‘Tony Blair hasn’t learned from the Iraq War – but Keir Starmer has’

What’s the story?

If there's one man in Britain who knows a thing or two about wars in the Middle East, it's Tony Blair.

It doesn't mean he should be listened to though.

Blair has said the UK should have backed Donald Trump's war in Iran "from the very beginning", during a private event for Jewish News.

“If they are your ally and they are an indispensable cornerstone for your security... you had better show up," he added – according to reporters who attended the event.

Keir Starmer has permitted the use of British military bases and other assets for defensive purposes in supporting the American and Israeli war on Iran.

Blair's words have been strongly rejected by members of the Labour government, and The News Agents have spoken of how the "shadow" of the Iraq war – widely seen to have irreversibly damaged Blair's reputation – now hangs over Starmer's Labour.

"Blair is apparently very pissed off that his words came out," says Jon Sopel.

"But surely he knows better than to think a lunch organised by a newspaper is a safe space, where he can express his viewpoints and it won't get reported."

The former PM, despite sitting on Donald Trump’s 'Board of Peace', has rarely shared his views on world affairs since leaving office in 2007.

"There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and Blair made the wrong judgment," says Lewis Goodall.

"He says to this day – and I'm sure he'll go to his grave saying – that he made the right judgment."

Keir Starmer's judgement on the current situation, Lewis adds, is "aging like a fine wine".

Why Starmer has been 'vindicated' on Iran War judgement

When Donald Trump teamed up with Israel leader Benjamin Netanyahu to invade Iran, he expected the world powers to fall in line.

But this didn't happen – and the UK was among the countries unwilling to follow the US president into a war which hadn't been explained, justified or fully planned for.

Like the Iraq War, there is nothing set for what comes after the conflict, with recent footage showing scenes of devastation after the bombing of Tehran's oil depots, and the bombing of a desalination plant both likely to cause long-term problems for the country.

"If Starmer had backed this to the hilt, as Blair would have done, he would have had no choice but to take the Trump line, which is these consequences are bad, but it's worth it, and a small price to pay," says Lewis.

This is the message Trump has shared with the American public, saying the soaring prices of oil across the world is the cost of "safety" from the perceived threat of Iran to US citizens.

"Starmer would have been in a position where he had to defend a war that he doesn't really understand the point or purpose of," Lewis adds.

"If he'd backed it in the way that Blair would have, Starmer would have been politically accountable in Britain for the consequences because – to some extent – it would be partly his war."

Should we listen to Tony Blair on the Middle East?

Public opinion was divided in 2003 on whether the UK should join the invasion of Iraq.

In 2026, polling suggests most Britons do not support the invasion in Iran, or the UK's involvement.

And Jon, who says he believes Blair was right to invade Iraq in 2003, says Blair’s comments about the UK's involvement in 2026 are wrong.

"No explanation has been given for this war in Iran, no preparation of the ground, no arguments about what the military objectives are – there's nothing," he says.

Fortunately for Starmer, Lewis adds, offering only minimal support to Trump's war also aligns with his personal beliefs on the matter.

He says Blair has an “incorrect” understanding of what the relationship between the UK and the US really entails.

"It is clear that Starmer has learned from Iraq," he says.

"Blair does not seem to have done so."

Listen to the latest episode of The News Agents.