Iraq made Blair a pariah – Starmer risks the same with Iran
Then, as now, America was acting as virtually a rogue nation giving no thought to the different opinions of its allies.
Then, as now, the American president had a skewed vision of the situation in that part of the world and no clear idea of the forces which would be unleashed by his actions and how to restore peace.
Then, as now, Labour were in power and had demonstrated they were willing to support America in any course of action they decided upon no matter what the consequences might be.
Today those consequences look even more terrifying than they appeared when America, with support from Britain's armed forces, invaded Iraq in 2003. This time the threat of nuclear annihilation hangs more heavily in the air.
READ MORE: Casual threats of annihilation from Trump are not reality TV stunts
And this time America's president is even more unpredictable and reckless than George W Bush, even more unlikely to apply logic to any decision as to his future course of action.
Bush's justification for taking action against Iraq had nothing directly to do with the terrorist atrocity of 9/11.
There was no suggestion, far less evidence, that Iraq was in any way linked to the plane hijackings which led to the demolition of the north and south towers of the World Trade Center in New York.
America was so desperate to take action – any action – in what it had dubbed the 'global war against terror' in the aftermath of 9/11 that it alighted on the claim that Iraq had in its armoury weapons of mass destruction that posed a potential threat to the US and its allies.
There was, in fact, no evidence to back up that claim. Most of the Western world regarded Bush's claim with justified scepticism. However, Britain pledged its support.
It's important to remember that in Bush's State of the Union address in 2002, in which the president started to put together the case for action to remove Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, he railed against the so-called 'axis of evil' which included Iran as well as Iraq.
The US grudge against Iran has deep roots so it's no surprise that it could one day lead to the possibility of military action.
Americans have been easily persuaded by presidential warmongering even without any compelling evidence it was needed. Even before that State of the Union address, a survey suggested that 73% favoured military action to oust Hussein.
The government was not willing to let the small matter of there being no evidence of the existence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction deter it from waging war.
Then national security adviser Condoleezza Rice told CNN: 'The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he [Hussein] can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.'
The British people were less easily fooled, but, alas, the same cannot be said for their government at Westminster. Its Prime Minister Tony Blair ignored the millions in his country marching against the invasion of Iraq and ploughed on regardless.
There was some opposition within his own party. Robin Cook, then the leader of the Commons and a former foreign secretary, resigned from Blair's government in March 2003 over Iraq.
He said at the time: 'I can't accept collective responsibility for the decision to commit Britain now to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support.'
However, Blair brushed off the resignation and most of his ministers and Labour MPs watched in acquiescence as the invasion proceeded.
At the time, the Prime Minister was fond of telling us that if we could see the evidence that was on his desk proving that Iraq did indeed have weapons of mass destruction then we too would back his decision.
Some time after Hussein was deposed and executed, when the weapons of mass destruction theory had been well and truly dismissed, I watched Blair tell a private meeting of Scottish editors that there was at that time no further evidence of the existence of those weapons but he still supported the invasion anyway.
Today I'm still not clear what motivated Blair.
READ MORE: The facts are clear. So why won't the BBC report on Israel's nuclear weapons?
Did he really believe Iraq posed a threat to the rest of the world, despite all the evidence to the contrary? Or did he support Bush in a bid to cement the relationship between his government and Bush's Republican regime?
A Guardian column by Steve Richards queried this interpretation. He suggested that both Blair's support for the invasion and David Cameron's decision to call the Brexit referendum were the result of a lack of prime ministerial depth and experience.
Whatever the answer, history will judge. The big question now is whether Keir Starmer will duplicate Blair's blind allegiance to a US president's decision, no matter how crazy.
And secondly, will anyone in his government have the guts to advocate standing up to Donald Trump and tell him that joining Israel's bombing of Iran is not only immoral but will move the world closer to nuclear destruction?
The answer to that first question looks dangerously close to Starmer hitching his future of Trump's insistence on supporting Israel in all matters, from the unrelentingly inhumane genocide in Gaza to buying into the president's paranoia about Iran's alleged closeness to developing nuclear weapons.
That claim has already led to a split between Trump and his director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who testified in March that Iran was not building a nuclear bomb.
The president's annoyance was clear in his dismissal of her opinion this week, when he snapped 'I don't care what she said.'
Starmer said on Tuesday that Trump has said nothing to indicate he would direct US missile strikes on Iran.
Nothing that is apart from confirming on Wednesday that he has approved a plan to do just that.
He told CBS that he has not yet made a decision on whether to enact that plan. The truth is that no one, probably including the president himself, knows what Trump will do next.
Things don't look good. According to a 'senior intelligence source', the president has held off from strikes to see how Iran responds to his demands for 'unconditional surrender', which seems to translate as an abandonment of its nuclear programme.
The heat was turned up even further yesterday when Israel's defence minister said Iran's supreme leader 'can no longer be allowed to exist' after an Iranian missile attack hit a hospital.
It's hard to overestimate the damage done to Israel's claims of moral superiority in this conflict by the damage caused by its missiles hitting hospitals in Gaza. What is clear is that Israel and Iran are nowhere near a solution to their dispute and the pressure is mounting on Trump to make a decision.
Starmer has admittedly advocated further negotiations rather than American bombs but if Trump goes ahead with military action it looks more likely that Britain will support him, at the very least by allowing him to use the Diego Garcia UK military base in the Indian Ocean.
The record of Labour MPs – and particularly Labour MSPs in the Scottish Parliament – of standing up to their Prime Minister's folly on other matters is poor.
READ MORE: David Lammy heads to US as Donald Trump considers whether to strike Iran
The party's leader in Scotland, Anas Sarwar, has urged Starmer to do more for Scotland after its by-election win in Hamilton but any criticism of his performance after major U-turns on election promises has been either missing or heavily coded.
That's not going to change if he moves to back Trump's action.
Blair's support for Bush moved many former Labour supporters to ditch the party and embrace the SNP and independence because of the urgent need for Scotland to develop its own foreign policy.
That urgency has increased rather than faded. John Swinney really has to capture that renewed urgency with real passage and focus, together with an indication of a route to independence, at the SNP's national council meeting tomorrow.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
35 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Israel and Iran launch new strikes as new diplomatic effort takes shape
The US president has been weighing whether to attack Iran by striking its well-defended Fordo uranium enrichment facility, which is buried under a mountain and widely considered to be out of reach of all but America's 'bunker-buster' bombs. He said he will decide within two weeks whether the US military will be directly involved in the war given the 'substantial chance' for renewed negotiations over Tehran's nuclear programme. Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi appeared to be heading to Geneva for meetings with the European Union's top diplomat and counterparts from the UK, France and Germany. But in an interview aired on Friday he said that 'in the current situation, as the Zionist regime's attacks continue, we are not seeking negotiations with anyone'. 'I believe that as a result of this resistance (by Iran), we will gradually see countries distancing themselves from the aggression carried out by the regime, and calls for ending this war have already begun, and they will only grow stronger,' he said, adding that Tehran considers 'the Americans to be companions and collaborators of the Zionist regime'. Britain's Foreign Secretary David Lammy said he met US secretary of state Marco Rubio and envoy Steve Witkoff at the White House to discuss the potential for a deal to cool the conflict. Israel said it conducted air strikes into Friday morning in Iran with more than 60 aircraft hitting what it said were industrial sites to manufacture missiles. It also said it hit the headquarters of Iran's Organisation of Defensive Innovation and Research, known by its acronym in Farsi, SPND. The US has linked the agency to alleged Iranian research and testing tied to the possible development of nuclear explosive devices. Israeli air strikes reached into the city of Rasht on the Caspian Sea early on Friday, Iranian media reported. The Israeli military had warned the public to flee the area around Rasht's Industrial City, but with Iran's internet shut off to the outside world, it is unclear how many people could see the message. In Israel, paramedic service Magen David Adom said missiles struck a residential area in southern Israel, causing damage to buildings, including one six-storey building. Crews provided medical treatment to five people with minor injuries, it added. It comes a day after at least 80 patients and medical workers were wounded in a strike on the Soroka Medical Centre in the southern Israeli city of Beersheba. Israel's defence minister threatened Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei after the Iranian missile crashed into the hospital. Israel's military 'has been instructed and knows that in order to achieve all of its goals, this man absolutely should not continue to exist', said defence minister Israel Katz. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he trusted that Mr Trump would 'do what's best for America'. Speaking from the rubble and shattered glass around the hospital, he added: 'I can tell you that they're already helping a lot.' The war between Israel and Iran erupted on June 13 with Israeli air strikes targeting nuclear and military sites, senior generals and nuclear scientists. At least 657 people, including 263 civilians, have been killed in Iran and more than 2,000 wounded, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group. Iran has retaliated by firing 450 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel, according to Israeli army estimates. Most have been shot down by Israel's air defences, but at least 24 people have been killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has long maintained its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes, but it is the only non-nuclear-weapon state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. Israel is widely believed to be the only Middle Eastern country with a nuclear weapons programme but has never acknowledged it. The Israeli air campaign has targeted Iran's enrichment site at Natanz, centrifuge workshops around Tehran, a nuclear site in Isfahan and what the army assesses to be most of Iran's ballistic missile launchers. The destruction of those launchers has contributed to the steady decline in Iranian attacks since the start of the conflict.
North Wales Chronicle
35 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Minister insists no major welfare rebellion on the horizon after whip quits
Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said Vicky Foxcroft was the only frontbencher who had spoken to her about resigning. MPs must 'look to their conscience' when deciding how to vote, Ms Nandy said, but added the Government believes the Commons will back the reforms. Lewisham North MP Ms Foxcroft said she understood 'the need to address the ever-increasing welfare bill' but did not believe the proposed cuts 'should be part of the solution', in her resignation letter to the Prime Minister. Sir Keir Starmer has faced a backlash from some Labour MPs over proposals to reform the welfare system, which are expected to save up to £5 billion a year. Ms Nandy said a 'handful' of backbench MPs had expressed concerns to her about the 'detail' of the Bill, but added she was confident the Government had listened and the package of reforms was 'absolutely right'. 'It would be wrong to say that when you bring forward big reforms, there aren't concerns and there aren't dissenting voices, of course there are. But Vicky is the only frontbencher that I've had a conversation with about resigning,' she told BBC Breakfast. She told Times Radio that Ms Foxcroft 'did the honourable thing' by standing down. 'If you can't stick with collective responsibility in Government, you have to resign. 'She's done the honourable thing. It will enable her to have a voice, and she – as the former shadow disabilities minister – is very keen to use it. 'But I think most Labour MPs, including her, agree with the principle of the reforms that we're making.' She added: 'It's now up to every MP, as it always is at moments of major reform, to look to their conscience and vote the way that they believe is right. 'And we believe this package of reforms are right and will carry the confidence of the House.' Ms Foxcroft is the second Labour frontbencher to go in protest over policy issues after Anneliese Dodds quit as development minister over cuts to the aid budget. Rebel Labour MPs welcomed Ms Foxcroft's decision, with Hartlepool's Jonathan Brash saying he had the 'utmost respect' for her 'principled stand' and Crewe and Nantwich's Connor Naismith saying it 'must have been an incredibly difficult decision but she should be commended for standing by her principles'. She said she had wrestled with whether to resign or remain in the Government and 'fight from within'. 'Sadly it… now seems that we are not going to get the changes I desperately wanted to see. 'I therefore tender my resignation as I know I will not be able to do the job that is required of me and whip – or indeed vote – for reforms which include cuts to disabled people's finances.' Legislation introduced into Parliament on Wednesday includes a tightening of the criteria for the main disability payment in England, the personal independence payment (Pip). Ministers also want to cut the sickness-related element of universal credit (UC), and delay access to it so only those aged 22 and over can claim it. The package of reforms is aimed at encouraging more people off sickness benefits and into work, but dozens of Labour rebels said last month that the proposals were 'impossible to support'. Pip is aimed at helping with extra living costs if someone has a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability and difficulty doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of their condition. Data published on Tuesday showed 3.7 million people in England and Wales claimed Pip, up from 2.05 million in 2019, with teenagers and young adults making up a growing proportion of claimants. Around 800,000 people are set to lose out on the benefit under the Government's proposals, according to an impact assessment published alongside Wednesday's legislation. The assessment also confirmed a previous estimate that 250,000 more people, including 50,000 children, are likely to fall into relative poverty after housing costs in 2029/30, although the Government repeated this does not take into account the potentially positive impact of £1 billion annual funding by then for measures to support people into work. Ms Foxcroft received hugs and other gestures of support from her Labour backbench colleagues as she appeared in the Commons on Friday as MPs took part in votes on the assisted dying Bill. Several colleagues approached her, offering warm words, hugs, an arm on the shoulder or a pat on the back. Responding to her resignation, a Government spokesperson said: 'This Labour Government was elected to deliver change. The broken welfare system we inherited is failing the sick and most vulnerable and holding too many young people back. It is fair and responsible to fix it. 'Our principled reforms will ensure those who can work should, that those who want to work are properly supported, and that those with most severe disabilities and health conditions are protected.'
Leader Live
35 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Minister insists no major welfare rebellion on the horizon after whip quits
Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said Vicky Foxcroft was the only frontbencher who had spoken to her about resigning. MPs must 'look to their conscience' when deciding how to vote, Ms Nandy said, but added the Government believes the Commons will back the reforms. Lewisham North MP Ms Foxcroft said she understood 'the need to address the ever-increasing welfare bill' but did not believe the proposed cuts 'should be part of the solution', in her resignation letter to the Prime Minister. Sir Keir Starmer has faced a backlash from some Labour MPs over proposals to reform the welfare system, which are expected to save up to £5 billion a year. Ms Nandy said a 'handful' of backbench MPs had expressed concerns to her about the 'detail' of the Bill, but added she was confident the Government had listened and the package of reforms was 'absolutely right'. 'It would be wrong to say that when you bring forward big reforms, there aren't concerns and there aren't dissenting voices, of course there are. But Vicky is the only frontbencher that I've had a conversation with about resigning,' she told BBC Breakfast. She told Times Radio that Ms Foxcroft 'did the honourable thing' by standing down. 'If you can't stick with collective responsibility in Government, you have to resign. 'She's done the honourable thing. It will enable her to have a voice, and she – as the former shadow disabilities minister – is very keen to use it. 'But I think most Labour MPs, including her, agree with the principle of the reforms that we're making.' She added: 'It's now up to every MP, as it always is at moments of major reform, to look to their conscience and vote the way that they believe is right. 'And we believe this package of reforms are right and will carry the confidence of the House.' Ms Foxcroft is the second Labour frontbencher to go in protest over policy issues after Anneliese Dodds quit as development minister over cuts to the aid budget. Rebel Labour MPs welcomed Ms Foxcroft's decision, with Hartlepool's Jonathan Brash saying he had the 'utmost respect' for her 'principled stand' and Crewe and Nantwich's Connor Naismith saying it 'must have been an incredibly difficult decision but she should be commended for standing by her principles'. She said she had wrestled with whether to resign or remain in the Government and 'fight from within'. 'Sadly it… now seems that we are not going to get the changes I desperately wanted to see. 'I therefore tender my resignation as I know I will not be able to do the job that is required of me and whip – or indeed vote – for reforms which include cuts to disabled people's finances.' Legislation introduced into Parliament on Wednesday includes a tightening of the criteria for the main disability payment in England, the personal independence payment (Pip). Ministers also want to cut the sickness-related element of universal credit (UC), and delay access to it so only those aged 22 and over can claim it. The package of reforms is aimed at encouraging more people off sickness benefits and into work, but dozens of Labour rebels said last month that the proposals were 'impossible to support'. Pip is aimed at helping with extra living costs if someone has a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability and difficulty doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of their condition. Data published on Tuesday showed 3.7 million people in England and Wales claimed Pip, up from 2.05 million in 2019, with teenagers and young adults making up a growing proportion of claimants. Around 800,000 people are set to lose out on the benefit under the Government's proposals, according to an impact assessment published alongside Wednesday's legislation. The assessment also confirmed a previous estimate that 250,000 more people, including 50,000 children, are likely to fall into relative poverty after housing costs in 2029/30, although the Government repeated this does not take into account the potentially positive impact of £1 billion annual funding by then for measures to support people into work. Ms Foxcroft received hugs and other gestures of support from her Labour backbench colleagues as she appeared in the Commons on Friday as MPs took part in votes on the assisted dying Bill. Several colleagues approached her, offering warm words, hugs, an arm on the shoulder or a pat on the back. Responding to her resignation, a Government spokesperson said: 'This Labour Government was elected to deliver change. The broken welfare system we inherited is failing the sick and most vulnerable and holding too many young people back. It is fair and responsible to fix it. 'Our principled reforms will ensure those who can work should, that those who want to work are properly supported, and that those with most severe disabilities and health conditions are protected.'
