All’s Quiet on the (Middle) Eastern Front: Uneven US-UK Relations Exposed by the Iran War

Image - Number 10

‍

On the 28th of February 2026, President Trump initiated US-Israeli airstrikes on Iran and denounced the UK government’s refusal of US forces to transit via Diego Garcia or RAF bases. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer strongly defended this decision, citing breaches to international law, and rejecting “regime change from the skies”. Yet this stance quickly unravelled, exposing British contradiction pressured by its relationship with the US.  

‍

Despite Starmer’s firm insistence that “we are not getting dragged into this [US-Iran] war”, it has emerged that the UK has quietly enabled US military action in Iran, therefore undermining public protestations criticising it. Furthermore, just a day later, Starmer approved US “defensive military action” against Iranian missile sites, conducted through UK bases. This reversal highlights the fragility and far from mutual US-UK relationship influenced by military dependency and public criticisms of UK action.  

‍

In January 2026, Declassified UK first identified the build-up of American military on British soil, highlighting US troops and airplanes departing from RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk. Despite requests for further information, Starmer maintained the UK’s refusal to join the Iran war, whilst the Ministry of Defence refused to comment. Meanwhile, a minimum of 28 US planes used UK bases between the 17th and 21st February and US military personnel were also observed loading explosive ordnance at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire.  

‍

Since Starmer’s approval of “defensive” US action against Iranian missile threats from UK bases on the 1st March, three more US bombers have landed in the UK. However, the build-up of B-1 and B-52 bombers signal an offensive, rather than defensive posture in the Iranian conflict.

‍

Both Declassified UK and The Black Agenda Report have outlined the secrecy surrounding this military build-up and reluctance to alert the British public - perhaps understandably, as a recent YouGov poll exposed that 49% of Britons opposed US strikes in Iran. By playing down support for American-led attacks against Iran, Starmer appears to have attempted to preserve a tense relationship with Trump, who had criticised the UK as “uncooperative”, whilst limiting political consequence following his refusal.  

‍

Defence has been a long-standing central pillar of the US-UK relationship, underpinned by the Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA), which was ratified in 1958 and permanently extended in 2024. This treaty encourages not only nuclear but also broader defence cooperation; an aspect which Trump has exploited in this conflict.  

‍

It has been difficult to extricate our military foreign policy from the US since World War II, due to our financial and logistical dependency. For example, the UK’s sole strategic nuclear deterrent, Trident, is leased from an American shared pool and is US-built. Although the UK Government has stated Trident’s operational independence, its technical reliance on the US undermines this and further entraps us with a mutual relationship wherein the US retains the upper hand.  

‍

Previous PM Sir Tony Blair recently described the US as an “indispensable cornerstone” of the UK’s security, emphasising the importance of the alliance regardless of president. However, this dependency reveals an underlying imbalance in this mutual relationship, with Starmer’s acceptance of US transit via UK bases reflecting a conciliatory move to appease Trump.  

‍

This imbalance and undercurrent of power which sits beneath the Anglo-American relationship has been further exacerbated by Trump’s use of social media to voice his opinions on British involvement in the Iran war. His expletive-ridden posts, dominated by demands and personal criticisms complicate traditional diplomatic channels and shift away from pre-Trump diplomacy characterised by state positions over personal expression. On the 8th  of March, he criticised the UK’s initial refusal to aid US airstrikes three times over 24 hours, describing how the US-UK relationship is “obviously not what it was” and personally attacked Starmer, who was “no Winston Churchill”. Despite Starmer’s insistence that the mutual relationship had not been fractured, the public perception of a mutual relationship has been undermined and tarnished with disrespect. The UK is therefore forced to walk a tightrope of managing Trump’s demands whilst preserving our reputation amidst Trump’s scathing criticisms of Starmer and UK resolve.    

‍

The Iranian war has therefore not only exposed the fragility of the US-UK relationship, but also the illusion of mutuality within it. Underneath the veneer of a balanced alliance, the UK is constrained by its military dependency on the US - a vulnerability Trump appears willing to exploit.

‍