UK military could 'potentially' be used to defend Israel, chancellor tells Sky News
The chancellor has told Sky News that UK military assets could "potentially" be used to help defend Israel, and the government is "not ruling anything out".
Rachel Reeves said that while the UK is calling for de-escalation in the region, it is also sending military assets, including fighter jets, "to protect ourselves and also potentially to support our allies".
The chancellor went further than the prime minister last night, who confirmed the movement of military assets, but refused to say if they could be used to help Israel.
She also warned about rising oil prices and disruption to key trade routes in the Middle East, which could see inflation in Britain.
Politics Hub:
Speaking to Sky's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, the chancellor said sending military assets to the Middle East "does not mean that we are at war", and emphasised that "we have not been involved in these strikes or this conflict".
"But we do have important assets in the region," she continued. "And it is right that we send jets to protect them. And that's what we've done. It's a precautionary move, and at the same time, we are urging de-escalation."
Asked what the UK government would do if the Israelis requested the deployment of assets to support their operations, Ms Reeves reiterated that there has been no UK involvement so far and would not get in to "operational decisions for the future".
She said: "This is a fast moving situation. Israel has every right to defend itself. We also are very concerned about Iran's nuclear deterrent."
She continued: "We have, in the past, supported Israel when there had been missiles coming in. I'm not going to comment on what might happen in the future. But so far we haven't been involved. We're sending in assets to protect ourselves and also potentially to support our allies."
Pushed on the question of what the UK would do if Israel asked for support with its operations, the chancellor replied: "I'm not going to rule anything out at this stage. It's a fast moving situation, a very volatile situation. But we don't want to see escalation."
Read more:
Asked if the UK would support a change of regime in Tehran, she replied: "I've got no time for the Iranian regime for the suppression and repression of their own people, and we have serious concerns, which we've expressed on a number of occasions, about the Iranian nuclear programme.
"But we want to see de-escalation at the moment. We are not trying to ramp up the rhetoric."
Ms Reeves also warned of the consequences of the conflict in the UK, saying that oil and gas prices "have gone up by just over 10%" since the conflict started, and warning there is a risk that key trade routes through the Middle East could be disrupted.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Starmer resists recognising Palestinian state as unions' demand deepens Labour split
Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will not agree to recognise a unilateral Palestine as a state, as a civil war over the issue threatens to erupt in his party. With tensions mounting in the Middle East, given the ongoing blockade of Gaza by Israel and the region on the brink of all-out war between Israel and Iran, Sir Keir made it clear that the UK government will not budge. The prime minister said: 'Our position on recognition of Palestine as part of the process hasn't changed for us. I hold very strongly to the belief that the only long-term solution to the conflict in the Middle East is a two-state solution. However hard that may seem at the moment in the current circumstances, that is the only way to peace. So that continues to be our position.' His comments came as the Trades Union Congress (TUC), Labour's biggest financial backer, issued a joint statement with its Canadian and French counterparts calling on the UK government to change its position. It makes three demands, including recognising Palestine's statehood. They are calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire, and for the government to ensure the Israeli government meets its obligations under international humanitarian law. The statement said: 'We urge our governments to formally recognise the State of Palestine now and to stand firm in their opposition to the atrocities committed in Gaza and in the West Bank. 'We welcome the recent joint statement by our heads of state calling for an immediate halt to Israel's assault in Gaza and for unimpeded access to humanitarian aid. 'These are critical first steps toward alleviating the suffering of civilians caught in the conflict. 'Our governments rightly acknowledged that permanent forced displacement is a breach of international humanitarian law, and we welcome their opposition to settlement expansion and the recognition that it is illegal and undermines the viability of a Palestinian state. However, words must be matched by action. 'As members of the G7, doing so would send a powerful signal – particularly in the lead-up to the UN conference co-chaired by France in mid-June. 'The time for decisive action is now. The need for justice, peace, and recognition has never been more urgent.' The text, seen by The Independent, comes as Sir Keir is in Canada meeting new PM Mark Carney for trade talks before attending the G7 summit where the Middle East crisis will be top of the agenda. It follows pressure from a number of senior Labour figures – including Commons foreign affairs chair Dame Emily Thornbury – for the UK to follow the example of Ireland, Spain and Norway last year to officially recognise Palestine as a state. Added pressure on the issue has even come from the Tories, with a group of Conservative MPs signing a letter from former minister Kit Malthouse demanding Palestine be recognised as a state. The Green Party and SNP have also long supported the policy. However, Jon Pearce, chair of the Labour Friends of Israel, which has a number of powerful cabinet allies, including the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, and the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Pat McFadden, has pushed back against the growing demands in Labour for Palestinian recognition. He claims it would undermine Britain's position as an honest broker in the conflict. He told The Independent: 'Given the all-too-evident threat posed by Iran's nuclear and ballistic missiles programmes, and its support for terrorism and proxy armies, not just to Israel and the region but to our own national security, it is vital that the UK maintains its diplomatic influence and credibility with our allies. 'Last year, Ireland, Spain and Norway unilaterally recognised a Palestinian state, but it changed nothing on the ground. If Britain were to follow this course, we would inevitably damage our reputation as an impartial broker and reduce our ability to have an impact.' He added: 'The Oslo accords state that any dispute must be resolved through direct negotiations. If Britain and our allies abandon our commitment to this core principle underpinning the accords, this will be a gift to those in Israel and the Palestinian Territories who have always opposed them and risk unleashing unbearable consequences for both Israelis and Palestinians. 'Recognition is a card that can only be played once. It must be done when it will have maximum impact.'
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NHS faces paying more for US drugs to avoid future Trump tariffs
Britain faces paying more for US drugs as part of a deal to avoid future tariffs from Donald Trump. The NHS will review drug pricing to take into account the 'concerns of the president', according to documents released after a trade agreement was signed earlier this year. White House sources said it expected the NHS to pay higher prices for American drugs in an attempt to boost the interests of corporate America. A Westminster source said: 'There's an understanding that we would look at the drug pricing issue in the concerns of the president.' The disclosure is likely to increase concerns about American interference in the British health service, which has long been regarded as a flashpoint in trade talks. It comes after Rachel Reeves announced a record £29 billion investment in the NHS in last week's spending review. The Chancellor's plans will drive spending on the health service up towards 50 per cent of all taxpayer expenditure by the mid-2030s, according to economists at the Resolution Foundation. The Telegraph has also learnt that under the terms of the trade deal with America, the UK has agreed to take fewer Chinese drugs, in a clause similar to the 'veto' given to Mr Trump over Chinese investment in Britain. The White House has asked the UK for assurances that steel and pharmaceutical products exported to the US do not originate in China, amid fears the deal could be used to 'circumvent' Mr Trump's punishing tariffs on Beijing. Mr Trump is enraged by how much more America pays for drugs compared with other countries and considers it to be the same issue as he has raised on defence spending. Just as the US president has heaped pressure on European nations to increase the GDP share they allocate to defence, he thinks they should spend more on drug development. An industry source said: 'The way we've been thinking about it and many in the administration have been thinking about it, it's more like the model in Nato, where countries contribute some share of their GDP.' Britain and the US 'intend to promptly negotiate significantly preferential treatment outcomes on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients', the trade deal reads. Pharmaceutical companies are also pushing for reductions in the revenue sales rebates they pay to the NHS under the voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing, access and growth (VPAG) – a mechanism that the UK uses to make sure the NHS does not overpay. Last week, Albert Bourla, Pfizer's chief executive, said non-US countries were 'free-riding' and called for a US government-led push to make other nations increase their proportionate spend on innovative medicines. He said White House officials were discussing drug prices in trade negotiations with other countries. 'We represent in UK 0.3pc of their GDP per capita. That's how much they spend on medicine. So yes, they can increase prices,' Mr Bourla said. Industry sources said there was no indication yet on what the White House would consider to be a fair level of spending. Whatever the benchmark, Britain will face one of the biggest step-ups. UK expenditure on new innovative medicines is just 0.28pc of its GDP, roughly a third of America's proportionate spending of 0.78pc of its GDP. Even among other G7 nations, the UK is an anomaly. Germany spends 0.4pc of its GDP while Italy spends 0.5pc. Most large pharmaceutical companies generate between half and three quarters of their profits in the US, despite the fact that America typically makes up less than a fifth of their sales. This is because drug prices outside of the US can cost as little as 30pc of what Americans pay. Yet, pharmaceutical companies rely on higher US prices to fund drug research and development, which the rest of the world benefits from. A month ago, Mr Trump signed an executive order titled 'Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients', which hit out at 'global freeloading' on drug pricing. It stated that 'Americans should not be forced to subsidise low-cost prescription drugs and biologics in other developed countries, and face overcharges for the same products in the United States' and ordered his commerce secretary to 'consider all necessary action regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or precursor material that may be fuelling the global price discrimination'. Trung Huynh, the head of pharma analysis at UBS, said: 'The crux of this issue is Trump thinks that the US is subsidising the rest of the world with drug prices. 'The president has said he wants to equalise pricing between the US and ex-US. And the way he wants to do it is not necessarily to bring down US prices all the way to where ex-US prices are, but he wants to use trade and tariffs as a pressure point to get countries to increase their prices. 'If he can offset some of the price by increasing prices higher ex-US, then the prices in America don't have to go down so much.' Mr Huynh added: 'It's going to be very hard for him to do. Because [in the UK deal] it hinges on the NHS, which we know has got zero money.' Under VPAG, pharmaceutical companies hand back at least 23pc of their revenue from sales of branded medicines back to the NHS, worth £3bn in the past financial year. The industry is pushing for this clawback to be cut to 10pc, which would mean the NHS would have to spend around 1.54bn more on the same medicines on an annual basis. The Government has already committed to reviewing the scheme, a decision which is understood to pre-date US trade negotiations. A government spokesman said: 'This Government is clear that we will only ever sign trade agreements that align with the UK's national interests and to suggest otherwise would be misleading. 'The UK has well-established and effective mechanisms for managing the costs of medicines and has clear processes in place to mitigate risks to supply.'
Bloomberg
33 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Blocked Israel From Killing Iran's Leader, Reuters Reports
President Donald Trump discouraged Israel from trying kill Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, after Israeli officials said they had an opportunity, Reuters reported, citing two US officials. Asked about the report, Israeli national security adviser Tzachi Hanegbi told Israel's N12 News that the government doesn't ask permission from the US for targets and that Israel isn't looking to overthrow the regime.
