British opposition figures warn of dangers of US using UK base in potential Iran attack
Much of the discussion hinged on Diego Garcia, a shadowy UK-US military base deep in the Indian Ocean.
The strategic base puts US bomber aircraft within 5,300 kilometres of Iran and could allow them to attack Iran while avoiding Gulf airspace.
It means that if the US directly intervenes, Britain will almost certainly find itself heavily involved - even if it does not help protect Israel from Iranian strikes.
On Monday, four US B-52 Stratofortress bombers - which can carry precision-guided bombs - were sighted on a Diego Garcia runway, according to the Daily Mail.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
After the Cobra meeting it emerged that the British government will have to sign off on the US use of the base in any bombing raid on Iran.
Independent MP Adnan Hussain told MEE: "If the UK permits the US to use its bases for offensive operations against Iran, and especially if those attacks originate from UK sovereign territory, then it could be considered directly involved in the conflict - legally a co-belligerent."
Hussain added: "This would expose the UK to retaliation and Iranian counterattacks, in essence it could result in all out involvement."
Base within attack range of Iran
Deputy Green Party leader Zack Polanski, who is standing to lead the party, told MEE: "Israel's attack on Iran is illegal.
"Starmer claims to want de-escalation - yet dragging the UK into their illegal war does the opposite."
Diego Garcia is almost certain to play a crucial role in any future American attacks on Iran, given its proximity to the country.
UK lobbying US against sanctioning ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More »
Iranian military officials have repeatedly warned Israel's allies that they could be attacked if they help defend Israel.
Iran's Shahed-136B kamikaze drones have the range to attack the base, which houses around 4,000 people, mostly members of the American military and contractors.
Scottish National Party MP Chris Law told MEE: "The UK government must recognise the seriousness of the situation and understand that any such decision will require the support of parliament.
'Any use of UK military bases for US military action in Iran would be a significant escalation in this conflict, and it is imperative that Parliament be consulted and votes be held before any such decision is taken."
If the US asks the Starmer government for permission to use the base for an attack, Starmer would be expected to seek advice from Jonathan Powell, his national security adviser, who was Tony Blair's chief of staff when Britain invaded Iraq in 2003.
Hussain said: "The UK should continue with its focus on diplomatic solutions, as this is the only real solution to the issue.
"An all-out war, especially with modern methods of warfare and talks of the potentiality of nuclear weapons would be a disaster not just for those involved but the whole world."
Polanski added: "A million marched against Iraq, and the chaos and destruction that followed remain Labour's shameful legacy.
"They must learn from history."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
The rise of paramilitary settler groups in Israel's West Bank strategy
Last week, just days after Israeli forces killed three men while intervening to protect settlers violently storming the Palestinian village of Kafr Malik in the occupied West Bank, an unusual wave of condemnation swept through Israeli politics and media. But the outrage was not directed at the killing of Palestinians. It came only after settlers turned on Israeli soldiers. On Friday night, settlers, commonly referred to in Israel as the 'Hilltop Youth', attacked soldiers stationed at an outpost near Kafr Malik, northeast of Ramallah. The following day, the same group stormed a nearby military base. For a military long accustomed to escorting settlers during raids on Palestinian communities, the aggression from their usual allies was both unexpected and unsettling. The term 'Hilltop Youth' may no longer accurately describe this group. Their structure, tactics, and growing confidence suggest they now function more as a paramilitary organisation than as an informal collection of radicalised young settlers. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defence Minister Israel Katz, and politicians from across Israel's political spectrum, including members of both the coalition and the opposition, swiftly condemned the attacks on soldiers. Yet the violent activities of these settler groups against Palestinians have continued for years with little political or legal consequence. State-sanctioned violence The rise of settler militias is not a new phenomenon. During the May 2021 clashes between Jews and Palestinians, coordinated settler militias carried out simultaneous assaults on Palestinian villages across the West Bank. These militias do not operate spontaneously but rather operate within the framework of an organization that includes several hundred-armed men. Israeli army detains Palestinian family members after settlers attack village Read More » What has changed is the apparent formalisation of their operations under the current Israeli government. Since Bezalel Smotrich, who also serves as Israel's finance minister, assumed control of the Civil Administration in the West Bank, these militias appear to be operating in closer alignment with a broader strategic objective: expanding Israeli control over Area C, which makes up about 60 per cent of the West Bank, effectively obstructing the possibility of establishing a future Palestinian state. A central feature of this strategy is the proliferation of so-called 'shepherds' farms', a settlement model that allows settlers to seize large tracts of land without formal government approval and with little, if any, military resistance. These farms typically begin with just a few settlers, sometimes as few as two or three, but they quickly spread across wide areas. Through these outposts, small groups of settlers, often linked to the Hilltop Youth, manage to assert control over vast stretches of land. The settlers who run these farms routinely intimidate and forcibly expel Palestinian herders and residents, creating de facto zones of exclusion without official annexation. For Palestinians living in the West Bank, the violence and dispossession inflicted by these militias are neither new nor isolated. But the recent attacks on Israeli soldiers have briefly drawn attention to these groups, exposing a reality Palestinians have long endured: that parts of the settler movement are evolving into organised, militarised forces pursuing a territorial agenda with increasing impunity. Post-Smotrich strategy Under Smotrich's leadership, many of these farms are now being legalised. At the same time, attacks (seemingly deliberate and coordinated) are increasing against Palestinian shepherds and Bedouin communities east of the Alon Road, particularly in the Jordan Valley. The purpose of these attacks appears to be clear: to drive Palestinians from the area. Recently, the settler militias have begun pushing westward from the Alon Road, moving closer to the Nablus and Ramallah regions. It remains uncertain whether the militias are receiving direct orders from Smotrich himself, but their objectives are evidently aligned. Both are working towards a shared goal: to consolidate Israeli control over Area C and to clear it of its Palestinian inhabitants. Smotrich's apparent aim is to ensure that these annexed areas are as devoid of Palestinians as possible, reducing the number who would have any claim to citizenship An example of this tacit cooperation emerged in the aftermath of last Friday's events. Smotrich declared that shooting at Jews constituted 'a red line' that must not be crossed, stating unequivocally that it was forbidden to shoot at Jews. Settlers had initially claimed that a 14-year-old boy had been shot by Israeli soldiers, though it later emerged that the boy had been injured while throwing stones at soldiers in an entirely different location. Nevertheless, Smotrich chose to side with the Hilltop Youth's version of events. The attack on the military base the following day forced the finance minister to publicly condemn the settlers' actions, but the shared strategic interests between the two sides remain intact. The increased pace of attacks against Palestinians in recent times may stem from the Israeli finance minister's concern that the government will collapse or that he will not be a member of the next government. In most polls, Smotrich's Religious Zionist Party does not pass the electoral threshold. UK and allies sanction Israeli ministers Ben Gvir and Smotrich over Gaza comments Read More » Smotrich is one of the most sophisticated and sharp politicians in Israel and has a developed historical consciousness. The aggressive expansion by armed settler militias across the West Bank is not simply a series of isolated attacks; it is part of Smotrich's broader effort to establish irreversible 'facts on the ground' in the event of a change in government. He may well be correct in his calculation. It is highly unlikely that any future Israeli government will move to dismantle shepherds' farms or outposts in the West Bank, and even less likely that it would act to restore displaced Palestinians to the lands from which they were expelled. Smotrich may also have in mind the contours of the Trump administration's Middle East plan, which he has publicly criticised. According to that plan, much of Area C would be annexed to Israel, while a fragmented Palestinian state would exist as disconnected enclaves throughout the West Bank. Smotrich's apparent aim is to ensure that these annexed areas are as devoid of Palestinians as possible, reducing the number of Palestinians who would have any claim to citizenship or full rights within the Israeli state. The ongoing war in Gaza is also shaping the thinking of settler militias, as well as bolstering Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. The war has created a permissive environment that seems to embolden these actors to accelerate their agenda in the West Bank. Settler fantasy Settlers have long harboured the ambition of emptying the West Bank of its Palestinian population. For years, this aspiration was broadly understood, even among settlers themselves, as an unattainable fantasy. However, the near-total destruction of Gaza and the growing perception that the ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip has, at least semi-explicitly, become one of the war aims of Prime Minister Netanyahu, have emboldened settler groups to believe that such a scenario might also be possible in the West Bank. Israeli forces kill three Palestinians in violent West Bank settler assault Read More » Ethnic cleansing in the West Bank would, however, present far greater logistical and political challenges than in Gaza. Unlike Gaza, the West Bank features a more intertwined population of Palestinians and settlers. Additionally, Jordan (positioned just across the border) would almost certainly respond with far less tolerance than Egypt in the event of any Israeli attempt to forcibly expel hundreds of thousands of Palestinians into its territory. Nevertheless, some of the methods currently employed by the Israeli military in Gaza appear to be gradually making their way to the West Bank, albeit on a smaller scale. In recent months, large sections of the Tulkarm and Jenin refugee camps, along with other areas, have been bulldozed, and hundreds of homes have been demolished by Israeli forces. The images emerging from these sites increasingly resemble those coming out of Gaza. Even if the West Bank is not yet experiencing a full replication of the Gaza campaign, what is unfolding may well be seen as preparation for a more extensive effort by Smotrich and the settler militias to 'clear' key areas of Palestinians. A race between thugs Last Friday's attack on the Israeli army by settler militias marked a rare deviation from the unwritten rules that have long governed the relationship between settlers and the military in the West Bank. This breach prompted some criticism within Israel. However, such criticism is unlikely to have any meaningful impact on the militias' operations or on the broader trajectory of settlement expansion and Palestinian displacement. Defence Minister Israel Katz, who recently revoked the use of administrative detention orders against Jewish settlers (thereby weakening the enforcement powers of the Shin Bet's Jewish Division) has now announced the formation of a new police unit tasked with addressing settler violence. Israel's Ben Gvir calls for aid to be bombed amid siege on Gaza Read More » According to Katz, the Israeli army and the Shin Bet will be involved in some capacity, but the unit will be led primarily by police officers. In practice, however, there is little doubt that the appointment of the unit's commander will require the approval of Ben Gvir, who oversees the police and is widely seen as an ally of the settler movement. As such, the creation of this unit appears less a genuine effort to curb settler violence and more a political manoeuvre to manage public perception. It is likely aimed at deflecting criticism rather than seriously addressing the ongoing attacks. Public assaults on Israeli soldiers are broadly unpopular within Israel, and even Israelis from the centre and centre right oppose settler violence against Palestinians. These factors pose a potential threat to the political project advanced by Smotrich and the settler militias. Yet despite these internal tensions, the project is unlikely to be fundamentally derailed. Smotrich and Ben Gvir, who serve as the settler movement's most prominent representatives within the Knesset, are now deeply embedded within the core of the Israeli government, making it difficult to envisage any scenario in which this agenda is meaningfully challenged from within. Still, as is often the case within violent movements of this nature, there may be more extreme elements who perceive Smotrich and Ben Gvir as too moderate or insufficiently committed to the cause. But this is ultimately a competition among factions driven by escalating radicalism. It is a race between thugs.
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Hamas ceasefire response expected within 24 hours, Trump says
More than 90 killed by Israeli strikes and shootings on Wednesday and Thursday Hamas in talks on final details of Gaza ceasefire US plans nuclear talks with Iran in Oslo next week, Axios reports One killed in Israeli drone strike on vehicle in Beirut At least 57,130 Palestinians killed and 135,173 wounded since Gaza war began
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Sensible statesman or 'Never here Keir'? Starmer buffeted by a year of headwinds
Not since Winston Churchill took power just as France was falling to Nazi Germany in 1940 has a British prime minister entered Downing Street to face such an onslaught of international turbulence. When he took power after victory in the July 4 election last year, both Germany and France's leaders were politically emasculated and US President Joe Biden's authority was tumbling. Then Donald Trump was elected president and the political landscape turned into disarray. In his first year in office, Keir Starmer, 62, has had to leverage Britain's modest authority on the international stage to find some form of normality in a world of wars in Europe and the Middle East. Weakened But the sensible global statesman persona has come at some cost, with a neglected domestic front weakening his authority, which in turn could damage his international standing. Even his own MPs are muttering about 'never here Keir' due to the machine-gun diary entries that have sent him abroad. That unintentional absence, on top of several misguided policies, has seen Labour's standing in the polls plummet, threatening its 'super majority' of 156 MPs and letting in the hard-right populist Reform party of Nigel Farage. The prime minister's authority with Labour MPs reached its lowest ebb on Tuesday after he had to heavily water down a welfare-reform bill to avert a rebellion by more than 120 members. The huge increase in support gained at the general election had already been curtailed by Mr Starmer's questionable stance, shortly after the October 7 Hamas killings, when he suggested that Israel had the right to withhold water to Gaza. Four of the new MPs entering the Commons were all Muslim independents, largely elected on a pro-Palestinian vote and all in former Labour seats. Tremors for that loss of popularity have been felt in the latest polling that extraordinarily suggests Reform would get the majority of seats, 271, if a general election was held today, with Labour second on 178, Lib Dems on 81 and the Conservatives fourth with just 46. Fresh start It all looked so different a year ago when The National watched as Mr Starmer, accompanied by his wife Victoria, walked into Downing Street and announced that he would restore level-headed government, fix the economy, spur house building and revive the NHS. There is a festering problem around Gaza, which I'm fearful people won't forget Jon Cruddas Minutes earlier his predecessor, Rishi Sunak, had departed, ending 14 years of Conservative rule that in the chaotic, mismanaged post-Brexit years had resulted in a decline in Britain's global standing. Labour had been handed a toxic legacy by the Tories, including a £20 billion black hole in finances, unchecked migration and a hollowed-out military and NHS. 'The inheritance was abysmal and that needs replaying,' said Labour's policy thinker Jon Cruddas, who retired as an MP at the election. John Slinger, who became an MP for the first time last year, suggested that a 'poisoned chalice was quite deliberately bequeathed by the Tories', impeding Labour's ability to grow the economy without resorting to tax rises. That, agreed another Labour backbencher, was 'cunning, did us damage and we've paid a political price'. Ultimately most people in Labour would acknowledge that 'they haven't got everything right' but it had faced circumstances 'more challenging than any government in living memory', said Joe Dromey, general secretary of the Labour-leaning Fabian Society. 'It has been a very tumultuous situation especially since the re-election of Donald Trump, with the geopolitical order being turned on its head and unleashing of trade wars.' Rioting While absorbing the economic shock of what the Tories left behind, Mr Starmer was jolted into dealing with his first crisis. After the murders of three girls at a Taylor Swift dance class, the country exploded in a series of anti-migrant riots. That was three weeks after Labour came to power. Most commentators agreed Mr Starmer handled the crisis well, resolving another Conservative inheritance of overcrowded prisons by rapidly clearing space for the 200 or so convicted rioters. If it seemed things settled for a while then the political power battle between his chief of staff, former civil servant Sue Gray, and others in Downing Street culminated in the former's departure in October. There were other early speed bumps such as revelations about 'freebies' given to ministers, which in Mr Starmer's case was for accepting director's box tickets to Arsenal football matches, suits and glasses. Gaza mood change Those early controversies subsided only to be replaced by the hastening global crisis and the Gaza situation in particular. Labour looked to position itself as tougher on Israel than the Conservatives, which had shown lukewarm support, by introducing a modest arms embargo, agreeing to not oppose international arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and restoring UNWRA aid funding. That placated some MPs for some months, as did the January ceasefire, but with Israel embarking on its revised security plan for Gaza and recommencing military action in March the mood in parliament 'dramatically changed', said Mr Slinger. 'With civilian suffering on a totally unacceptable scale the actions we've taken have become more condemnatory and the Israeli government doesn't like it, but the way they're acting now in Gaza, you just cannot have humanitarian suffering on that scale,' he added. But that change has come too late for some party stalwarts. Mr Cruddas warned that Labour's initial stance had 'damaged the credibility of the moral character of the government'. 'There is a festering problem around Gaza, which I'm fearful people won't forget, and it's not just about our relationship with Muslim voters it's a wider question of our ethical approach to what's been happening across the Middle East,' he said. Labour's Gaza position had 'created a rupture with Muslim voters', the back bench MP source said, which was why independent MPs such as Shockat Adam won their seats. The majority of MPs in the Commons now support UK recognition of a Palestinian state, Mr Adam told The National, 'yet the government doesn't seem to listen'. He also described the UK's sanctioning last month of two Israeli cabinet ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, as 'tokenistic gestures' in a government's stance that was 'extremely disheartening and disappointing'. Trump sweeteners Surprisingly to some, despite having no previous experience, Mr Starmer has added polish to his reputation through his international work. Labour was savvy enough to sweeten Mr Trump before his election win and since then the Prime Minister has trodden a careful path to avoid both sycophancy and confrontation. That allowed Britain to become the first country to sign a trade deal with America, although potential US tariffs remain a concern. 'He's proven to be smart and agile in not getting boxed in, in a very difficult international environment,' said Mr Cruddas. 'He's played that quite well.' Despite opposing politics, Mr Starmer had 'surprised quite a few people' with his constructive Trump relationship that 'paid off' with the trade deal, added Mr Dromey. An example of that came when Mr Starmer delicately navigated the potential maelstrom fallout of the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's White House confrontation with Mr Trump in February. He was behind some form of reconciliation that has secured continued US backing for Ukraine and, with Mr Starmer's urging, greater Nato-wide support for defence spending. Trade deals have also been struck with India and the EU that will help the economy and defence is receiving significant uplift, albeit at the cost of the international aid budget. U-turn But domestic disquiet is growing among Labour MPs deeply concerned at welfare payment cuts and the axing of winter fuel payments to pensioners. These have resulted in government U-turns which can have an eroding effect over time on a prime minister's authority. That was also not helped by the 'narrative of decline and defeatism' of the government blaming the Tories for the UK's dire state, said Mr Cruddas. 'Talking down the country is not helpful, he needs to be much more positive and assertive,' he advised. But Mr Slinger argued that their policies will see the economy grow and that people's anger being 'exploited by Reform will dissipate'. His backbench colleague suggested that even after a year in office 'most governments are unpopular … it's the nature of things.' Mr Starmer has until August 2029, at the latest, to improve his fortunes if he wishes to win a second term.
