Whether the UK wished it or not, we are now in the firing-line after Trump's strikes on Iran

22 June 2025, 11:45

The United States has attacked Iran’s nuclear weapons production facilities: good. But now we will need to live with the consequences.

First the positives. Whilst the effectiveness of the US attack is still to assessed - deeply buried facilities are hard to get at and the damage may be more superficial than hoped, or claimed, by President Trump - ‘defanging’ Iran and ensuring that it does not possess nuclear weapons has been a long-held western objective.

Whatever one thinks of President Trump, or even of Israel in the conduct of its operations in Gaza and the West Bank, if the Iranian facilities are effectively, ‘put beyond use’, the world will be a better, and safer, place.

It also serves as notice to Iran that the ambiguity of whether the US, in support of Israel or not, will put-up with the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran or not, is over.

They won’t. That is a significant re-ordering of the Middle East and themajor destabilising country in that region, responsible for widespread terrorism externally, and repression internally, will have suffered a strategic defeat.

The regime may collapse and we will need to ride the consequences: this will not be straightforward.

Reas more: What we know about the trio of Iranian nuclear facilities “obliterated” in the US strikes

Read more: LIVE: US 'obliterates' Iran's nuclear sites as Tehran warns 'dangerous' war has begun

Whether the UK wished it or not, we are now also in the firing-line.

The Middle East, where we have long historical links, recent engagement, and vital national interests, is now, once again, a potential front-line for us, just as, post-SDR, we were, supposedly, focusing on Europe.

A rattled, and deeply unpopular, regime will lash-out and may seek to attack, not only US assets in the region, but also those of US allies, such as Britain and France, that have bases within Iranian missile range. We will need to protect our bases and our interests, which includes trade through the Straits of Hormuz.

The real pity is that the UK, whose stated objective has also been, ‘There shall not be a nuclear-armed Iran’, did not have the moral courage, to immediately offer UK support not just to defend Israel against Iranian attacks but to offer, as a minimum and publicly, basing rights to US forces.

To will the end, no nuclear-armed Iran, but then to cavil over nice distinctions between ‘legitimacy’ and ‘legaility’ is to end-up, where we are: sitting on the fence and being, quite rightly, ignored and bypassed.

This matters because the most fundamental building-block in our security strategy is NATO and its Article V promise: that relies on all signatories being willing to fight for each other’s security.

If UK is not seen as a reliable partner in a matter of existential concern to a close ally, then we are in serious trouble. Our government will now need to work hard to assure partners, by deeds not words, that we are reliable and trustworthy: this will be a steep hill to climb for a government marked to date by puerile gesture politics and a weekly U-turn.

Simon Diggins OBE is a former Army Colonel and Defence Attaché in Kabul from 2008 to 2010.

He was a Military Advisor to the UN Special Representative to Secretary-General in Iraq between 2004 and 2005.

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