1 week ago
6
Energy Secretary controversially blocked US strikes on Syria in 2013 and has now repeated the same trick over Iran - the UK could pay a terrible price
11:59, Thu, Mar 5, 2026 Updated: 11:59, Thu, Mar 5, 2026
. (Image: Getty)
History, it seems, has a habit of repeating itself evermore. This month, Ed Miliband, the man whose crowning achievement was to do battle with a bacon sandwich and lose, seems to have dedicated a lion's share of his efforts to frustrating the special relationship once more.
Red Ed, fresh back from turning off some more oil wells, one assumes, appears to have led the charge to block US pleas to use British bases to strike against the Iranian regime. Cast your mind back to 2013 when David Cameron sought approval for military action against Bashar al-Assad's Syrian despotism after it gassed its own people. A handwringing Miliband, presumably terrified of having to make decisions, led his party to block those strikes as well.
Rattling his chains, he invoked the ghost of Iraq, warning of mission creep as he railed against the idea that striking against a despot was a good thing.
While Britain was subsequently benched, Russia stepped into the vacuum, and Assad clung onto power for over a decade more. Miliband never looked back – and even now, as Assad is relegated to his Moscow apartment playing PlayStation games, Red Ed insists he was right. It tells you everything you need to know about his judgement.
Fast-forward to 2026, and one of our closest allies calls on Britain to step up to the plate. Donald Trump prepares strikes against a despotic regime whose daily routine in their Parliament consists of kicking the day off with chants calling for the death of the West.
All he asks is to be able to make use of the Diego Garcia joint UK-US base. The request goes to Cabinet, and step forward Ed Miliband.
The Energy Secretary apparently argued, as he did in 2013, that supporting pre-emptive strikes would have breached international law.
Never mind that Iran has been racing towards a nuclear weapon, never mind that Tehran has backed attacks on British soil, and never mind that hundreds of thousands of British citizens live in the Gulf states now under Iranian missile fire. Miliband wanted his Iraq moment again, and now he wanted to be the man who said no to America.
Sir Keir Starmer went along with it, kowtowing to a man whose main passion in life appears to be the erection of windmills. But the damage was already done, Donald Trump took to the airwaves to eviscerate the special relationship and proclaim his disappointment in our grey Prime Minister and his Cabinet of cowards.
Ensure our latest politics headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as Preferred Source in your Google search settings.
David Cameron's bid to intervene in Syria was thwarted by Ed Miliband (Image: Getty)
Even now, the United Kingdom's interests abroad, and its people, are living under the threat of Iranian missiles. We cannot afford the luxury of preening whilst the world burns.
Our security and the freedom of the Western world depend on our alliance with like-minded allies, which include our American cousins. When the United States asks for help defending its interests and ours, we do not respond by citing the Iraq war.
Miliband, since being foisted from the leadership of his party some years ago, has evolved into a symbol of everything dangerous about the modern Left. He is more comfortable opposing Western power than confronting genuine threats. He sees every military action through the prism of Iraq, as if that single mistake invalidates all future uses of force. He elevates process over outcome, legalism over reality.
The result is that our country is left weakened by the hesitation and indecision of a Government that no longer leads, it merely occupies the corridors of power. It is this hesitation and doubt that emboldens our enemies and alarms our friends.
The latest politics news - straight from our team in Westminster Invalid email
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
Britain has learned hard lessons about appeasement. We know what happens when we mistake restraint for virtue, and yet here is Miliband, back in government, applying the same failed thinking to a new crisis.
In 2013, his opposition to Syrian strikes helped prolong Assad's butchery. What will be the price of his obstruction this time?
English (US) · 