Donald Trump and Tony Blair weigh in on UK's Iran response | BBC Newscast

Patrick, >> Nutcracker is the word I would use. >> Oh, I thought you were gonna call me nut Nutcracker because I said your name. >> You could say that K. You could say >> Karm has been nutcrackered by comments from Sir Tony Blair and President Trump. >> Yes, he has. Both of whom are figures not universally loved by people in his own party. Um but their status as a former incredibly successful in many ways Labour prime minister and the current occupment of the White House means that criticism from them is not something that Kristar would choose to have. And it has brought to life the political awkwardness of the raging dangerous war in the Middle East that has just become over a week old. >> Welcome to Sunday's newscast. Hello, it's Patty in the studio >> and it's Laura in the studio >> and it's Henry at home. >> And it's Henry at home. I can I just say before we get into a very serious conversation, I think Henry at home is now something that should be trademarked. >> Well, as I told you both, uh I was at a wedding last week and a big fan of the podcast who I'd not met before came up to me and said, "You're Henry at home." Uh and so, uh you know, I do have a surname, too, by the way, in case anyone's wondering. is Zeffan and I appear on other bits of the BBC from BBC offices over the course of the week but I'm very happy on Sundays to be Henry at home. >> You're Henry at home and I'm BBC Laura Kane and that's just things is once you got a name that's just what you get. So there you are. >> I think it could be a Substack Henry at home, couldn't it? It could be a whole whole lifetime >> with interior design tips. >> Yeah, it could be anything. >> I wouldn't go quite that far. I'm not sure anyone would want my tips. But >> when it takes off, we won't we won't be getting any slice of it. >> We'll have retired by then. So the conversation actually on the airwaves is all about what the US president says about the UK's military support or not. >> That's correct. And Donald Trump in one of his late night uh messages on social media slagged off, let's just say, slagged off what's meant to be his closest ally, the UK, and its prime minister. and he said that the US doesn't need the UK. Um he said that this war in the Middle East is basically already been won by America and Israel and so what if the UK is now thinking about sending two aircraft carriers. Uh Donald Trump said actually the reality is the UK the UK's only got one aircraft carrier that's in any state to be sent to the Gulf. But even by Donald Trump's measure, it is a pretty extraordinary digital attack on your bezymeate across the Atlantic. >> Henry at home. >> Well, I think there's two levels on which you can look at this. There is uh the frame of Shakir Star spent 15 or so months trying to get as close to Donald Trump as possible and that strategy has clearly gone down in complete failure. It might have worked for a time, but it's very hard to see their relationship returning to what it was, even with this very capricious president. This feels much more like the situation that Theresa May ended up in with Donald Trump, where just for ages he was belittling her in public. >> Mhm. >> On the other hand, the prime minister has managed to avoid putting himself in the midst of on the side of a war which public opinion polling suggests so far is unpopular in the UK. and he's also clashing with a US president who has never been popular in the UK. So on that level politically, as sort of slightly kind of glib as it might sound, I think they're quite pleased with this in parts of the government. But is the question of that competing impulse between the strategic priority this government has had since President Trump returned to the White House and the political imperative this government has to find ways not to annoy the British public. And then I think there's a third element as well actually is whether or not this means anything of substance. So what the foreign secretary Cooper was saying to us this morning is oh focus on the substance, focus on the substance. I.e. ignore Donald Trump's late night messages on social media. I would say that this is about what's in the UK's interest. It's for the US president to decide what he thinks is in the US national interest. Uh and that's for him to do. But it is our job as the UK government to decide what's in the UK national interest. And that doesn't mean simply agreeing with other countries or outsourcing our foreign policy to other countries. We have to be able to take those decisions. Of course, we have a long uh deep important security partnership with the United States. But we also have some issues where we disagree in the British. >> We're seeing these pictures here of President Trump and Kharma laughing and joking as they did in the Oval Office. the king handing over this invitation to come and have tea with the king. This is a public and serious spat between the prime minister and the man who's meant to be our closest ally. >> Well, you'll forgive me that I focus on the substance rather than on social media posts. And I've leared for this long enough. So, should we ignore him? Should we just ignore social media post? If you follow every single social media post, you spend an awful lot of time doing social media posts in response. Well, the president used to spend a lot of time doing social media post it. >> I think the substance we should concentrate on is what is the right thing to do. >> So the politics of this actually could you might posit as some people in government might hope. You end up with a sort of unintentional Hugh Grant in love actually moment for Kier Starmer. He ends up getting the respect of some people for having made Donald Trump cross. That's a possibility. Um the other way then of looking at this be point4 is actually the UK government potentially has ended up in the worst of all worlds because they have made itself unpopular with its allies many of them particularly Americans but also we understand across the Gulf. The cpriates, for example, have been cross about what they perceive as been a lack of support. But also angering people on the left because although we're not wholeheartedly in this war in the way that America would like, there are American bombers that will be taking off from British bases, there are RAF jets in the skies in the Middle East shooting down and intercepting Iranian drones and missiles. So, it's a kind of in and out, you know, Goldilocks position, isn't it? you know, not not quite hot enough, not quite cool enough. That may prove in time to look like actually something politically convenient. Or it might just be awkward and you end up making everyone cross. >> Yes. Because this is really about what the president posts online. >> Yeah. >> As distinct from a war on Iran, which is something that all of the people in the world are wondering when does it h when and how does it end? And so Iet Cooper is really trying to separate out what the president says from what the underlying sort of relationship is. >> And she was also trying to I think have a bit of a pop at Tony Blair. So some of the other reporting this morning has been that Tony Blair told a private event that he hoped wouldn't be leaked. Well, actually, who knows? I'm speaking for Tony Blair. That's an outrageous thing to do. The expectation was that it would not be leaked. And he said what we would expect him to say, that America is your ally. They're an indispensable cornerstone for your security. You'd better show up when they want you to. So Tony Blair there all over the front pages this morning attacking Kier Starmer's decision to sit out the original attacks on this war. But it was interesting hear def hearing Iette Cooper talk about this this morning who of course was a minister in Tony Blair's government. >> This is my point to him. I know understand there are people who think we should just unquestioningly do so and that I just think is not in the UK's national interest. I also think having been a minister in the last Labor government, I also think it is important to learn lessons for what went wrong in Iraq and to recognize whether that is about ensuring that the purpose for any action that the UK becomes a part of and just recognizing that all of our decisions need to be about what is right for British citizens and in the UK's national interest. No other country would say, look, we want to just outsource our foreign policy. Everyone would say that actually what you need to do is to take decisions ourselves. That's what Karma has been doing and I think he's right to stand up for Britain and Britain's interest whether it is >> I thought she was you know quite deliberately taking a bit of a pop at the former Labor leader trying to evoke some of the memories of Iraq and you know maybe even that famous memo that Tony Blair wrote to George W. Bush we'll be with you whatever um in the run-up to the Iraq war. So that's a little kind of mini drama in this whole saga. >> It is so striking to me how much the spectre of Iraq has loomed over this whole week in the government and in the Labour party. You know we have seen I think uh since new labor left office in 2010 how much Iraq still hangs over the Labor party. Uh it's a big reason why Ed Milliband now the energy secretary and now quite a crucial voice we're understanding in the private discussions about how to approach this. is is one of the reasons that he beat his brother David to the Labour leadership in 2010. It was a big reason that Jeremy Corbyn became Labour leader in 2015 and in 2019 when 2020 sorry when Kier Stalmer became leader you know one of his 10 pledges which famously he junked was about a uh commitment to always have a parliamentary vote for military action. No Labour leader has prospered since Tony Blair without at least showing some intent to kind of constrain UK military involvement in the world as compared to Tony Blair. But I I even knowing that I don't know about you guys, I've been struck by how much Iraq comes up again and again both in private and in public in what Labor politicians have said about why they are taking the actions they're taking in relation to this conflict. I I completely agree. And of course there's a more eternal argument really when I was a student in I don't know if it was the 80s or the 90s I can't remember. >> Are you sure? The um the argument was against was on one side people who said we are a floating aircraft carrier. We are Americans poodle and we should not be in that position. And this was a long argument that was had and the Iraq war stirred up the feeling that Britain had joined a war without knowing why without crucially and this was the finding of the inquiry without knowing what comes after you depose the regime and that we are littered in the west with booting out strong men who and it is men who run oil rich states and it generally always goes very badly and that's the argument about not getting involved and that's why uh Henry is saying to us the Iraq hot war comes back even though the country we're talking about is Iran. >> And the other element of all of that which is why I think Iraq is still so toxic in our politics and also it still runs very hard in the minds of many members of the public is the perception that people were lied to. It wasn't just oh this is a war that nobody knew how it would end and off we went and wasn't that terrible. And let's not forget there were forces there on the ground. This is very very different in all sorts of ways and a huge number of civil civilian deaths and military deaths too. But that perception that the ruling class in this country lied to people in order to persuade them that that war was a good idea. And that's an argument that you know soured the incredible political success of Tony Blair forever and ever and ever and ever. So there's an awful lot of painful long history for Labor here. It is though curiously as Henry is saying yes that kind of political pain might actually end up helping Kier Starmer and getting him some praise in some quarters for not going what you might say full boots in here but we're going to have to see this is still really early early early days. >> Yeah. Um, can I Henry, can I get your um readout on the Tony Blair spectre for modern labor? Because if you think about the fact that it did look to me, who's not the expert in this room that Kstarma early days was leaning into the experience of Tony Blair who was a massive election winner and there was Jonathan Powell, there was Peter Mandlesson. I mean, everyone in Britain's on a journey. What journey has Kier Starma been on with Tony Blair? >> Well, Kier Stalmer wrote a long legalistic article in the Guardian opposing the Iraq war when he was Kia Starma QC and had no political profile back in 2003. So I think he was in a different place uh as regards Tony Blair then compared to when he became leader of the Labour party and as you say you know started having won the leadership from a sort of Corbinism without Corbyn position moved to the right and um I mean I think just worth spelling out some of those names you mentioned there everyone will know who Peter Mandlesson is now but Jonathan Powell >> who you know people see in some ways no offense to Laura's guest on on the program today as sort of the true anchor of Britain's foreign policy Jonathan Pal was Tony Blair's chief of staff for the full decade that he was prime minister and is now this government's national security adviser until recently. Karma was director of communications was a man called Tim Allen who had been Tony Blair's deputy director of communications. So that Blair world is to some degree back at the heart of government. You have ministers like Iette Cooper who served as Laura said at length in Tony Blair's government. Um, but you have a very clear, I think, divergence in worldview that you've seen this week. Kier Stalmer, you know, does not just think Iraq was a mistake because of what we've discussed about how there wasn't a thought through plan for what came next. I think that's the phrase he used earlier this week. He also thinks that it was illegal essentially. And that legal view of the world is pretty different to how Tony Blair sees great power relations clearly. Um, it's also actually pretty different to even how some of Sakir Starma's global allies who have ended up in a similar position on this conflict see things. And I think it's something we'll hear more about is whether, you know, this political debate about whether Karma's fidelity to international law >> feels a bit outdated in an era where even many of his allies kind of don't care about that anymore. >> Yeah. And also I would say this because I always say it and it's a really boring point but I think it's a really important point even if it does sound a bit boring because I've said it lots of times. International law is not written in tablets of stone. International law is always something that politicians have argued about. Different lawyers disagree on international law in different circumstances. So and often in political debates it's sort of used often by opposition politicians to say ah you cannot do this thing that I don't like because it would be against international law but international law to use a silly white hole jargon is fungeible in other way in other ways it is very much open to interpretation and it is not written on tablets of stone but as Henry says years ago at the Iraq invasion even though America really wanted to do it America and Britain labored for months and months and months and months and months trying to get legal sign off for the action that they wanted to take. This time that's out the window. President Trump's on the record saying I don't need international law. So it's a completely different world even though as Henry says Karma is somebody who still does see the world in that way of international rules which is why even though the UK has said yes that the US can use British bases the conditions on that they're trying to stick to are quite tight. those jets bombing uh Iran are specifically given permission to do so on things like missile missile launch sites. They're not being given permission to hit economic targets. They're not given permission to just do whatever they want. There are quite strict conditions that the UK is trying to impose on the US in order to be allowed to use those bases. The difficulty of course is if the government says, well, it's only defensive action in the fog of war. Where does defensive action end and offensive action begin? And I'm not sure that that position is going to be able to be held forever depending how long this goes on. >> K Starmmer has said that he'll allow the US to use our basis for defensive purposes only. Nigel emails. What does that actually mean as the US is on the offensive? So there's nuance wherever you look about one plane in the sky doing one thing and one plane in the sky doing another thing. >> Well, that's right. And the princ, you know, the principle is, would an an American plane be allowed to take off from a British base to fly to Iran to drop a bomb on the middle of Thran and maybe kill lots of civilians? No, it would not. Would a British air base be allowed to be used for an American plane to take off and fly to Iran and drop a bomb on a specifically agreed target from where missiles have been launched into Israel? Yes, it would. That's the principle. But Henry, do you detect nerves in government about whether or not that can actually hold when it comes into sharp relief with the real world? >> Yes, without question. uh nerves about uh that process of ensuring that the American strikes are only on what the UK government sees as defensive targets and then political nerves about the British public understanding and agreeing with the distinction. Um definitely and I think it'll be one of the stories of the coming week because uh though Sakir Storm gave that permission some time ago, it's only just beginning to start now. So I think you know if you want to sort of cast ahead to what's going to happen this week and you know you'd be crazy to predict what's going to happen this week uh this coming week given what's happened this past week but I think two of the big political rows in Westminster will be about that about what strikes the US is or is not carrying out from UK bases and uh whether HMS Dragon which we've talked about so much this week leaves Portsmouth and gets to Cyprus anytime soon because I do Actually, if you're asking where I detect the most nerves in government, I think it's not about their handling of what the US can and can't do with UK bases, it's about this suggestion that the UK was slow to pro protect what is British sovereign territory in Cyprus and the question of whether they ought to have had British well ought to have had that vessel uh in the region much quicker when instead you have Cyprus being protected by France and others. And let's hope for goodness sake that nothing awful happens. But you can see how the politics of that might unravel if a British ship has not arrived to defend that island and something terrible were to happen. You can imagine the political catastrophe that that could uh result in. >> So Lord West who ran the Navy is in the mail on Sunday today saying that the Navy's been run down too much. And and you could say you could argue would expect him to say that, but he's written a whole piece >> and others would agree and many people would agree with that. >> And I could I could detect that the the the live wire of this the third rail of this argument because we had Sir Ben Wallace on Radio 4 today, >> foreign defense secretary under the Conservative. >> Yes. >> And I'll play you a little bit of it. But he he didn't like the suggestion when I explained to him that it's been said on the airwaves in the last few days that it was 14 years of conservative monies that are under the microscope when you look at where this readiness of our armed forces. He was very feisty on that subject if you want to hear the whole thing. But here's what he said about the row which is where we began this newscast what must appear to many people days ago uh with the row over the remarks from Donald Trump. And interestingly, he didn't make it worse for the prime minister, Ben Morris. He he criticized what Donald Trump had said, but he did repeat the conservative position that the the UK should have acted earlier and basically should have been there with more support earlier. So, here's S. Ben Wallace. If we just deal with Donald Trump and his remarks, I mean, him and his gang know no history at all from what I can tell. Uh, we definitely needed the United States after the Battle of Britain, but we didn't say to them, "Don't show up. Thanks. you weren't there in the 1930s or or late late30s. Ultimately, America does need Britain. It's why he got so upset that he couldn't use our bases. He needs Britain uh for the basing, but he also needs Britain for the intelligence collection around the world. The Five Eyes partnership is not a one-way ticket at all. So, I think, you know, look, come on, that comes on the heel of him and his Pete Hegger, his defense secretary insulting Britain's contribution to Afghanistan and all the allies. So, I wouldn't get too upset by his true social uh binge. Um, you know, none of us should get upset even about my own Twitter feeds. I think best to park there. I think the real key here is uh actually Tony Blair's comments today is really really interesting or recent comments about whether or not we should have given permission for the United States to use our bases. And if you listen to Iette Cooper's answer today, it's sort of it's a bit odd. It's a bit bizarre, let me say, because fundamentally it is in Britain's national interest to help the ally, whoever is in the White House, that currently provides the cornerstone of our defense and security in Europe. >> There speaks a man who knows what it's like to be in government when Donald Trump is in the White House and you wake up in the morning and pick up your phone and wonder, "Oh my goodness, what's he going to have said next?" But I think the other point about that is there are different things in the national interest. You know, is it in the national interest to stand alongside America because it's such a special ally? Yes, the government would say yes to that. Is it in the British national interest to take part in what is considered by many to be a highly dangerous and illegal war? It's not necessarily in that national interest. So depending where you sit, the national interest has different flavors. >> Yeah. Henry, do you hear Ben Wallace setting an agenda there for for comments that be made this week? >> Yeah, definitely. I mean I think it has been very striking the extent to which um there has not been a consensus politically on how the government should handle this. Karma has held I think the Labor party the parliamentary Labor party together quite effectively and obviously that's his >> first political task and he'll be pleased with that. But we are not in anywhere close to the world of the aftermath of for example Putin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine where there was a complete and total consensus in parliament over how the UK government should handle that and even I think to some extent uh October the 7th and the aftermath of that I mean it fractured but initially there was pretty strong consensus in the House of Commons over that too. We've had a long time of foreign policy consensus in the House of Commons and I think partly because of the rise of insurgent parties of the left and right, but also just generally because of how different politicians view what's happening here in Iran and President Trump. I think we don't have that now and I think that's really interesting. >> I think you're right. I think it's been smashed to bits and it is the convention newscasters in this country that wherever possible opposition parties stick closely to the government when it comes to foreign policy and security policy and that is not the world that we are living in anymore. So let's go to events in Iran where we are reporting with thanks to our colleagues at BBC Persian service that a new Ayatollah new supreme leader is being chosen today and possibly has been chosen today. >> Yeah, that's what we understand. We don't know who it is. What we do know because the Iranians thought that there was of course a threat to them from America that they did have a whole sort of designated system as Liz Det was explaining to us a couple of weeks ago about how they would choose the next supreme leader. So our colleagues at BBC Persia understand that that process has happened that sort of inner council in Iran of what's left of the regime has got together and chosen the next leader but we can't tell you who it is because we don't yet have that information. Of course, right across the BBC, we're also reporting on the attacks that are continuing. Fire, black skies over Tyran, oil depots, we understand, have been hit. Incredible pictures and signs of awful, awful attacks there, but of course also across the region with Israel attacking in Lebanon and other places across the Gulf still being hit by Iranian drones, towers on fire in Kuwait, all sorts of things happening. So the information about all the different strands of the conflict is across the BBC on lots of different platforms for you and of course will be updated through the day. We should also say Patty we're recording this at 3 minutes past 11. So by the time you're listening to this newscasters undoubtedly there will have been many more events but just to give you a sense of the time at which we're recording this. So, it's reckoned 40,000 people were killed with the reaction of the regime to the growing protest they saw because there's an economic crisis in Iran. Prices have multiplied and it's very hard for people to get by. That's one of the root causes. It means that there are there is a strength of feeling in the country. We don't know how many people hold it. That is pleased that the regime is being bombed, that the military sites of repression, one woman said to me, are being attacked. We don't know of a hundred Iranians. We don't know how many Iranians think that, but we do know that's thought. We do know that the protests shocked the world. And we know you put the strength of that reaction to the Iranian ambassador to the UK. >> That's right. So, it's rare that somebody from the regime would accept a request for an interview. Um, but we were invited in yesterday to the Iranian embassy in London as we told you about yesterday. And of course, we did have the chance to put to him what the Iranian government had done, killing thousands of its own people on its own streets. And this is a flavor of how he answered those questions. >> Iranian side has their own problems due to the sound the economic sanctions against us. And the Iranian people unfortunately has their own problems uh you know in this matter. But I do believe I do believe yes now the our people are uh in a very uh painful uh uh and sensitive period of time but they are they are supporting the government against the foreign invader foreign aggressors >> to say amass if you go to the inside of Iran you can see one solidarity one unity among the people >> ambassador we we would love to be able to report independently from inside Iran to see what is really going on. Why not? But we have seen much of what has gone on. >> Just this morning, I looked at many of the images and watched some of the videos from what happened to protesters in your country in January. >> I looked at images and videos verified independently by our colleagues at BBC Verify that show body bags littered over the courtyard of a Mortimer, the Carisak Forensic Medical Center in Iran. I saw images of young, old teenagers, people killed by your government, beaten faces, bloodied bodies, gunshot wounds. How on earth do you justify that and sit there today saying our people have some complaints? Your government killed thousands of their own people and the world saw that. Nora, I I I I again I recommend you to be very viligent and dedicate delicate for and colleagues have verified those images of Iran. Let me let me finish and so I do not want to say that we do not have any problem. No, the problem there there are the problems there are in our country. But you see that how to settle how to address these kind of problems according to the Iranian laws and regulations. It's a very important and the other than without any uh interference of the foreign countries against Iran. >> This was not about interference. This was about your own people taking to the streets to protest against their suffering. And if you had nothing to hide, why turn off the internet during the protests? If you had nothing to hide, why not allow people to report freely and fairly >> because the internet now using for the as a military devices against the Iranian security. Henry, when you hear that um there is an argument which presumably we will hear made in parliament for why the war was p prosecuted by the United States in the first place. >> Yeah, certainly. And uh there is a um I think an interesting question for this government which is if and right now it feels like a very big if but if this war does precipitate regime change in Iran, will that then have been deemed by Sakir star to have been worth it? He used that phrase on Monday. He said, "We do not believe in regime change from the skies." But the UK government does believe at least in a sort of hopeful sense that it would be better for Iran to have a different kind of regime. But as you say, Paddyy, regime change is just one of the constellation of reasons that have been given by uh President Trump or senior members of this White House for the reason that they've uh launched this war. So, you know, it's just one piece of the puzzle, I guess. >> Yeah. Because Donald Trump had earlier said he had destroyed their nuclear capabilities. So that doesn't square with having to take out more of their capabilities, including what the Israel says is an existential risk to the country. >> Well, that's right. And when you speak to the Israelis, we spoke to the Israeli president this morning. He was sort of saying, well, Iranians should all rise up, but when the country is being bombed in the way that it does, that seems to me that's something that Israel and America can say rather than hope than expectation. You know, this is a very complex, fraught, dangerous moment, and we cannot tell or assess with any great certainty at all how likely or not it is that Iranian people will be able to muster opposition forces in order to be able to depose their government. We have no way of being able to assess that accurately. As you said, P, we can we know that many people in Iran do want change, but we cannot from the outside without being able to access get access uh to report freely from that country. We just can't know how likely or not that will be. >> Okay, so we're reaching the end. Henry, do we have anything important to preview in the week ahead? >> Well, I just think it's really striking how this is going to continue to dominate the UK government uh I think for the coming days. uh if not weeks. And it is a reminder that you can uh stay out of this war to a degree. Uh but uh whether this ought to be the case or ought not to be the case, the UK is living in America's world. Uh and there's an argument over the extent to which it should be and there's an argument over the ways in which Sakama is handling that. But this is going to be the big topic in parliament all week. And by the way, we talked about this a lot earlier the year in relation to different American uh issues. Skiama wanted to talk relentlessly about the cost of living. Remember that this is a war which could well have huge impact on the cost of living here in the UK. Uh and uh I think we'll hear more and more about what the UK government could and should do about that as well. The editor wants us to wrap up, but we had the boss of Octopus, Greg Jackson, on Radio 4 saying that there are talks now between the government and energy companies about the potential for on bills in the next few weeks. >> Well, I bet there are. Fascinating. Thank you both very much indeed. Thank you newscasters for being with us on Sunday. >> Henry home. Goodbye. >> Goodbye. >> Goodbye.

Today, we look at the extent to which the lessons learned from the Iraq war has shaped the UK's response to the war in Iran. Keir Starmer has taken a position somewhere between full support of Donald Trump’s actions, and direct criticism of them. In a post on Truth Social, the US president criticised the UK for being less than 100% supportive, saying ‘we will remember’ and "We don't need people that join Wars after we've already won!" On Friday, former Labour Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair told a private event that the UK should have backed the strikes from the beginning. But is Keir Starmer’s decision making being guided by some of the failures of the 2003 Iraq war, which Blair led the UK into?