How The Iraq War's Legacy Shaped The UK's Iran Response

Summary

---

Newscast: How the Iraq War’s Legacy Shaped the UK's Iran Response

Date: March 8, 2026
Hosts: Paddy O’Connell, Laura Kuenssberg, Henry Zeffman
Guests/Contributors: Yvette Cooper (Foreign Secretary), Ben Wallace (former Defence Secretary), Iranian Ambassador to the UK

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, the Newscast team unpacks how the legacy of the Iraq war is influencing the UK government's response to the current Iran conflict. With the backdrop of fraught transatlantic relations, political criticism from figures like Donald Trump and Tony Blair, and public skepticism rooted in the past two decades of British foreign policy, the hosts explore the dilemmas and debates facing Keir Starmer's government. The episode also features a rare interview with the Iranian ambassador to the UK amid ongoing violence in Iran and shifting regional alliances.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Transatlantic Tensions and Trump’s Criticism

Timestamps: 03:39–06:40

• Laura details former President Trump's social media tirades, in which he publicly dismissed the UK's proposed military support and mocked the state of the British fleet:

  “Donald Trump... slagged off what's meant to be his closest ally... He said the US doesn't need the UK... He said the UK's only got one aircraft carrier that's in any state to be sent..."
  — Laura Kuenssberg [03:48]

• Henry points out the political irony for Prime Minister Keir Starmer, whose efforts to build bridges with Trump have now failed, but who may paradoxically benefit domestically:

  "...there is the frame of Sir Keir Starmer spent 15 or so months trying to get as close to Donald Trump as possible and that strategy has gone down in complete failure... But is the question of that competing impulse between the strategic priority... and the political imperative... to find ways not to annoy the British public?"
  — Henry Zeffman [04:36]

• The discussion highlights how Trump’s popularity (or lack thereof) in the UK allows Starmer to use the rift for some political cover.

2. The Shadow of Iraq

Timestamps: 10:00–14:30

• The hosts dissect Tony Blair’s public and private interventions, where he suggests the UK should align with the US, recalling his 2000s leadership during the Iraq war.

• Yvette Cooper (Foreign Secretary) addresses these criticisms on the show, arguing for lessons learned and asserting the UK's independent decision-making:

  “...it is important to learn lessons for what went wrong in Iraq... all of our decisions need to be about what is right for British citizens and in the UK's national interest... That's what Keir Starmer has been doing..."
  — Yvette Cooper [10:23]

• Henry emphasizes the extent to which Iraq still overshadows Labour politics:

  "It's so striking to me how much the spectre of Iraq has loomed over this whole week in the government and in the Labour Party..."
  — Henry Zeffman [11:16]

• Paddy summarizes public disillusionment post-Iraq:

  "...the Iraq war stirred up the feeling that Britain had joined a war without knowing why, without crucially... knowing what comes after you depose the regime. And... it generally always goes very badly."
  — Paddy O'Connell [12:35]

3. The Complexity of the UK’s Position

Timestamps: 07:23–08:31; 14:30–16:56

• The team analyses the UK’s so-called "Goldilocks" stance — not fully committing to US-led military action but not abstaining entirely:

  "So it's a kind of in and out, you know, Goldilocks position, isn't it? You know, not... quite hot enough, not quite cool enough..."
  — Laura Kuenssberg [07:23]

• The debate around whether the UK's base permission for US operations can hold as "defensive only" grows:

  "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...? Yes, it would... But...do you detect nerves in government about whether or not that can actually hold?"
  — Laura Kuenssberg [19:10]

• Henry notes political and practical worries within the UK government over both transparency (is this really only “defensive”?) and military preparedness, especially concerning Cyprus:

  "...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 protect... Cyprus..."
  — Henry Zeffman [19:51]

4. Diverging Lessons from History: Blairism, Legalism, and “National Interest”

Timestamps: 15:00–18:55

• Henry details the Labour leadership’s complicated journey with Blair-era veterans now advising Starmer but a very different strategic ethos prevailing:

  "Jonathan Powell was Tony Blair's chief of staff for the full decade... and is now this government's national security advisor... But you have a very clear... divergence in worldview... Keir Starmer... also thinks that [the Iraq War] was illegal, essentially. And that legal view of the world is pretty different to how Tony Blair sees great power relations..."
  — Henry Zeffman [15:00]

• Laura underscores international law’s ambiguity in practice:

  "International law is not written in tablets of stone. International law is always something that politicians have argued about... It is very much open to interpretation..."
  — Laura Kuenssberg [16:56]

5. Broader Political Dissensus and Public Sentiment

Timestamps: 25:00–26:13

• Henry and Laura reflect on the fracturing of traditional foreign-policy unity in Westminster:

  "It has been very striking the extent to which there has not been a consensus politically on how the government should handle this... We are not in anywhere close to the world... where there was complete and total consensus in Parliament..."
  — Henry Zeffman [25:00]

  "I think you're right. I think it's been smashed to bits... wherever possible, opposition parties stick closely to the government... That is not the world that we are living in anymore."
  — Laura Kuenssberg [25:57]

6. Voices from Iran: Interview With the Ambassador

Timestamps: 28:27–31:11

• Laura conducts a tense, probing interview with the Iranian Ambassador, challenging him on the government's killing of protesters and information suppression:

  "Your government killed thousands of their own people and the world saw that."
  — Laura Kuenssberg [30:07]

  "Because the Internet now [is] using as a military devices against Iranian security..."
  — Iranian Ambassador [31:11]

• The discussion highlights the difficulty of independent reporting from Iran and the uncertainty about the true level of support for the regime among ordinary Iranians.

7. Will This War Change Iran’s Regime?

Timestamps: 31:18–33:36

• Henry explores whether the current conflict could bring about regime change and what price the UK would consider worth paying:

  "If this war does precipitate regime change in Iran, will that then have been deemed by Sir Keir Starmer to have been worth it?... regime change is just one of the constellation of reasons..."
  — Henry Zeffman [31:39]

• Laura notes the limits of external hope or expectation regarding Iranian “regime change,” absent true on-the-ground reporting.

---

Notable Quotes

• “This is not the future we were promised.”
  — Henry Zeffman [01:07, recurring throughout]

• “It's so striking to me how much the specter of Iraq has loomed over this whole week in the government and in the Labour Party.”
  — Henry Zeffman [11:16]

• “...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...”
  — Laura Kuenssberg [13:20]

• “International law... is very much open to interpretation and it is not written on tablets of stone.”
  — Laura Kuenssberg [16:56]

• “Your government killed thousands of their own people and the world saw that.”
  — Laura Kuenssberg [30:07]

---

Important Segments by Timestamp

• 03:39–06:40: US-UK political and military tensions, Trump’s social media outburst
• 10:00–14:30: Tony Blair’s intervention; Iraq War’s lessons and public distrust
• 19:10–21:16: UK’s "defensive only" position—government anxiety and Cyprus
• 25:00–26:13: Collapse of Westminster consensus on foreign policy
• 28:27–31:11: Interview with Iranian Ambassador: protest crackdowns and information control
• 31:39–33:36: Prospects for regime change in Iran and UK’s stance

---

Tone & Style

The episode maintains Newscast’s typical combination of conversational banter and incisive political analysis, mixing wit with sober assessment. Laura, Henry, and Paddy all strike a tone of skepticism towards official narratives and display clear-eyed awareness of the complexity and high stakes involved. The exchanges with guests, especially Yvette Cooper and the Iranian Ambassador, are direct and challenging.

---

Conclusion & Forward Look

• The podcast closes with a sense that the UK’s position is both deeply constrained and fiercely debated, with the spectre of Iraq war failures looming over every decision.
• The team predicts a week of heated Westminster debates about the UK’s role in the Iran conflict, public and parliamentary opinion, and the risk of wider repercussions, including impacts on the cost of living in the UK.
• The legacy of Iraq endures as a warning, shaping every aspect of the UK’s Iran response—as much in public mood as in policy, reinforcing the government's preference for caution and clarity over automatic alliance.

---

Transcript

[Paddy O'Connell]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.

[Podcast Advertiser]

You know that goal you set at the start of the year? You can still do it. Whether you're committed to a thru hike with friends, lifting heavier or simply walking more. It's not too late to stick with it and make your future self proud. Especially with the all in One Nutrition Shake from Cachava because quality nutrition shouldn't be complicated. Just two scoops of Cachava's all in One Nutrition Shake and you've got 25 grams of protein, 6 grams of fiber, greens, adaptogens and so much more. Plus it actually tastes delicious. No fillers, no nonsense, just the good stuff your body craves. So instead of adding to your backstock of supplements that over promise and under deliver, simplify your progress with just two scoops of the highest quality ingredients. Stick with your wellness goals. Go to kachava.com and use code fitness for 15% off. That's kachava.com and use Code Fitness K A C H-A-V-A.com Code Fitness this is

[Henry Zeffman]

not the future we were promised. Like hold that up for a tagline for the show from the BBC. This is the interface, the show that explores how tech is rewiring your week and your world.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

This isn't about quarterly earnings or about tech reviews.

[Henry Zeffman]

It's about what technology is actually doing to your work and your politics, your everyday life and all the bizarre ways people are using the Internet. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Patrick Nutcracker is the word I would use.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

I thought you were going to call me Nutcracker because I said your name.

[Paddy O'Connell]

You could say that. Kirsten Keir Starmer's been nutcrackered by comments from Sir Tony Blair and President Trump.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Yes, he has. Both of whom are figures not universally loved by people in his own party, but their status as a former incredibly successful in many ways, Labour Prime Minister and the current occupant of the White House means that criticism from them is not something that Keir Starmer would choose to have. And it has brought to life the political awkwardness of the raging dangerous war in the Middle east that it has just become over a week old.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Welcome to Sunday's newscast, newscast, newscast from

[Henry Zeffman]

the BBC Fat boy sliver me in the classroom doing our violin lessons. I was the tattletale in the classroom.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Can I have an apology please? I trust almost nobody that daddy has

[Henry Zeffman]

to sometimes use strong language next time

[Laura Kuenssberg]

in Moscow I feel delulu with no salulu Take me down to Downing street

[Henry Zeffman]

let's go have a tour. Blimey.

[Paddy O'Connell]

It's Paddy in the studio.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

And it's Laura in the studio.

[Henry Zeffman]

And it's Henry at home.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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.

[Henry Zeffman]

Well, as I told you both, I was at a wedding last week and a big fan of the podcast who I've not met before came up to me and said, you're Henry at Home. And so, you know, I do have a surname too, by the way, in case anyone's wondering, it's Zeffman. And I'm here 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.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

You're Henry at and I'm BBC Laura Kay. And that's just. Thing is, once you've got a name, that's just what you get. So there you are.

[Paddy O'Connell]

I think it could be a substack Henry at Home, couldn't it? It could be a whole, whole lifetime

[Laura Kuenssberg]

with interior design tips.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yeah, it could be anything.

[Henry Zeffman]

I wouldn't go quite that far. Not sure anyone would want my tips

[Paddy O'Connell]

when it takes off. We won't, we won't be getting any slice of it.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

We'll have retired by then.

[Paddy O'Connell]

So the conversation actually on the airwaves is all about what the US president says about the UK's military support or not.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

And Donald Trump, in one of his late night 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. 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? Donald Trump said, actually the reality is the uk is 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 bezy mate across the Atlantic.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Henry at home.

[Henry Zeffman]

Well, I think there's two levels on which you can look at this. There is the frame of Sir Keir Starmer 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. 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?

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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, Yvette 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.

[Yvette Cooper]

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, 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, deep, important security partnership with the United States. But we also have some issues where we disagree in the British interest.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Look, we're seeing these pictures here of President Trump and Keir Starmer 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.

[Yvette Cooper]

Well, you'll forgive me that I focus on the substance rather than on social media posts. And I've learnt this long enough to know.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

So should we ignore him? Should we just ignore him?

[Yvette Cooper]

Social media posts. If you follow every single social media post, you spend an awful lot of time doing social media posts in response.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Well, the President seems to spend a lot of time doing social media posts.

[Yvette Cooper]

I think the substance we should concentrate on is what is the right thing to do.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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 Keir Starmer. He ends up getting the respect of some people for having made Donald Trump cross. That's a possibility. The other way then of looking at this B point 4 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 Cypriots, for example, have been cross about what they perceive as being 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.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yes. Because this is really about what the President posts online. Yeah. As distinct from war on Iran, which is something that all of the people in the world are wondering, when does it. When and how does it end? And so Yvette Cooper's really trying to separate out what the President says from what the underlying sort of relationship is.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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 was not be leaked. And he said what we would expect him to see, 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 Keir Starmer's decision to sit out the original attacks on this war. But it was interesting here def hearing Yvette Cooper talk about this this morning, who of course was a minister in Tony Blair's government. 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. In the run up to the Iraq War. So that's a little kind of mini drama in this whole saga.

[Yvette Cooper]

I know there are some people in politics who think that we should just unquestioningly agree with the us, whatever. I know there are also some people in politics who think that we should never agree with the US and we should never go along with anything, any joint action. I just think. This is my point.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

You were a minister in his government. Would you say to him, and this

[Yvette Cooper]

is my point to him, I don't 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 Labour government, I also think it is important to learn lessons for what went wrong in Iraq and to recognise whether that is about ensuring that the purpose for any action that the UK becomes a part of and just recognising 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 Keir Starmer has been doing, and I think he's right to stand up for Britain and Britain's interests.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

But whether it is Donald Trump, it's

[Henry Zeffman]

so striking to me how much the specter of Iraq has loomed over this whole week in the government and in the Labour Party. You know, we have seen, I think, since New Labour left office in 2010, how much Iraq still hangs over the Labour Party. It's a big reason why Ed Miliband, now the Energy Secretary and now quite a crucial voice we're understanding in the private discussions about how to approach this. It's 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 Keir Starmer became leader, you know, one of his 10 pledges, which famously he junked, was about a commitment to always have a parliamentary vote before 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, 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 Labour politicians have said about why they are taking the actions they're taking in relation to this conflict.

[Paddy O'Connell]

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.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Are you sure?

[Paddy O'Connell]

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 Henry's saying to us, the Iraq war comes back, even though the country we're talking about is Iran.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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 Keir Starmer and getting him some praise in some quarters for not going, what you might say, full boots in here. But we're gonna have to see. This is still really early days.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Henry, can I get your readout on the Tony Blair specter 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 Keir Starmer early days was leaning into the experience of Tony Blair, who was a massive election winner. And there was Jonathan Powell, there was Peter Mandelson. What I mean, everyone in Britain's on a journey. What journey has Keir Starmer been on with Tony Blair?

[Henry Zeffman]

Well, Keir Starmer wrote a long legalistic article in the Guardian opposing the Iraq war when he was Keir Starmer QC and had no political profile back in 2003. So I think he was in a different place 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 Corbynism without Corbyn position, moved to the right. And I mean, I think just worth spelling out some of those names you mentioned there. Everyone will know who Peter Mandelson is now, but Jonathan Powell, who, you know, people see in some ways, no offense to Laura's guest on the program today as sort of the true anchor of Britain's foreign policy these days. Jonathan Powell was Tony Blair's chief of staff for the full decade that he was Prime Minister and is now this government's national security advisor. Until recently, Keir Starmer's 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 Yvette Cooper, who served, as Laura said at length, in Tony Blair's government. But you have a very clear, I think, divergence in worldview that you've seen this week. Keir Starmer, 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. It's also actually pretty different to even how some of Sir Keir Starmer'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 Keir Starmer'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.

[Yvette Cooper]

Yeah.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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 Whitehall jargon, is fungible 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, Keir Starmer 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 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. And 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.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yeah. Keir Starmer has said that he'll allow the US to use our bases 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.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Well, that's right. And the print, you know, the principle is, would an American plane be allowed to take off from a British base to fly to Iran to drop a bomb on the middle of Tehran 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 or 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?

[Henry Zeffman]

Yes, without question. Nerves about 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. Definitely. And I think it'll be one of the stories of the coming week because though Sir Keir Starmer 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, 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, at about what strikes the US Is or is not carrying out from UK Bases and 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 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 in the region much quicker when instead you have Cyprus being protected by France and others.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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 result in.

[Paddy O'Connell]

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 you could argue would expect him to say that, but he's written a

[Laura Kuenssberg]

whole piece and others would agree. Yeah, many people would agree with that.

[Paddy O'Connell]

And I could, I could detect that the, the live wire of this, the third rail of this argument, because we had Sir Ben Wallace on Radio 4

[Laura Kuenssberg]

today, former Defense secretary under the Conservative.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yes, but 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 this readiness of our armed forces. But here's what he said about the row, which is where we began this newscast. And interestingly, he didn't make it worse for the prime minister, Ben Wallace. He criticized what Donald Trump had said, but he did criticize, repeat the Conservative position that the UK should have acted earlier.

[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, 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 late 30s. Ultimately, America does need Britain. It's why he got so upset that he couldn't use our bases. He needs Britain 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 Headgarth, his defense secretary, insulting Britain's contribution to Afghanistan and all the allies. So I wouldn't get too upset by his true social binge. You know, none of us should get upset even about my own Twitter feeds. I think think best to park that. I think the real key here is 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 Yvette 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.

[Henry Zeffman]

This is not the future we were promised. Like, how about that for a tagline for the show from the BBC. This is the interface, the show that explores how tech is rewiring your week and your world.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

This isn't about quarterly earnings or about tech reviews.

[Henry Zeffman]

It's about what technology is actually doing to your work and your politics, your everyday life and all the bizarre ways people are using the Internet. Listen, on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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.

[Henry Zeffman]

It has been very striking the extent to which there has not been a consensus politically on how the government should handle this. Keir Starmer has held, I think, the Labour Party, the parliamentary Labour 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, October 7, in 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.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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.

[Paddy O'Connell]

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.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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 Doucet 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 Tehran, 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, 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, paddy, 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

[Paddy O'Connell]

this, so it's reckoned 40,000 people were killed with the reaction of the regime to the growing protests they saw because there's an economic crisis in Iran, prices have multiplied and it very hard for people to get by. That's one of the root causes. It means that 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.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

That's right. So it's rare that somebody from the regime would accept a request for an interview. 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 flavour of how he answered those questions.

[Iranian Ambassador]

Iranian side has their own problems due to the economic sanctions against us. And the Iranian people unfortunately has their own problems, you know, in this matter. But I do believe, I do believe, yes, now the, our people are in a very painful and sensitive period of time, but they are, they are supporting the government against the foreign invader, foreign aggressors to same. If you go to the inside of Iran, you can see one solidarity, one unity among the people.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Ambassador, we would love to be able to report independently from inside Iran to see what is really going on.

[Iranian Ambassador]

Why not?

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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 mortuary, the Karazakh 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.

[Iranian Ambassador]

Laura, again, I recommend you to be very vigilant and delicate for us have

[Laura Kuenssberg]

verified those images independently.

[Iranian Ambassador]

Mr. Adams, let me finish. And so I do not want to say that we do not have any problem. No, the problem. There are the problems there are in our country. But you see that how to settle, how to address this kind of problems according to the Iranian laws and regulations, it's very important. And the other than without any interference of the foreign countries against Iran.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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?

[Iranian Ambassador]

Because the Internet now using as a military devices against Iranian security, the Iranians

[Paddy O'Connell]

are not held to account in their own country. This is the starting point. You have held the ambassador to this country to account on the killing of civilians. Henry, when you hear that, there is an argument which presumably we will hear made in Parliament for why the war was prosecuted by the United States in the first place.

[Henry Zeffman]

Yeah, certainly. And there is a, 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 Starmer 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, Paddy, regime change is just one of the constellation of reasons that have been given by President Trump or senior members of this White House for the reason that they've launched this war. So, you know, it's just one piece of the puzzle, I guess.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Yeah. Because Donald Trump had earlier said he destroyed their nuclear capabilities. So that doesn't square with having to take out more of their capabilities, including what Israel says is an existential risk to the country.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

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, Patty, 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 to report freely from that country. We just can't know how likely or not that will be.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Okay, so we're reaching the end. Henry, do we have anything important to preview in the week ahead?

[Henry Zeffman]

Well, I just think it's really striking how this is going to continue to dominate the UK Government, I think for the coming days, if not weeks. And it is a reminder that you can stay out of this war to a degree. But whether this ought to be the case or ought not to be the case. The UK is living in America's world and there's an argument over the extent to which it should be and there's an argument over the ways in which the Keir Starmer 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 this year in relation to different American issues. Skier Starmer 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 And I think we'll hear more and more about what the UK government could and should do about that as well.

[Paddy O'Connell]

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.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

I bet there are. Fascinating. Thank you both very much indeed. Thank you newscasters for being with us on Sunday. James and Alex will be here tomorrow. A treat for your ears. So much news to talk about.

[Paddy O'Connell]

So thank you for listening and Henry at home. Goodbye.

[Henry Zeffman]

Goodbye.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

Goodbye. Newscast Newscast from the BBC.

[Paddy O'Connell]

Thank you so much for making it to the end of Newscast. You clearly copyright Chris Mason Ooze stamina. Can I gently encourage you to subscribe to us on BBC Sounds?

[Henry Zeffman]

Don't forget you can email us anytime.

[Paddy O'Connell]

It's newscastbc.co.uk and if you would like to join our Discord Community community to talk about everything newscast related, there is a link in the description of this podcast. And don't be scared. It's super easy to click on it and then get set up. Or you can WhatsApp us on 033-01-239480 and I promise you, we read and listen to every single message.

[Henry Zeffman]

Thanks for listening to this podcast by. This is not the future we were promised. Like how about that for a tagline for the show from the BBC. This is the interface, the show that explores how tech is rewiring your week and your world.

[Laura Kuenssberg]

This isn't about quarterly earnings or about tech reviews.

[Henry Zeffman]

It's about what technology is actually doing to your work and your politics, your everyday life life and all the bizarre ways people are using the Internet. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.