Why does Keir Starmer's obsession with international law stop at the Strait of Hormuz?
The UK is choosing to ignore a legally binding UN resolution, presumably because it doesn’t fit its politicised grandstanding on the war, writes Jeff Blackett
Last month, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2817 condemning Iran for attacking its neighbours, for the deliberate targeting of civilians and for the 'attacks and threats on merchant and commercial vessels in and near the Strait of Hormuz'.
Listen to this article
It demanded the immediate cessation of all of those attacks and called upon Iran to comply fully with its obligations under international law.
The resolution went on to condemn “any actions or threats by the Islamic Republic of Iran aimed at closing, obstructing, or otherwise interfering with international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, or threatening maritime security in the Bab Al Mandab".
“Any attempt to impede lawful transit passage or freedom of navigation in the international waterways,’ the resolution read, “constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security.”
Keir Starmer, however, didn’t get the memo. Despite the UK voting for the landmark resolution, the Prime Minister has made a virtue of not sending the Royal Navy to assist the US Navy’s blockade of Iranian ports this week.
“My decision”, the Prime Minister told the BBC, “has been very clearly that whatever the pressure - and there's been some considerable pressure - we're not getting dragged into the war”. He went further - "that's not in our national interest, because I'm not going to act unless there's a clear, lawful basis and a clear thought-through plan”.
For a Prime Minister who, along with his Attorney General, Lord Hermer, is obsessed with international law, this isn’t only entirely legally illogical but smacks of hypocrisy.
The UK is choosing to ignore a legally binding resolution, presumably because it doesn’t fit its politicised grandstanding on the war. After all, the same resolution affirmed the right of “individual and collective self-defence in response to the deplorable armed attacks by the Islamic Republic or Iran, as recognised by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter”.
It could not be clearer: it is lawful under Article 51 for UN member states to attack and destroy any Iranian ship, submarine, aircraft, drone, missile or mine which may be used to prevent ships from transiting the Strait. The US’s move to impose a blockade on Iranian ports to prevent them from selling oil and gas and dispatching naval assets to disrupt international shipping through the Strait is, indisputably, a legitimate and legal act.
If the Prime Minister were truly committed to upholding international law, the UK would be standing shoulder to shoulder with the US at this point.
Perhaps more concerning than an impotent Prime Minister is the question of whether the UK could even do anything if we wanted to. Indeed, for more than two decades until December last year, the UK maintained a frigate or destroyer and four Mine Counter Measure Vessels in the Gulf to guarantee the right of passage through the Straits. But when they were needed, they were nowhere to be seen because this irresponsible Government withdrew them without any replacement.
In short, the UK voted for this Resolution and has an obligation to enforce it. It is our war because we are part of the United Nations, which has condemned Iran. It is our war because we uphold the right of freedom of navigation on the high seas. It is our war because Iran is a rogue state and a threat to international peace and security, and the global economy. For all of these reasons, it is in the UK’s best interest to support the US in every way possible to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. That means we should send sea and air assets to the area to defend shipping transiting the Straits: using armed force in collective self-defence to prevent any Iranian attacks on shipping. That would include bombing missile and drone launch sites, searching and destroying Iranian mines, sinking any Iranian ship or submarine that threatened ships lawfully transiting the Strait.
The Prime Minister and Attorney General seem to view international law through the lens of the far left. Together, they have contrived a policy which has forced a wedge between the UK and our closest ally, weakened NATO and done nothing to prevent Iran from undermining the peace and security of the Middle East. Only a fool would consider that to be in the UK’s best interests.
____________________
His Honour Jeff Blackett OBE was Judge Advocate General of the Armed Forces between 2004 and2020 and a former Royal Navy officer.
LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.
To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk