Dear Subscribers,
With conflict in the Middle East persisting, Britain has been faced with strategic decisions. Starmer’s response has seemed reluctant if not uncertain. Some suspected this reflected his dogmatic commitment to international law. But Tim Shipman has reported that it was, instead, the National Security Council led by Miliband, Reeves and Cooper who blocked Trump’s use of Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford to launch the attacks. It turns out that Starmer and Healey saw no reason to stop Trump using the bases. Miliband, rather than Lord Hermer, has been fudging the government’s response.
Last weekend Iran attacked a British RAF base in Cyprus. After three days of vacillation the government decided to deploy a Type 45 destroyer, HMS Dragon, to protect them. Yet the deployment of Dragon has not happened. It has been delayed. The Prospect union on the Portsmouth dock, at which the Dragon is stationed, says its staff only work 9-5, so the government will have to wait a fortnight. French and Spanish ships are expected to come to Cyprus’ aid instead, a sad irony which offends all historical conventions and enmities.
Such vacillations have damaged the government’s relationship with Washington. Trump said Starmer was ‘no Winston Churchill’, a ‘loser’ and was generally ‘disappointed’ with him. The question of military bases has brought the Chagos Islands deal into the spotlight. Farage visited Trump at Mar-a-Lago to persuade him to sink the deal on Friday. From another direction, the Mauritian government has threatened to sue the government over delaying the transfer of the Islands. Meanwhile, Sir Tony Blair has criticised Starmer for not immediately allowing the US to use British air bases.
On Tuesday, Rachel Reeves delivered a Spring Forecast speech to the Commons. She announced that the ever-reliable OBR predicts growth of 1.6pc 2027-2028 and 1.5pc 2029-2030; that real disposable incomes will grow by less than 0.25pc 2025-2026; that unemployment will peak this year at 5.3pc (1.9 million); that welfare spending to rise by £18bn this year (£333bn total). Nothing out the ordinary, then. And, upholding the dignity of her office, no policies were announced for the markets to brace themselves this time.
Blog
The EU single market: where the magic doesn’t happen
UK government ministers have recently made extravagant claims about the benefits of closer integration with the EU single market, referring to EU alignment as a ‘prize’ and ‘where the magic happens’. But the reality is far removed from these assertions. UK exports to the EU grew very slowly in the last two decades of the UK’s EU membership, while exports to non-EU destinations thrived. Efforts to re-align the UK with parts of the EU single market will bring very scant gains while also imposing considerable financial costs and can be considered a dead end as far as boosting UK growth is concerned.
Media
Lord Frost in the Daily Telegraph: Labour wants closer ties the EU. The result would be disastrous.
Doug Stokes in The Spectator: Why the Iran war is really about China
Ameer Kotecha in The Times: Foreign Office fails to put Britain first. That’s why I’ve quit.
Key Points
Starmer and Iran
Tim Shipman’s reporting of the internal dynamics inside the Cabinet have been revelatory. Many who reasonably assumed that his response was informed by a commitment to international law shared by the Attorney General were only partly right. Ed Miliband has led the anti-Trump revolt from within.
Ultimately the buck stops with Starmer. It seems like yet another bungled political judgement. Foreign affairs can famously save a premiership, as per Thatcher and the Falklands. Starmer’s vacillation has been costly – he ultimately failed to act when it mattered. The past week has blemished one of the hitherto less dreadful areas of government policy – relations with the US.
‘Special Relationship’?
Whether or not relations with Washington are special, they are nonetheless important. Starmer knows this. Hence his willingness to let Trump use British bases before Miliband’s interventions.
In a tale of almost tragic proportions, the Chagos deal has emerged to inflect Anglo-American relations at this crucial juncture. Initially Trump’s support was diplomatic, or polite. He cared not about the details, as the impact on American military activity didn’t seem immediate.
Trump’s commitment to the deal began to unravel earlier this year when the importance of Diego Garcia became apparent. And, indeed, when it was conveyed to Trump that Starmer was doing this because of the suspect trio of Powell, Hermer and Sands.
Starmer’s response to the Iran strikes were, in Trump’s eyes, a test which Starmer personally failed. Trump has the power to sink the Chagos deal. How many more reversals can Starmer take until there’s nowhere left to go?
Might just the Chagos deal which embodies Starmerism be the very thing that ends him?
