Why does Britain have a role in the Israel-Iran conflict?

Its history in the Middle East means the United Kingdom will always be a prisoner of its past, as Sean O’Grady explains

Britain has ordered RAF aircraft into the Middle East “for contingency support across the region”. At the G7 summit, Keir Starmer also stressed that “the constant message is de-escalate” and said he will bring whatever influence he can to encourage the entire group, and crucially the United States, to adopt such a stance.

In recent weeks, notably at the United Nations, the UK has also taken a more critical attitude towards Israel’s actions, especially over the conduct of the war in Gaza, while continuing to state that Israel has a right to defend itself. How much influence Britain still has on events in the region, however, is debatable…

What does Keir Starmer want?

He is conflicted. Sir Keir certainly doesn’t want to see tensions in the region escalate, with all that implies for even more geopolitical instability and the spread of the current conflicts, both in the Middle East and in Ukraine, spreading further. Like the other G7 leaders, he will also be conscious that Taiwan remains highly vulnerable to an attack by China, which could take opportunistic advantage of the chaos to reunify the Chinese nation – a top priority for Beijing.

There’s also the ever-present internal instability in Syria and Iraq, in Yemen and Iran itself, and, less likely, Saudi Arabia. Economically as well as geopolitically, there’s a lot at stake for a medium-sized open European economy dependent on the free passage of marine cargo through the Strait of Hormuz and on to the Suez Canal.

Can Britain act unilaterally?

Not really. UK arms exports to Israel are minimal, and to Iran, non-existent. The government has ruled out an embargo on spare parts for Israeli air force fighter jets. The cancellation of free trade talks with Israel was more symbolic than anything, and the same goes for the Israeli individuals sanctioned by the British government.

Does Britain matter?

To a surprising degree. Long past its imperial prime, the legacy of that era lives on in the minds of Israeli and Iranian leaders. Britain, in other words, looms larger in their consciousness than it has any right to, for mostly purely historical reasons.

Why does Britain matter to Israel?

Because it was the last imperial power in the former Palestine Territory, taken over from the Ottoman Empire after the First World War, and under British administration granted as a mandate from the League of Nations, then the United Nations. The proto-Israelis fought a war of independence against the British until they hurriedly withdrew and the UN partitioned it terribly.

Only a few weeks ago, the Israeli foreign ministry made scornful reference to this background when it rejected British criticism of its government: “The British Mandate ended exactly 77 years ago. External pressure will not divert Israel from its path in the struggle for its existence and security against enemies seeking its destruction.”

It’s also fair to say that events in the region have also affected British politics, notably in the internal affairs of the Labour Party, and the election of five independent MPs elected last July on a “pro-Gaza” manifesto.

Why does Britain matter to Iran?

Also, for mainly historical reasons. For decades, certainly since “Persia” emerged as a buffer between the Russian Empire and the Indian Ocean and the British Empire, and when oil became of strategic importance, the UK has sought to interfere in Iranian affairs. A key moment came when the American CIA and the British organised a coup against the then-prime minister of Iran in 1953, to protect Western oil interests with the help of the pro-Western Shah.

However, there had been almost constant British military and political intervention for decades before. When the Islamic Revolution overthrew the Shah in 1979, America was called “the Great Satan” and the UK “the Little Satan”, which denoted status for the British, at best. Naval skirmishes with Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, the imprisonment of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, and long-running disputes over money kept by the British after an aborted arms deal further poisoned relations in recent times.

Where are the British popular?

The Gulf kingdoms: close royal links, their taste for life in London, and the lingering legacy of Lawrence of Arabia have helped to foster a degree of warmth.

And the future?

Memories tend to run back a long way in the Middle East. Given that the British have had some sort of a colonial role in Cyprus, Egypt (especially in the Suez crisis), Sudan, Palestine/Israel, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Aden/Yemen, Iran and Afghanistan, sometimes reprised in more recent times, and not always recalled fondly, the UK will be a prisoner of its past just as much as any nation in the region for a long time to come.