In Iran, we risk repeating the mistakes of Iraq 22 years later

It’s been 22 years since an Anglo-American force invaded Iraq under the pretence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Despite deeply antithetical public sentiment towards the conflict, a brutal war began. America and Britain rushed into a conflict for which the nation’s respective leaders, George W. Bush and Tony Blair, espoused the desperate need to seize WMDs that never surfaced. Both had their reputations tarnished.

Involvement in the conflict was retrospectively the wrong decision, particularly from a UK perspective. As revealed in the Chilcot report, British involvement was based on inconclusive evidence presented with a large degree of uncertainty and plagued with inadequate preparation and planning for the conflict. Although the report admits that military action may have been necessary later, it suggests that not all other options were exhausted.

We are now looking down the barrel of another conflict in the Middle East

Hussein’s usage of chemical weaponry on his own people was abhorred – he was a monster who needed to be stopped. However, the intel which spoke of Iraqi WMDs was ultimately incorrect, and it was an error to use it as the pretext of sending an underprepared British army to suffer on scorching blood-soaked sands. Whether the Blair administration truly believed it to be a moral course of action is somewhat irrelevant, as the consequences endure regardless. The Iraq conflict has eroded trust in the state on an unparalleled scale, and history will always remember who was responsible, though perhaps not how they would desire or even fully deserve.

We are now looking down the barrel of another conflict in the Middle East. Instead of Iraq, we are now discussing Iran. Israel recently fired major missile strikes at Iran, with the US following suit. The reasoning for the strikes was to damage Iran’s nuclear ambitions by crippling its military infrastructure. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has, however, claimed for over 30 years that Iran was close to developing a nuclear bomb, leading to scepticism as to Israel’s true geopolitical motives.

While Iran is undoubtedly a hostile threat and needs to be treated as such, so was Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. While the supposed development of nuclear weapons is worrying, so was their supposed development in Iraq in the early 2000s. Mohamad Bazzi of The Guardian has remarked that just like George W. Bush, “Trump has started a reckless war based on a lie”. While cynicism reigns supreme as to the legitimacy of the Iranian nuclear threat, Britain faces a similar conundrum as it did in the lead up to 2003 – should it join America in an all-out war in the Middle East?

Starmer has no chance of convincing the vocal and influential liberal interventionists of the US federal government to stay out of Iran

While the development of Iranian nuclear weapons is undoubtedly a concern for British national security, British involvement will do little but drag our military back to the Arabian Peninsula, where it surely doesn’t want to revisit. If a full-scale conflict begins as Iran responds to the bombing of its nuclear facilities, as seems likely, Starmer faces a similar decision to Blair: do we stick with our special relationship and wage war, or do we sit this one out? We must sit this one out.

Being allied with the Americans is a saving grace at this moment. Undoubtedly, if Iran were to retaliate, the Trump administration would not sit on its laurels but instead undergo a process of what the President called “Making Iran Great Again”, or “MIGA” for short, more commonly known as regime change. There is no doubt that such a process would include the absolute destruction of all future prospective WMD development, hence killing the main threat to UK security. With the director general of MI5 suggesting it had responded to 20 Iran-backed plots since 2022, Iran still poses threats to Britain. We ought to focus on these threats to the mainland whilst allowing our boisterous, more affluent cross-Atlantic ally to formally invade if they so desire.

Starmer has no chance of convincing the vocal and influential liberal interventionists of the US federal government to stay out of Iran if they wished to retaliate. Debating the broader suggestion as to whether America should upscale its involvement following Iranian retaliation is futile – we all know how the cogs of American foreign policy turn, particularly in the Middle East, and Trump, of all Presidents, is not going to attempt to break the US military-industrial complex. Persuading a US President to avoid war in the Middle East is like shouting into the wind. If the White House orders it, the might of the US military will crush Iran, and that is the inevitable direction that this whole affair is headed, regardless of Starmer’s admirable calls for de-escalation. The UK, with few effective military capabilities to provide, may as well learn from Iraq and not charge headfirst into a conflict where it is not needed based on dubious intelligence.

Learn from history, or it is destined to repeat itself

The globe’s powerbrokers are making moves, but Starmer does not need to involve his government or the nation. The Americans will do what they will (as will the Israelis), and whilst the White House may not learn from Iraq, we must. Starmer doubtless lacks the political capital to engage in an unpopular war in the Middle East, and he shouldn’t, even if he feels it is a justified plan of action. Blair believed Iraq was justified and still does, yet undoubtedly regrets the mistakes of the conflict and its consequences.

Questionable intelligence, the threat of WMDs, and a looming war which would lead to an inevitable loss of life. We may not be able to control our allies, but unlike with Iraq, we need not follow them into battle. Blair wrote in a 2002 memo to George W. Bush, “I will be with you, whatever”, in reference to Iraq. While our special relationship is doubtless crucial for future British prosperity, Starmer shouldn’t be with Trump anywhere in the Middle East where salvos rage and missiles fly. Learn from history, or it is destined to repeat itself.