Why Trump's Iran Strikes Are A Legal And Political Nightmare For Starmer

Donald Trump’s attempts to rope the UK into his attacks on Iran have left Keir Starmer trying to plot his way through a legal and political minefield.

The US and Israel launched joint strikes on Iran at the weekend, killing the country’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Tehran retaliated by targeting US military bases in countries across the region and hitting back at Israel as the conflict escalates.

After rejecting an initial the US request, Starmer announced on Sunday night that he had granted America permission to use British military bases to target weapons storage facilities and missile launch sites.

The prime minister said: “The basis of our decision is the collective self-defence of longstanding friends and allies, and protecting British lives. This is in line with international law.”

However, any hope that honouring the US’s request would strength the “special relationship” was torpedoed on Monday when Trump told the Telegraph he was “very disappointed” in Starmer’s slow response.

An Iranian drone attack on the RAF’s Akrotiri base in Cyprus has also piled pressure on Starmer to green light a UK response.

The prime minister is walking a military and political tightrope as international tensions soar.

Fresh Tensions With Trump

The prime minister has been blasted for his hesitation over helping Trump in the UK.

Broadcaster Andrew Neil told Times Radio that the PM had handled this situation “very badly”, and accused him of putting international law ahead of the UK’s national interest.

“All America wanted from us was the use of the bases in Britain and Diego Garcia,” he said, saying that would have been “no skin off our nose”.

“The United States did not want us to go to war with them. They don’t need us,” Neil said. “The stupidity of that decision... allowing international lawyers of dubious providence to determine the national interest of the United Kingdom is a disaster for transatlantic relations.”

Similarly, former head of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove told LBC: “We should have been clear cut from day one and supported the Americans and Israelis unequivocally.”

“We should have had the confidence and the moral conviction to know where our national security and defence interest best lay,” he said.

Domestic Frustrations

But Neil and Dearlove’s responses to the prime minister’s reactions do not appear to be supported by voters.

YouGov pollsters have found 50% of Brits oppose allowing the States to use RAF bases to attack Iran.

A further 45% of Brits say the government should neither praise nor condemn the US for the Iran attacks. 

Around one in five (21%) want the UK to condemn the US over its actions.

The PM told MPs on Monday that his government “does not believe in regime change from the skies”, a subtle dig at the Trump administration’s apparent strategy.

The Greens – which leapfrogged Labour into second place in a new opinion poll – is clear in its opposition to the US-Israeli military action.

The party has tabled an Armed Conflicts Requirements bill to stop the UK being dragged into war abroad.

The legislation is modelled on the prime minister’s own promises from when he was running to be Labour leader, highlighting Starmer’s own flip-flopping over the years.

The conflict could also have profound economic consequences, given the world’s reliance on Middle East oil.

If global oil and gas prices increase by 20%, British inflation could go up, stunting economic growth, which has been Labour’s main mission since getting into power.

Legal Questions Loom

There could be further danger ahead for Starmer over his attempts to avoid falling into legal trouble over the strikes, too.

Dr Aurel Sari, international law expert from the University of Exeter, suggested Starmer’s legal defence “rests on a crucial distinction between offensive and defensive military action”.

“Iran, responding to the US-Israeli assault, exercised its own right of self-defence, a right it was entitled to invoke under the UN Charter given the scale of the attack on it,” he said.

“However, Iran’s strikes have not been limited to military targets, but also hit civilian infrastructure, including international airports, hotels and residential areas across the Gulf.”

Iran has launched missiles and drone attacks against targets in Israel, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Iraq since Saturday.

There are around 300,000 British citizens in the Gulf region.

Sari continued: “Because those attacks on civilian targets served no genuine defensive purpose, they exceeded what international law permits in self-defence.

“The government argues that this, together with Iranian drone strikes against RAF Akrotiri, entitles the UK to use force against Iran in the exercise of the right of individual and collective self-defence.”

However, Sari said this position is “highly precarious in practice”, because US military operations “do not neatly separate offensive from defensive activities”.

The same military bases operate both personnel and intelligence systems.

He warned: “If British bases inadvertently support the broader US-Israeli campaign to destroy Iran’s military and change its government, the UK’s carefully constructed legal position collapses.

“While the government has drawn a clear legal line, it may lack the ability to hold it.”

Occupying The Middle Ground In Europe

But as RUSI’s international security director, Neil Melvin, pointed out, the US’s attacks have exposed the limits of international law and a lack of enforcement – and Europe’s difficult position.

“Many have said Iran has been allowed to hide behind international law for many decades, and engage in terrorism against the United States and its allies,” Melvin said.

“So therefore it’s a slightly strange position that the Europeans have adopted – that they often seem to be upholding more the rights of regimes which are repressing their populations and conducting terrorism.

“So now we’ve seen the Europeans having to shift.”

He said Trump’s action has revealed inconsistency within Europe’s position, as Spain continues to call the strikes an illegal act, and have even asked the US forces to leave their bases in Spain.

But Germany “has come out quite firmly supporting President Trump while not necessarily agreeing with the legality of this”.

Meanwhile, Starmer is somewhere in between.

Melvin said: “The UK has been struggling to occupy a middle ground, so the longer this conflict goes on, the more these difficulties and contradictions in the European position, I think, are going to be exposed.”

The pressure is on for Starmer to hold onto the course he has set out on – no matter how convoluted it may be.