“British involvement has already gone beyond what most would consider a defensive brief.”
By Carol Turner, Labour CND
Three days ago, on Saturday 28 February, the US and Israel began bombing attacks on Iran. Tehran and multiple cities across the country were bombarded in an attempt to assassinate the regime’s political and military leadership. Thus began the war on Iran that President Trump says could last for weeks. Attacks took place on Iranian nuclear, military, and energy facilities, as well as civilian structures.
After 48 hours of bombing, over 550 Iranians were dead and many more were injured. School girls in Minab, southern Iran, were early victims of the US-Israel blitzkrieg – over 100 died, many more were injured, and the school was destroyed. Concern for the civilian population will not stand in the way of Trump and Netanyahu’s campaign to crush Iran.
US objectives
Trump’s aims are clear, set out at the beginning of his second presidential term in National Security Presidential Memorandum 2, signed on 4 February 2025. The memo directs US agencies to initiate a ‘maximum pressure’ campaign against Iran, with the aim of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, ending its ballistic missiles programme, and closing down its support for proxy groups in the Middle East.
Statements by Trump at the outset of the bombing included:
- ‘They will never have a nuclear weapon.’
- ‘We are going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground.’
- ‘We are going to ensure that the region’s terrorist proxies can no longer destabilise the region or the world.’
Despite the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior figures, the initial attempt to behead Iran’s political and religious leadership has been unsuccessful. Another leadership was quickly reconstituted, and state institutions continue to function. Iran’s military, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has launched missile and drone attacks on Israel and carried out counter-strikes against US allies in the Gulf, targeting military bases, embassies, and airfields in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia.
Iran is OPEC’s third-largest producer, supplying around 4.5% of global oil. Initial attacks by the US and Israel have targeted Iranian energy facilities. Explosions were reported on Saturday in Kharg Island, which processes 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports.
By Monday, the conflict had spread beyond Iran’s borders. Israel and Hezbollah are exchanging fire, and Iran is targeting Gulf states’ oil and gas facilities.
The war has dramatically expanded.
Energy targets
Iranian retaliation has included attacks on oil and gas facilities in the Gulf and elsewhere. By Monday, Reuters was reporting that precautionary shutdowns across the Middle East were already causing supply disruptions. Traffic across the Straits of Hormuz was interrupted, and oil prices were rising.
- Israel has temporarily suspended production at Chevron’s Leviathan natural gas field, which supplies Israel, Egypt, and Jordan.
- Qatar halted liquefied natural gas (LNG) production, which accounts for approximately 20% of global supply and plays a major role in balancing Asian and European market demands.
- Most output in Iraqi Kurdistan is under precautionary shutdown, and
- Saudi Arabia has suspended operations in Aramco’s Ras Tanura refinery after it was hit by drones. Ras Tanura produces 550,000 barrels per day (bpd), a significantly large amount.
British government response
UK bases in Bahrain and Qatar have also come under attack, and the RAF has been deployed ‘in a defensive capacity’. A drone hit RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus on Sunday, with ‘minimal damage’ according to Cypriot authorities, and further drone attacks on Monday have been thwarted.
In a speech at the end of Sunday, Keir Starmer attempted to distance himself from US and Israel’s broader objective of regime change. ‘This is the British government protecting British interests and British lives,’ he said. However, in ambiguous fashion – which has become a signifier of his leadership – Starmer confirmed that Britain had agreed to allow the US to use British military bases for ‘defensive strikes’ on Iranian missile sites. This strongly suggests that British involvement has already gone beyond what most would consider a defensive brief.
Why now?
The bombing began only weeks after the latest round of indirect talks between the US and Iran concluded, with agreement by all parties that slow progress was being made. Whilst keeping the verbal pressure up with threats of attacks, Trump said the talks were moving forward, as did Oman’s Foreign Minister, who brokered the negotiations. Both confirmed that a further round would take place within weeks.
Ali Larijani, head of Iran’s National Security Council, issued a statement that a structured negotiating framework was beginning to take shape. President Masoud Pezeshkian reiterated that Iran was not seeking nuclear weapons, and shortly after talks adjourned, announced that Iran would permit verification inspections of nuclear sites.
At the same time, Netanyahu flew to Washington for a meeting with Trump. It was brought forward and took place in private. Trump said afterwards that ‘nothing definite’ had come out of discussions, prompting widespread speculation that the two might not be on the same page over Iran (see Will the US and Israel bomb Iran? Labour Outlook, 21 Feb 2025).
Iran was undoubtedly negotiating from a position weakened by heavy sanctions and the costs of the 12-day war last June. Worsening economic conditions had led to popular street protests. Netanyahu repeated his call for regime change as protestors took to the streets. Now was the time to strike, he argued.
Public opinion
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has called for an end to US-Israeli strikes and Iran’s retaliation, saying: ‘Military action carries the risk of igniting a chain of events that no one can control in the most volatile region of the world.’ Guterres is already being proven right.
US public opinion, including Trump’s base, is far from onside with this war. Some Republican politicians are openly querying it, and the Democrats are seeking a vote in Congress under the War Powers Act, in an attempt to curb the president’s powers.
The British public is also uneasy, sensing the potential for an out-of-control escalation in the Middle East and beyond. A large YouGov poll published on Monday showed clear opposition to US military action against Iran, by 49% to 28%. Broken down by which party respondents voted for in 2024, the results were as follows:
- 59% of Green voters, 29% of Lib Dem voters, 45% of Labour voters opposed the war
- 33% of Reform voters, and 14% of Conservative voters supported Trump’s war
This reinforces the unlearned lesson of the recent Gorton and Denton by-election. Labour’s focus on Reform must shift. It must also take note of opinion to its left.
How should the anti-war movement respond?
The job of the anti-war movement in Britain is to bring maximum pressure to bear to end the war in Iran, and to break the British government’s complicity in Trump’s war by allowing the US to access UK military facilities for their attacks. We have two immediate tasks. The first is to encourage the biggest possible show of support on the streets to demand an end to Trump and Netanyahu’s war on Iran.
That movement is already beginning to assemble. Within 48 hours of the bombardment, a wide range of trade union leaders have condemned the illegal war, the US abandonment of talks under pressure from Israel. Warning of possible devastating consequences for regional stability, they have opposed the indirect participation by the UK.
The TUC followed suit on Monday, with a General Council statement reaffirming its commitment to peace, diplomacy, and respect for state sovereignty, and opposing the use of force without clear UN authorisation. The statement calls for an immediate halt to hostilities and the urgent resumption of talks and calls on the UK government to do everything it can to resist efforts to drag Britain further into the conflict.
The second job of the anti-war movement is to do all we can to break the silence about what is happening. As the state continues to restrict the right to protest, and the government continues to shut down debate in parliament and amongst the public – not only on war, but the linked issues of military spending and rearmament, getting the truth across is an important part of encouraging public opposition. The anti-war movement can and should contribute to getting across what the government and media won’t tell us about what is happening.
Both these roles are essential and immediate if we are to campaign effectively for Hands Off Iran! No British Bases for US Attacks!
- Carol Turner is Vice Chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). You can follow her on Twitter/X, and CND on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter/X and TikTok.
- If you support Labour Outlook’s work amplifying the voices of left movements and struggles here and internationally, please consider becoming a supporter on Patreon.
Used under Creative Commons Licence
