Sir Keir Starmer has been treading a delicate diplomatic tightrope all week on the issue of Iran. Last night's airstrikes by the USmean the challenges facing the prime minister could now continue for months. Sir Keir's repeatedcalls for de-escalationhave clearly not been heeded by the White House. Yet he has avoided direct UK involvement in military action and has sought to maintain what British diplomats claim is a solid and valuable relationship with US president Donald Trump. The response from ministers appears to be it was not the means they wanted, but they supported the outcome. The UK has not explicitly endorsed the method, but the result - a delay in Iran getting nuclear weapons - is, they argue, in the UK's national interest. Sir Keir's position has shifted since Tuesday, when he seemed confident Trump would not intervene, after sitting next to him at a G7 dinner in Canada. "I was sitting right next to President Trump, so I've no doubt, in my mind, the level of agreement there was," he said. Just four days later the president intervened. Did the prime minister misread Trump? Or did the president - whose unpredictability is central to his foreign policy approach - just change his mind? No 10 has told us it was given advanced warning of the US action, but the UK was not asked to take part. We do not know why. There had been speculation that US B-2 stealth bombers could have used the UK's Diego Garcia airbase in the Indian Ocean as a waypoint en route to Iran. Instead, "Operation Midnight Hammer" involved B-2s flying non-stop for 18 hours to reach their targets, according to the Pentagon. It is possible the UK was not asked for assistance because it would have been a difficult request to grant. There have been debates at the top of government in recent days about the legality of any UK involvement, with the attorney general, Lord Hermer, providing advice on a range of scenarios. With the next steps in the conflict unclear, the US could end up requesting military support from the UK in the coming weeks - prompting further difficult decisions for the prime minister. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth has responded to concerns the US attacks could prompt the start of a long conflict by insisting: "This is most certainly not open-ended". Yet the actions of both the The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) suggest they fear retaliation from Iran. This is why British diplomats have been planning a flight early next week to help "vulnerable British nationals and their dependents wanting to leave Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories". Defence sources have told me measures to protect British armed forces in the Middle East have been strengthened in the past few hours, with additional fighter jets already in the region and at "high readiness". One UK diplomat told me UK-US relations remain strong, as demonstrated by Foreign Secretary David Lammy's long meeting with secretary of state Marco Rubio and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff on Friday. However, we do not know if - or how - Iran might respond, or whether the UK or its military could be targeted. Starmer's high-wire act has just become even more dangerous.
Diplomatic tightrope on Iran just got more precarious for Starmer
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Starmer Faces Increased Diplomatic Challenges Amid US Airstrikes on Iran"
Bbc News
7.3
TruthLens AI Summary
Sir Keir Starmer has been navigating a complex diplomatic landscape regarding Iran, especially following the recent US airstrikes that have heightened tensions. His calls for de-escalation seem to have gone unheeded by the White House, yet he has managed to keep the UK out of direct military involvement while trying to maintain a strong relationship with US President Donald Trump. British ministers have expressed a supportive stance toward the US actions, arguing that while they did not endorse the method, the outcome—a delay in Iran's nuclear ambitions—aligns with UK national interests. Starmer's confidence in avoiding US intervention appeared to wane after President Trump's sudden military action, raising questions about whether Starmer misjudged Trump's intentions or if the president's unpredictable nature led to a change in strategy. Although Downing Street received prior warning of the airstrikes, the UK was not asked to participate, leaving speculation about the reasons behind this decision. The legality of any potential UK involvement has been debated among government officials, suggesting that future requests for military support from the US could complicate Starmer's position further.
The situation remains precarious, as US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth downplayed concerns regarding the potential for a prolonged conflict, asserting that the US actions were not intended to be open-ended. However, British officials are taking precautionary measures in light of potential Iranian retaliation. Plans are in place to assist vulnerable British nationals in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and UK military readiness has been heightened with additional fighter jets deployed to the region. Despite assurances of strong UK-US relations, exemplified by Foreign Secretary David Lammy's meetings with US officials, uncertainty looms over how Iran might react and whether UK interests or personnel could be in jeopardy. Starmer's diplomatic balancing act is becoming increasingly fraught, as the unfolding conflict poses new challenges and decisions that could have significant implications for the UK's foreign policy.
TruthLens AI Analysis
You need to be a member to generate the AI analysis for this article.
Log In to Generate AnalysisNot a member yet? Register for free.