Where is Keir Starmer’s moral courage?

Moral courage is a quality seemingly so incredible in Westminster as feathers on an eel.

Even so, when the United Kingdom’s close ally, someone we constantly and quite desperately refer to as having a ‘special relationship’ with, goes into bat against Iran – supporting Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East – and instead of proclaiming support, the UK does almost everything to disavow their actions: something has gone wrong.

From Foreign Secretary David Lammy telling MPs that whether or not the government supports the US stealth bombers strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities is not a “binary question”, to Defence Minister Luke Pollard claiming it was “not one for me to comment on” or even Sir Keir Starmer himself refusing to say if the UK would support the US if attacked: the eagerness at which Labour has distanced our country from actions that would make the West safer – the targeting of Iran’s nuclear capabilities – is staggering.

Iran has displayed naked breaches of its non-proliferation obligations. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recognised its accelerating Uranium enrichment. Tehran has continued pursuing regional destabilisation of the region through its proxies and terror groups. All of these things made a clear case for action.

Yet just last week, Sir Keir offered up his reading of President Trump’s attitude to Iran: “There is nothing the president said that suggests he’s about to get involved in this conflict.” If that was Mystic Meg reading your horoscope you’d ask for your money back – it could not have been more wrong. Downing Street and the Foreign Office were clearly left out of the loop on the intentions of the country’s most consequential ally.

In the direct aftermath of US action, Starmer issued a statement declaring “Iran’s nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security”. He continued: “Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat.”

As his aides were clear to point out to the rest of my colleagues in the press gallery, this was no endorsement – it was a clarification, bereft of diplomatic or moral grounding, emphasising the lack of UK involvement in targeting facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan – and I don’t think it is something to be proud of.

It was already recognised that Iran having an active nuclear programme would be a threat to the West and to Britain itself, but despite all these reasons, it appears it is a threat Labour deems our hands should be clean from actually doing anything about.

When it comes to US strikes we don’t even need to wash them because, as they are so keen to make clear, we haven’t gone anywhere near. We have offered the most lukewarm of support, with Lammy meaninglessly insisting the UK is “doing everything we can to stabilise the situation”.

At this point I should declare, as they do in the House of Commons chamber, a personal interest. I am Jewish, I have family and friends in Israel, my family have a home there, and, until the war, I would visit as much as I possibly could.

Our apartment block has not been hit, so far, but a blast did go off next to our nearest shopping mall about a 15 minute drive away. Family are all okay so far, too, but the windows of our friend’s 80-year-old parent’s home were blown through.

Israelis are practical, intelligent, hardy people. I trust that they will be resilient and prevail. What I am losing trust in, and what concerns me the most in the UK, is that we seem quite happy not only to leave them to go it alone – or at best with the help of the US – but that many seem quite eager to let the Iranian ayatollahs plow on ahead when their efforts are to destroy the Jewish state and take that fight further to the West.

As Kemi Badenoch pointed out, they use the term “Little Satan” interchangeably to refer to both the UK and Israel – and they quite literally have a countdown to Israel’s destruction ticking in Tehran’s Palestine Square.

And still Labour failed to find a moral argument to even just be seen to be linked to US action against Iran. Instead they were reportedly turning to advice from Attorney General Richard Hermer, not just to evade potential UK involvement, but to even go as far as hide away from asserting whether the US’ actions were legal or not. It would be little wonder if the US were to look at the UK as a potential hindrance rather than a help.

Tory leadership has shown some guts over this, with Badenoch claiming ministers were parroting lines written by pacifist civil servants which were “designed to not upset anybody or give any views”. 

On Lord Hermer being allowed to obsess over international law through No.10 she added: “I do think it is quite extraordinary the position they found themselves in where the Foreign Secretary is unable to say whether or not he believes that action is lawful.” 

But it is clear that Sir Keir has an issue with finding a moral grounding to his approach. Even those from within his own Government have begun to think so as they brace for a rebellion of Labour MPs over his welfare cuts. Sources told The Guardian that they believed the party should have focused on the moral case for reform, not the financial one. But it is difficult if it doesn’t exist.

“This is the dirty work Israel is doing for all of us,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recognised of the situation last week. The same can now be said for the US, both on strikes and seemingly bringing about a “complete and total ceasefire” between Israel and Iran. Where does it leave Sir Keir, and where does it leave us?