The Middle East is once again tilting toward open confrontation. In the wake of the G7’s failure to present a coherent position, the United States now edges closer to direct involvement in Iran. What started as firm language in the joint communiqué has now hardened into something more: aircraft carriers on the move, airspace warnings issued, and (purposeful) intelligence leaks hinting at operational readiness.

Some are calling this resolve others recklessness, but either way, the West’s response to Iran is now entering a critical phase and Britain needs a strategy, not just a stance.

America’s Intent – But at What Cost?

President Trump’s rhetoric of “unconditional surrender” from Tehran plays well, I’m sure, with his base but international credibility isn’t measured by applause at home. It’s measured by outcomes abroad.

What’s seemingly missing though is clarity of purpose. If the United States acts, what’s their objective? A decapitation strike? A deterrent? Regime change? Containment? These distinctions really matter and need to be clear, because they determine how allies, Britain included, are expected to respond.

And as I’ve written already, Britain must resist being drawn into open-ended conflict by accident or by alliance. Our aircraft in the region must remain a symbol of preparedness, not part of a drift to open ended engagement.

Washington Mirrors Westminster

The split inside Washington is revealing, with some Republicans calling for military resolve, others urging caution. But it also reflects the same matters closer to home.

We, too, have yet to answer the question of what we would actually do if this escalates.

Labour’s Foreign Secretary has, so far, kept a careful distance. And the Conservative front bench have issued only brief statements. There’s a vacuum where right now serious leadership should be.

This is not a time for caution disguised as prudence, nor for populism disguised as principle. It is a time for real statesmanship of the kind that Britain has, historically, been capable of delivering when it mattered.

Independent not Isolated

We are not a superpower, but neither are we irrelevant. Our diplomatic influence, soft power, military capability, and regional relationships particularly with Egypt, Jordan, and the UAE, matter more now than they have in years.

That’s why I believe a quiet British strategy built around aid logistics, humanitarian access, intelligence coordination and real diplomacy is what is called for. Not statements for the Six o’clock news. But action behind closed doors, where real stability is shaped.

And yet, the risks don’t end with missteps on the battlefield.

 

Unintended Consequences – The Wider Chess Board

Military strikes do not happen in a vacuum. If the US goes in, with or without us, there will be consequences across multiple fronts:

• Yemen: The Houthis, already a proxy for Iran, could open a new front against Western allies in the Gulf. Expect more drone attacks, escalated maritime disruption, and renewed regional instability.
• Russia: A distracted West is a gift to Moscow. If NATO attention pivots to Iran, Ukraine could find itself further down the list of international priorities – and Putin knows it.
• China: Beijing watches very carefully. Every Western misstep reinforces their narrative that liberal western democracies are chaotic and unreliable. And every Pound we spend on conflict in the middle east is one less that we have to invest in resilience, technology, and the Indo-Pacific.
• At home: Every foreign engagement has a domestic price tag – look at domestic energy prices post Kabuls fall – If we drift into involvement without a detailed mandate, a plan and endgame, we not only weaken our strategic credibility, we corrode public trust in foreign policy itself.

Still Time for Leadership

There is still time to get this right. Still time for Britain to show clarity of thought, steadiness of purpose and seriousness of intent.

But let’s be honest: there’s currently a vacuum where political leadership should be. The Labour Government offers caution without certainty. Its statements are carefully worded, but say little. In moments like this, it’s not just policy that matters, it’s the courage to speak up  and act with purpose.

That’s why this moment is also a test for the Conservative Party.

If we are to be taken seriously again, not just by our base, but by the country, we must be the ones to step forward and show what leadership looks like in a world that is volatile, complex and dangerous if no one else is willing to.

It means having the confidence to say:

Yes, Britain still matters on the global stage and we must act with purpose.

Yes, we support our allies but with strategy, not blank cheques.

Yes, we want peace, but peace built on diplomacy, and confidence of purpose.

The world is watching. And the electorate here at home are too. Kemi Badenoch and the front bench need to show them all that the Conservative Party is serious about power, serious about principle, and ready to lead again.