
Britain must take on the vile Iranian regime
History rhymes, but rarely repeats itself exactly. The fact that the West failed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya does not mean that Britain should now pursue a policy of total disengagement in the Middle East.
For the sake of global peace and stability, America and Britain must get involved in the project to strip Iran of its nuclear program and downgrade its offensive missile capabilities. This does not mean boots on the ground, from any Western power, or any direct attack by British forces on Iranian territory. What it does mean is permitting and encouraging the use of the Diego Garcia airbase by US bombers, and assisting with the defence of Israeli airspace against Iranian drones and missiles.
It would be greatly in our national interest. Iran is sponsoring terrorist activity against the United Kingdom and its allies, funding Hamas and Hezbollah, arming the Houthi militias that are disrupting world trade, hell-bent on obtaining nuclear weapons, and dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state as a core matter of state doctrine. It is, in other words, difficult to think of an alternative regime which would be worse for Britain's interests in the region, and the chance to deal it a blow at minimal cost to ourselves is one we should leap at.
It would also be a deserved punishment for a vile regime. While some appear eager to downplay Tehran's crimes, it should be remembered that the principal victims of the Iranian state are the Iranian people; the women and minorities tortured and disappeared, and those forced to flee for their safety. We should not miss the chance to downgrade the capabilities, particularly through fear of repeating previous errors.
What went wrong in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya was not the idea that the West could intervene for the better in a complex region, but the decision in the first two to put boots on the ground, and in Libya to intervene without care as to which force would replace Gadaffi.
In Iran, in contrast, the primary objective would be to defang an already maximally destabilising power, decapitating its military leadership, dismantling its nuclear programme, and striking military assets used to bomb Israel and threaten Western bases. Should this prove a catalyst for regime change, this would likely be an improvement: the Iranian people have no great love for their leaders, and may replace them with a government less hostile to the West.
Rather than standing in the way of American and Israeli efforts to conduct such an operation, Downing Street should be offering assistance. It would leave Britain in a safer position than the status quo, with our regional interests advanced: a clear strategic victory.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Sky News
9 minutes ago
- Sky News
Israel-Iran live: Donald Trump arriving back at White House as Security Council mulls Iran action
22:23:11 Analysis: Trump facing 'biggest call of his presidency to date' Donald Trump is preparing to make the biggest call of his presidency to date, US correspondent David Blevins says. The president is due to arrive back at the White House shortly, where he'll hold a National Security Council meeting to discuss the Israel-Iran conflict. "It's very unusual for Donald Trump to spend Saturday and Sunday at the White House," says Blevins. "And equally unusual for him to be meeting with his national security team as often as he is." The US currently has a group of B-2 bombers heading from America towards the Pacific region, which could then potentially head onwards to the Middle East if Trump approves it. On Thursday, Trump said that he will decide whether the US gets directly involved in the conflict within a fortnight. In a call on the same day, Israeli officials reportedly expressed their displeasure at such a timeframe (see 21.10pm post). "All of this speaks to the challenge facing the president right now," adds Blevins. "With his own base divided, his own administration arguably divided, it's going to be the biggest call of his presidency to date." 22:21:26 Iran launches new wave of attacks on Israel - report Attack drones have been moving towards Israel "for hours" as part of Iran's latest attack, local media says. "This operation will be continuous and unsettling," a spokesperson for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is quoted by the Tasnim news agency as saying. We'll bring you more on this as it develops. 22:07:34 More buildings struck at Isfahan, nuclear watchdog says The UN's nuclear watchdog has confirmed that several more buildings at the Isfahan nuclear site have been struck amid Israel's ongoing attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities. The site in central Iran was first hit on 13 June when four buildings were damaged, with six other buildings attacked today, the International Atomic Energy Agency says. These include a fuel rod production facility, nuclear material storage and laboratory, it added. 21:51:01 Israeli strikes heard in southern Iran - report Iranian media says that Israel had launched strikes on the southern city of Shiraz, which hosts military bases. The Mehr news agency says the city's air defences have been activated and have been "engaged in fighting hostile targets and Zionist aircraft". Air defences are also reportedly being engaged in the southern city of Bandar Abbas. A little earlier, the Israeli military said it was attacking drone and weapons warehouses in the region. 21:34:24 Iran's internet partially restored after 62-hour blackout Iran's internet connectivity has been partially restored after a widespread 62-hour blackout that began early Wednesday, according to internet monitoring group NetBlocks. The outage was described by NetBlocks as the most severe and extensive internet shutdown in Iran since the November 2019 protests. In the initial hours of the blackout, only 3% of Iranian users had access to the global internet, NetBlocks reported. 21:10:01 Israel seeks swift action on Iran, sources say Israeli officials have reportedly told the Trump administration they don't want to wait two weeks to learn if the US will join the Israel-Iran conflict. Donald Trump said on Thursday that he will decide whether the US gets directly involved in the conflict within a fortnight. According to the Reuters news agency, citing two unnamed sources, Israel believes it has a limited window of opportunity to move against the deeply buried nuclear site at Fordow, the crown jewel of Iran's nuclear program. The US is the only country with bombs powerful enough to reach the facility, which is dug into the side of a mountain. Four sources said it is now increasingly likely that Israel will launch a solo military operation at Fordow. Israeli air superiority over much of Iran makes an operation more feasible, though still risky, said two of the sources. Benjamin Netanyahu, defence minister Israel Katz and military chief Eyal Zamir reportedly part in the "tense" phone call with Washington on the Israeli side. JD Vance and defence secretary Pete Hegseth participated in the call on the US side, a security source said. 20:50:01 Watch: How close is Iran to producing a nuclear weapon? Last night, Donald Trump said US intelligence agencies were "wrong" after they said they had no evidence that Iran was building a nuclear weapon. Tehran has repeatedly denied that it is seeking a nuclear weapon and the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog said this month that it has no proof of a "systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon". But Iran is the only non-nuclear-weapon state to enrich uranium up to 60% - a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. So, how close is it to producing a nuclear weapon? Our US correspondent Mark Stone takes a look... 20:30:01 Palestine a 'central issue' to Iran, supreme leader says Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has this evening shared a message in support of the Palestinian people. Posting on X, he said the victory of Palestinians "is something that's definite".


The Guardian
40 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Kneecap's Glastonbury performance not ‘appropriate', says Keir Starmer
Kneecap's Glastonbury festival performance next Saturday is not 'appropriate', Keir Starmer has said. Kneecap member Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh appeared in court on Wednesday after allegedly displaying a flag in support of the proscribed terrorist organisation Hezbollah and saying 'up Hamas, up Hezbollah' at a gig in November last year. In an interview with the Sun, the prime minister was asked if he thought the trio should perform at Glastonbury. 'No, I don't, and I think we need to come down really clearly on this,' Starmer said. 'This is about the threats that shouldn't be made, I won't say too much because there's a court case on, but I don't think that's appropriate.' Earlier on Saturday the Conservative party leader, Kemi Badenoch, said she thought the BBC 'should not be showing' Kneecap's performance at the festival. In a post on X, accompanied by an article from he Times that claimed the BBC had not banned the group, Badenoch said: 'The BBC should not be showing Kneecap propaganda. One Kneecap band member is currently on bail, charged under the Terrorism Act. 'As a publicly funded platform, the BBC should not be rewarding extremism.' Badenoch previously called for the group to be banned from Glastonbury. Last year Kneecap won a discrimination case against the UK government in Belfast high court after Badenoch tried to refuse them a £14,250 funding award when she was a minister in the previous government. A BBC spokesperson said: 'As the broadcast partner, the BBC will be bringing audiences extensive music coverage from Glastonbury, with artists booked by the festival organisers. 'Whilst the BBC doesn't ban artists, our plans will ensure that our programming will meet our editorial guidelines. Decisions about our output will be made in the lead-up to the festival.' On Wednesday, Ó hAnnaidh, who performs under the stage name Mo Chara, was cheered by hundreds of supporters as he arrived with bandmates Naoise O Cairealláin and JJ Ó Dochartaigh at Westminster magistrates court in 'Free Mo Chara' T-shirts. Ó hAnnaidh was released on unconditional bail until his next hearing on 20 August. After the hearing, the rapper said: 'For anybody going to Glastonbury, you can see us there at 4pm on the Saturday. 'If you can't be there we'll be on the BBC, if anybody watches the BBC. We'll be at Wembley in September. 'But most importantly: free, free Palestine.' The charge followed a counter-terrorism police investigation after gig footage came to light, which also allegedly showed the group calling for the deaths of MPs. In April, Kneecap apologised to the families of murdered MPs but said footage of the incident had been 'exploited and weaponised'.


The Independent
42 minutes ago
- The Independent
Streeting: Assisted dying will take ‘time and money that is in short supply'
Wes Streeting has warned that legalising assisted dying would take 'time and money' away from other parts of the health service. The Health Secretary, who opposed the legislation in the Commons, said better end-of-life care was needed to prevent terminally ill people feeling they had no alternative but to end their own life. Mr Streeting, writing on his Facebook page, said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups. The Government is neutral on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill which cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday. Mr Streeting, who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation, said: 'Gordon Brown wrote this week that 'there is no effective freedom to choose if the alternative option, the freedom to draw on high-quality end-of-life care, is not available. Neither is there real freedom to choose if, as many fear, patients will feel under pressure to relieve their relatives of the burden of caring for them, a form of coercion that prioritising good end-of-life care would diminish.' He is right. 'The truth is that creating those conditions will take time and money. 'Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service – and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest – setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. 'There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one.' Mr Streeting said his Department of Health and Social Care 'will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill' as it goes through the House of Lords. Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. 'They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz off to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lords and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not a very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. Lord Shinkwin added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.'