Britain must wake up to the threat of Iran

Spectator

5 days ago

The Islamic Republic of Iran is a 'wide-ranging, persistent and unpredictable' threat to the United Kingdom. That was the sobering conclusion this week of the intelligence and security committee, which has spent several years examining Iranian policy and activity, taking evidence and analysing a huge amount of classified information. The committee's chairman, Lord Beamish (former Labour MP Kevan Jones), warned that the government had not developed a comprehensive or in-depth approach to the threat posed by Iran but had instead focused on short-term crisis management.
The intelligence and security committee (ISC) of parliament is a unique body. Despite its name, it is not a select committee, but established by statute under the provisions of the Intelligence Services Act 1994. Its nine members, drawn from both Houses of Parliament, are nominated by the prime minister in consultation with the leader of the opposition and approved by each House, though approval is a formality.
Iran is an implacable, dedicated and daring opponent, determined to harm us and our interests
The ISC scrutinises the 'policies, expenditure, administration and operations of the agencies and departments which form the UK intelligence community'. It takes evidence from ministers, officials and experts, like a select committee, but this is always done in private due to the sensitive nature of the subject matter. Its reports are agreed upon by a long and consultative process: they are submitted to the prime minister and, under the Justice and Security Act 2013, can only then be laid before parliament and subsequently published once he has agreed that nothing in them could prejudice the activities of the intelligence services. Some passages may be redacted.
The report on Iran has been subject to unusually long delays. The committee took evidence between 2021 and 2023, the process finishing before Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October 2023. Its conclusions were presented to the previous government in April 2024. Final publication was substantially delayed by the general election and change of administration, but Beamish argues that, while the landscape of the Middle East has changed, the report remains relevant and valid.
In recent years, we have tended to see Iran through two lenses: that of its support for Islamist proxy groups across the Middle East like Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Houthis; and its nuclear programme. The ISC argues that this has led to insufficient concentration on other kinds of threat. Iran's intelligence services have attempted to kidnap or murder UK-based dissidents and opponents of the régime in Tehran, and have not hesitated to target Jewish and Israeli interests in Britain. Indeed, the Home Office's Homeland Security Group considers Iran to be as great a threat as Russia in terms of physical attacks on individuals in the UK.
Iran also regards the UK as a leading target for espionage and cyber disruption, only marginally below the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia in its prioritisation. Although it lacks the technological capabilities of Russia and China, in this area as in others the Iranian government has a very high risk appetite and may be willing to undertake operations of a kind which other adversaries would regard as too provocative.
All of this is particularly relevant in light of the House of Commons defence committee's publication this week of a report on 'grey zone' warfare. This kind of threat, just below the threshold of conventional warfare, is already a reality for the UK. Although Russia and China are the most active adversaries of the UK, the ISC's report emphasises that we should not downplay the threat posed by Iran.
The government is not doing enough on Iran, or, rather, it is not conducting policy in a systematic and organised way. The ISC, which is sometimes accused of having too close and comfortable a relationship with Whitehall because of its unique structure and methodology, was explicit in its criticism:
Across government, there is a lack of Iran-specific expertise and seemingly no interest in building a future pipeline of specialists… there is no sense from anyone we spoke to of how the various government strategies on Iran relate to each other, which of them takes precedence – or, crucially, who is responsible for driving implementation and will be held accountable.
This should be a wake-up call for the government. Of course it is dealing with a range of pressing threats to national security, especially in terms of Russia and China, as well as working closely with allies to support Ukraine in its defence against Russian military aggression. But Iran has to be placed into a matrix of action by the government and given proper consideration: it represents an implacable, dedicated and daring opponent, determined to harm us and our interests. Tehran will not wait until the UK is less busy.