in The Hague and is scheduled to meet the alliance's secretary general, Mark Rutte. It is unclear if he will have a face-to-face meeting with Trump, who is expected to arrive on Tuesday and push for greater defence spending from Nato member states. Since Trump's return to the White House in January, Russia has dramatically stepped up its aerial attacks on Ukraine. It has refused Zelenskyy's offer of a 30-day ceasefire and continues to target civilians. Monday's strikes hit a residential area, hospitals and sports infrastructure. The most severe damage was in Shevchenkivskyi district, where a section of a five-storey apartment building collapsed. Kyiv's mayor, Vitali Klitschko, said six people had been killed in the district. Ten others, including a pregnant woman, were rescued from a nearby high-rise that also sustained heavy damage. Oleksii Pozychaniuk, 29, who lives in the building next to the one struck, said he heard the whistle of a rocket approaching and 'froze in terror' before feeling the impact. 'Windows blew out, glass was flying everywhere,' he told the Associated Press. 'We barely made it downstairs with my child. Everything here was on fire.'

Reuters

41 minutes ago

• Reuters

Bank of England's Bailey defends bond programme after Reform UK criticism

LONDON, June 23 (Reuters) - Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey defended the central bank's programme of government bond purchases and sales which has come under fire from some politicians for its cost. In a letter to Richard Tice, deputy leader of the Reform UK party which is led by former Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage, Bailey said claims that the programme was more expensive than those run by other central banks did not tell the full story. Britain's government issued more long-term debt than other countries at a time when the BoE's bond-buying - or quantitative easing - was keeping borrowing costs low, giving the country a longer-lasting benefit, Bailey said. "Put simply, the cash flow cost of QE/QT is not therefore what it seems, and the outcome in these terms will be better," he said in the letter published on Monday. Reform - which is leading Britain's more established political parties in opinion polls - has said the government could save as much as 40 billion pounds ($53.6 billion) a year by stopping payment of interest to banks on reserves held at the BoE. Most of those reserves were created as a byproduct of the central bank's bond purchases which began in 2009 and reached a peak of almost 900 billion pounds in holdings in 2021. Since then, the BoE has sold much of its bond portfolio - known as quantitative tightening - and the programme is due to incur losses for the public finances because of a rise in interest rates and a subsequent fall in the value of the bonds. In his letter, Bailey said the bond purchases shielded Britain's economy from a string of economic shocks over the past 16 years. "It is easy to forget the severe problems we faced with these shocks," he said. "Although the counterfactual is unknowable with any precision, most estimates indicate that QE provided very significant support to the UK economy, protecting both jobs and tax revenues." Bailey said that ceasing paying interest on reserves was tantamount to increasing taxes on banks and would lead to lower interest payments for savers or higher interest rates for borrowers. He also disputed Reform's view that British banks were making excess profits. "Interest paid on reserves is not free money for the banks, not least as most of it is paid on to customers in the form of interest on their deposits," Bailey said.