‘Embarrassing’: Starmer’s Gulf gambit misfires after Iran ceasefire

0:02The Telegraph.

0:30Visit Progressive.com and see if you can enjoy a little cash back. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company & Affiliates. National average 12-month savings by$946 by new customers surveyed who saved with Progressive between June 2024 and May 2025. Potential savings will vary. Will, come back! You're going to get soaked! At least I won't get soaked by high furniture prices. This week at Darwin, save 45-65 % store-wide with special financing for 36 months. Plus, get a free golf umbrella with qualifying purchase. Bend just$34.99 and get$200 in marketplace or outlet lamps, rugs, and accessories absolutely free.

1:07It's like getting soaked with savings. Through Monday at Darwin Furniture. Restrictions apply. See store for details.

1:21Cringeworthy and embarrassing. That's the verdict of Lord Dannet, the former head of the British army, as Keir Starmer arrives in the Gulf. Is he running away from his domestic problems? The biggest one. Why has Britain spent so little on defence, leaving us impotent during the Iran crisis? Welcome to The Daily Tea with me, Camilla Tomini. And me, Tim Stanley.

1:55Tim, the Daily Tee's going on the road, which you're pleased about because you love coming on the road with me in my Mini Cooper, don't you? Like Thelma and Louise. As I go into orbit on the M25. Ooh, you're driving quite fast. We were in a rush that day, weren't we? That's right. We might take the train, though, because we've got quite the geographical tour. We're covering big distances. It's not quite Route 66, it's more Route M40. but we're going to start in London on the 27th of April. We're going to have a big evening event, still to be confirmed because we've got some... I sound like Trump, don't I?

2:29We've got some big-level guests. It's going to be huge. It's going to be huge. It's going to be huge. Then we're going to travel to Cardiff on Tuesday the 28th. The land of the leak. And then we're going to go to Warwick on the 29th. We're going to speak to students there who will no doubt viscerally hate us before we even arrive. And then at the other end of the generational scale, we're going to Worthing on the 30th. Shall I get a blue rinse for that? So if you would like to come, please do get in touch. You can get your tickets now. The link is in the episode description. And you can come and watch us live.

3:03See that we are real. We're not AI. We're actual people, Tim, with actual opinions. And we may get you to wear your little headset again, because we got a few comments, by the way, about your headset yesterday. when we did the last minute thing. Oh, yeah. Oh, really? Somebody said they loved your Madonna headset. Well, it's half Madonna, half Tiffany. I think we're alone now. Yes. And we could actually get you to sing that in karaoke. So get your tickets. You don't know what you're going to get. It looked like I was trying to sell insurance to the crew of the Artemis, didn't it? It did a little bit.

3:31But also, we are at Worthing Pavilion. So if you wanted to do a star turn there, like I could be Matthew Kelly. Tonight, Matthew, I'm going to... Who would you be if you were going to appear on Worthing Pavilion? Who could you impersonate? Is it Morrissey, be honest? Probably Roy Orbison. Yes, because you've got the sunglasses. I've got sunglasses, yes. I saw you in them yesterday. Now, talking of glasses, will we be reflecting on this Iran deal through rose-tinted spectacles? Very good. Or with our eyes bleeding from the revelation that what's happened now is that after all of Donald Trump's threats, and let's be honest, he did threaten to wipe out a civilization.

4:11Destroy a civilization, yes. which is quite a big thing to vow to do. We've had a climb down of sorts, although I'm not sure it is a great deal to leave AK-47 wielding Iranian terrorists in charge of the Straits of Hormuz. So your problem with the deal is that we didn't finish the job. Whereas my problem with the deal is it seems a very heavy price for something we should never have done. You didn't want to start it in the first place. I'm saying a little bit like in Mastermind, we've started so we finish. right okay that actually pass okay you're saying pass this is you being david lamby in the big black chair right but at the same time i'm saying this isn't this isn't a good outcome is it yes that we have david would have said the capital of iran was paris that's indeed so but this idea that they're able to charge now one million dollars for every ship passing through that straight like there's some guy some some some terrorist in a toll booth like asking for people's credit, well not even credit card details, they want to be paid in cryptocurrency and Bitcoin, which sounds a bit dodgy to me.

5:16This isn't a good outcome, is it? So we now know the war began because an opportunity was seen, because the Israelis said all the Iranian leadership was in one place. The war began because of a strategic opportunity. It was then justified to the world as the purpose is to totally degrade Iran's military, including, of course, its nuclear program. And Donald Trump has said on Truth Social that part of this deal would be the Iranians ending uranium enrichment. If that is true, that sounds to me like ending their peaceful nuclear program as well as their aggressive one. So that's a win. That's a win.

5:49That would indeed be a win. So the purpose of this war was to grade the Iranian military. It was never explicitly regime change. But you will remember we spoke to the lovely Ilion Levy yesterday who said that from the Israeli point of view, Iran is never going to be a regime they can suffer because it is explicitly committed to the eradication of Israel. Yeah, there's no such thing as a good Ayatollah, unfortunately. Right. So rather than killing the Persian line, you've just put it inside a cage with this deal. But it is still savage and it still would like to kill everyone if it got out of the cage.

6:23Now, in the course of fighting the war, we discovered something, which is that Iran, it has some military capability. It could project its power across the region. It could attack Gulf states, and that was bad, and it did a lot of damage. But the U.S. destroyed its navy. It's probably depleted much of its missile stocks and drone stocks, etc. But we discovered that Iran has something that we just didn't really consider before, which is it has the ability to put its feet, its foot, on the neck of the Strait of Hormuz. It is, to quote Tucker Carlson, a geographic power. It happens by the grace of God to have control over this waterway and the ability to shut it down Which is not done in the past, it's threatened to, but this time it actually did And that's when the war took a different direction That's when it went from the superpower just pounding Iran into the superpower Then looking for a way to end the conflict because it discovered there was an economic price for it And it's possible that we'll emerge from this with Iran in a stronger position Because it's asserted its dominance over the strait And the world is now putting pressure on America to allow Iran just to get trade moving again, which means some kind of toll booth system.

7:35Which is ridiculous. We didn't have one before. And Iran, if you think about it, it already had sanctions on some oil sales lifted by the United States because they wanted to get the oil market flowing again. And now we're talking about paying them for the access to Hormuz, which we didn't have to do before. Iran may actually end up with a bigger revenue stream. after this conflict than it had before. Which it can plough into its friends in Hezbollah, Hamas. Right. And the Houthis, right? Let's rearm them. We've run out of missiles. Let's make some more, even if we're not making nuclear weapons.

8:09However, one thing, I don't think the Americans also, and indeed the Israelis, also predicted that the regime, albeit decapitated with a new Ayatollah, seemingly limbless, somewhere in a Tehran hospital would retain so much power over its own people. And didn't we witness that yesterday with this call to bring your children onto the streets, to use them as human shields against any planned US bombing raid? Yeah. Well, again, the populace there that had had an uprising that several months ago seemed to be on the precipice of something, of demanding regime change. well 30 ,000 plus deaths later are now having to be subservient to save their own souls.

8:57So that hope that the people would rise up simply hasn't materialised. And to pick up on your point about if you just leave this regime what's life going to be like? Well what's life going to be like for the globe but what's it going to be like for its own people? You probably will have a radicalised regime that has found it can hold on to power and will probably crush any dissent that was voiced during this conflict. But also the historical experience of air campaigns is they don't always break regimes. We bombed Germany during the Second World War. They still fought right up until Hitler's suicide.

9:33We bombed Japan. They still fought right up to the dropping of the atomic bombs. But they still fought through firebombing of their cities. So it was always unlikely that it was going to result in people rising up and overthrowing over the regime. On the contrary, it could be that because some innocent lives have been taken, there'll be a strengthening of support for the regime because Iranians feel they've been attacked by the great Satan. So when Donald Trump says, and I quote, that it's a total and complete victory, 100%, no question about it, and his press secretary, Caroline Leavitt, said the Americans had, quotes, achieved and exceeded our core military objectives.

10:16That's just spin. It is spin. Although he can be credited, well, at least the markets have reacted favourably, as we thought they would, and the price of a barrel of oil has come down below$100. And also the FTSE 100 has climbed more than 2.2 % and Asian stock markets soared in overnight trading. Are you sure about that? Because somebody's questioned your mathematics from yesterday. I'm very happy to say that someone else looked this up. I said yesterday I got the price of gas in the United States completely wrong because I confused imperial and metric gallons. Apparently they're different. Also, I'm very bad.

10:50I just am bad at maths. Whatever dyslexia is for maths, that's what I have. It's called dyscalculia. Oh, it's actually a thing. Yes, it is. But that's a bonus. The markets have rallied. It's spiked because of the war and we'll find out what problems have been created, what bottlenecks have emerged as a consequence of this war as we go on. But this could have gone on for weeks and weeks. I mean, we were then talking about our interest rates being up at near 5 % by the end of next year. I'm not going to give the president a gold star for starting a war. I never thought he should have done. I know you weren't in support of it.

11:18But we also have to ask, has his rhetoric got any credibility? I don't want him to fulfill a threat to eliminate a civilization, of course. But for those who this morning are saying, oh, come on, he never meant that. He's just playing the madman. Well, if he didn't mean it, what was the point of saying it? Well, because he wanted to push them into a point of negotiation and there hadn't been open channels. If apparently every intelligent, savvy person in the world doesn't believe what Donald Trump says, then why would the Iranians believe what Donald Trump said? Why would Russia? Why would China?

11:53Well, because their military's been wiped out. So, I mean, he has got firepower. I agree with what you're saying. Is the rhetoric just completely, it's just, you know, a taco, Trump always chickens out. It's the art of the deal. It's saying, I want the earth. And then, you know, just taking Canada. Yes. But, yes, I suppose. But the Iranians have witnessed the military might of America in the last few weeks, Tim. You can't deny that. they may be wanting to take him quite seriously. They have done, but my point is either the threat to eliminate a civilisation is real or it's not. You either make it because you intend to do it or you don't do it.

12:31If you do it when you don't do it, then you simply send the message that whenever I step up the escalation ladder, a term we've heard a lot in the last few weeks, I'm actually going to back down eventually. So you can take the risk of me threatening to eliminate your civilisation. So what happens in the future if China attacks Taiwan? and we come back with, we're going to bomb Beijing. Well, I wouldn't believe that because you've just backed down. But did we ever really believe it? That's the point, though, because this is a man who wanted to end the bloodshed in Ukraine because too many people were dying.

13:04So this is the contradiction at the heart of Trump. On one hand, you think he's some kind of gung-ho, trigger-happy warmongerer, and indeed that's reflected in some of the true social rhetoric which is often capitalised. and yet at his heart, even though he has been banging on about Iran since 1979, to be fair to him, in much more moderate language in the past, but then he cut a much more sensible figure back then, right, when he was businessman Trump rebuilding New York after the 70s. You then have that juxtaposed with somebody who I think probably inherently doesn't really want much bloodshed and probably has no intention at all of a civilisational wipeout.

13:45He wants wars on the cheap and he wants an easy win. who doesn't. In the United States, there are ideological hawks and ideological doves. And both in the last 10 years have read themselves in to Donald Trump's agenda. And sometimes it is correlated with what he does. But this is a man who, when he was campaigning, would say, I love Israel. And they say something wholly offensive about Jewish people. So he contradicted himself. But as I say, because people, when he got the Republican nomination, people had to reconcile themselves to him. They wanted to be part of his administration and they wanted to shape what he was doing.

14:20Both camps decided he was one of them. What we've discovered is that he's neither. He's opportunistic. He just acts according to what he can get away with at any given moment. Sometimes he'll be a hawk, sometimes he'll be a dove. And that's okay. There's a sort of realism to that that makes some sense. But it also means you can't trust this administration because you don't know if it's going to tear up everything it's agreed to. You don't know if it's going to fulfil threats. You don't know if it's going to turn nasty at the drop of a hat. It's not just opportunistic, is it? It is narcissistic because a lot of it is about him and how he wants to be viewed on the world stage.

14:57And this is why the intellectuals in the camp, Camp David, White House camp, Oval Office camp, like, for instance, J.D. Vance, if you can describe him as that, but I think compared to Trump you probably can, have kept quiet and have been below radar and have now expressed some sentiments which we knew all along that he had harbored, that he wasn't comfortable with any of this. They have kept quiet for the simple reason that they all want to run in the next set of presidential primaries and the only way you can win is with his endorsement. As far as I am aware, only one person so far has resigned from the administration over this, Joe Kent, which is quite remarkable.

15:38given how controversial the policy is and it shows that Trump is still capable of inspiring great loyalty in his staff. Now we discussed yesterday whether Wes Streeting was right, the health secretary, to say I'm just so proud of my prime minister and how he's behaved in all this because basically Wes Streeting is saying that Keir Starmer was right to resist being lumped in with Trump and his rhetoric and increasingly kind of deranged approach to this entire war. And maybe there is something that could be said for that. However, Starmer's inactivity in general and lack of direction, and as we pointed out yesterday, actual absence from the scene over the course of the last few days.

16:24I mean, OK, he's gone away for Easter, that's fine. But, I mean, we are at a critical moment in global affairs and indeed world history. and we are on the brink of perhaps extraordinary change in the Middle East, potentially. He's nowhere to be found. And now we learn, Tim, that he's popping up in the Gulf today. And this is what he told reporters. Well, we've just reached this ceasefire, which is both welcome and I think there'll be a sense of real relief, there certainly is across the region and for the United Kingdom. But there's work to do. And I'm here in Saudi Arabia and neighbouring countries now to carry out that work in support of what we're all seeking, which is that this ceasefire should be not a temporary ceasefire, but a permanent ceasefire.

17:07On top of that, we have to acknowledge that this war was now a war, but my job is to protect the UK. It's already had an impact on the UK, and it's very important that we get the Strait of Hormuz open. There's a lot of work to do there. We've been convening a number of countries. I now get the opportunity here in Saudi Arabia and countries nearby in the region to have the discussions, to coordinate our actions and to go forward collectively in pursuit of those two missions. A little bit like, you know, late to arrive to the party, the canapes have all been eaten and people have already cleared up and there's Keir Starmer saying, oh, can I help with the dishes?

17:43Well, no, Keir, because we've done it all now. You've come too little too late. In fact, we're all trying to order an Uber right now. But thanks very much, because what more can he do than feather his nest as the leader of the Coalition of the Willing? let's actually just call it what it is the coalition of the irrelevant because europe haven't had a say in this okay they've been blocked by donald trump they could have tried to exert more influence they didn't want to they were frightened of what was going on over in america nobody's a trump whisperer except perhaps maloney and indeed not even her and so starmer inevitably has ended up looking weak because he's just sat on the fence and and been largely absence and this trip to the gulf was pre-planned, we should note.

18:26Yes, so he was going to go anyway to boost morale, because of course that's what you want if you're, you know, stuck right now on HMS Dragon in the Mediterranean. You've been humiliated enough because the ship has taken so long. In the good old days when we wanted to boost morale, we sent a page three stunner. Yes, or Vera Lynn or something. Instead we're sending Keir Starmer. Can you imagine him bursting out of a cake and a bra and pants? Well, people have been critical. Former Foreign Secretary James cleverly criticised his decision to refuse the US permission to use UK bases at the beginning of the conflict, saying that he has, quote, no authority.

19:00He was neither supportive of America, nor was he critical of the president. He was caught between the two. He, throughout this, has demonstrated a lead-footedness. He has moved slowly at the last possible minute. He didn't prepare properly for the defence of our nation. Now, pick up on that point, but I think the Tories have not got a leg to stand on this one. I mean, they've got a lead foot. They could stand on a lead foot. couldn't they? They did the opposite. They came out in support of the president and saying that Britain should be involved. And then only later did they pivot towards saying, no, we shouldn't be involved.

19:32But more importantly, they didn't spend enough on defence themselves. Now, I appreciate as a former military man, James Cleverley was one of the voices in the last cabinet calling for more defence spending. But the bottom line is, from Cameron onwards, none of them have invested enough in defence. Yes. We know that now. And funnily enough, there's a growing appetite. We're going to be sharing some exclusive polling with you tomorrow which shows there's a growing appetite among the British public to spend more on warfare and less on welfare and we'll be speaking to Tony Diver about that tomorrow but you know the Tories haven't got a leg to stand on Labour haven't now we know Rachel Reeves is now resisting this call for increased defence spending that was once a commitment and then became an ambition Tim shall we speak to somebody who knows their military onions better than you and I coming up next we're going to be joined by General Lord Richard Dannett, who was the former head of the British Army.

20:28Hello, I'm William Sitwell, and as a proud ambassador of the Telegraph Save Our Pubs campaign, I'm here to tell you about our nationwide competition. Nominate your favourite pub and tell us in 250 words what it means to you and your community. Five winning pubs will win a£5 ,000 round for punters like you to enjoy on our National Pub Day on the 16th of May. Entries close on the 11th of April, so mark your calendars and get nominated. Visit telegraph.co.uk slash pubs today.

21:05We're now joined by General Lord Richard Dannett, former head of the British Army. And my first question has to be, what purpose do you think the Prime Minister is serving by being in the Gulf right now? Well, I suppose he's trying to demonstrate that despite the embarrassment of our military capability being exposed over the last four to six weeks, that the UK does have some clout in the world, that we do believe that we have some diplomatic strength to demonstrate, and that we have some form of convening power. So he has travelled there in the hope of Britain trying to restore a little of its reputation.

21:40Now, who he's going to talk to about what, to what purpose and what aim, I think remains to be seen. But he is rather turning up after things have happened. He's spoken throughout this conflict about wanting to push for de-escalation. Have you seen any evidence that Britain has played a role in this ceasefire? I don't think there's any evidence we played much role in this ceasefire at all. I think rather extraordinarily, top marks has to go to the Pakistanis, who seem to have acted as some kind of mediator in all this. The 10-point peace plan that Iran's put on the table, obviously it's going to be 100 % unacceptable to the Americans.

22:16But notwithstanding that, top marks the Pakistanis for at least arbitrating this two-week ceasefire, which we'll just have to wait and see the success of it. And the litmus test of that is going to be whether the Straits of Hormuz are or are not open to international shipping. We'll discuss Britain's military capability in a moment, but if Keir Starmer sees our future role as being that of an honest broker on the world stage, as someone who goes around de-escalating conflicts. Do you think Britain actually has the diplomatic clout to do that? I think historically we have got some diplomatic clout.

22:51I've always been impressed the further I've got away from London, the greater respect usually the United Kingdom is held in. And I think that's a bit of a historic throwover, but I think we probably overlook that to our own discredit. it. So I think it's not an unreasonable thing for him to try and exercise some diplomatic leverage or convene some conversations. You asked what else we've done towards this. Well, the Foreign Secretary did try and convene a meeting two or three days ago to see what could be done diplomatically to try and change the situation in the Straits of Homies. Well, whether or not that was effective remains to be seen.

23:32But I think it's not unreasonable that Keir Starmer is trying to do what he can. He seems to like travelling and now he's travelled off to the Gulf to see what he can do. Let's see who he talks to and see what the outcome is. Lord Dannett, the Prime Minister's critics have accused him of political posturing, of being rather too late to this party. He's been humiliated repeatedly by Donald Trump, accusing him of not being Churchill and likening him to Neville Chamberlain in recent days. Is there also a contradiction at pay here because he's going out there to apparently boost troop morale at a time when HMS Dragon has had to go back into dock for maintenance repairs, having taken weeks to get to our RAF base in the first place.

24:18And now we again learn that the Treasury is resisting these calls for defence spending to be increased. Well, of course, this is the absolute contradiction, isn't it? How many times over how many years have commentators like yourselves, people like myself who with a lifetime of experience in the armed forces, how many times have we said we've got to stop this hollowing out of our defence capability? We've got to stop the sequence of peace dividends being taken. And we've got to put some sensible additional money into our defence budget to start to rebuild our military capability. Once we've got a credible military capability, we probably can have rather more effect on the world stage from a diplomatic point of view.

24:59I think we all know that influence comes from a combination of soft power and hard power. And the hard power aspect of it comes as a result of putting cash into the defence budget. How many more embarrassments, like we've seen over the last four, five, six weeks, do we need to experience before eventually we have a prime minister who can crack the whip to the chancellor and say, I know you've got your problems, but we're going to have to look at our priorities again. This country must increase its defence capability if we're going to be taken seriously on the world stage. It frankly is embarrassing and it's truly annoying for President Trump to have humiliated the UK and the Royal Navy in the way that he has.

25:40Lord Dannett, when you look at the situation, particularly with HMS Dragon, the dragon that hasn't roared, let's be honest. I mean, with all of your military experience and background, I mean, do you look at it all in cringe? What's your reaction to this? We also had this unedifying episode of the Defence Secretary, John Healy, not seeming to know how many frigates we had, and indeed of those, how many were actually operational. Well, that was a very cringeworthy and embarrassing episode, and I think John Healy would be kicking himself for not having done his homework better, because that was a pretty obvious question he was going to be asked.

26:16But to come to HMS Dragon, and I was a soldier, not a sailor, so I'm not going to start becoming a naval expert. But I think anybody who knows much about these Type 45 air defence destroyers know that they have been characterised by being unreliable. There are six of them. I think three are in long term refit at the present moment. HMS Dragon was going through a maintenance period when it had to be rushed off to the eastern Mediterranean. And clearly not everything was fixed that should have been fixed. But again, it just illustrates the wider point that there's been some poor decision making in the Ministry of Defence over the years and a paucity of funding being made available by the Treasury.

26:53And that has got to change. We've got to become more efficient in our defence procurement, make better decisions. We've got to put money on the table so that defence industries can fire up their production capabilities and round out to a much greater and deeper degree the range of our capabilities to meet modern threats. The special relationship is central to Britain's defence, if you think about its role in NATO or intelligence sharing. Do you think that what's been said and what's happened in the last few weeks has damaged that relationship beyond repair? Or is this just a temporary blip due in part to the personality of Donald Trump?

27:31Well, I think the strength of the so-called special relationship has waxed and waned over time. it's pretty largely personality dependent except for the long-term good relationship and important relationship in terms of intelligence and intelligence sharing. Now we all benefit from this we have certain capabilities that the United States doesn't have and they've got many capabilities that we don't have and in the context of the UK-US it's a very important relationship in the context of five eyes throwing in the Canadians the Australians and the New Zealanders as well. This is an important part of the relationship.

28:10Yes, I think the relationship will improve again at some point in the future. But what's also very hurtful to UK military people is when the Americans say, gosh, what a shame that the UK's capability is so low and so poor now. It's really embarrassing and actually it's hurtful to us. And it's a direct consequence of 30 years of peace dividends being taken and the running down of our armed forces, piling on risk on risk, and that risk is now coming home to roost. It also emanates in part from Donald Trump's ignorance, right? I mean, some of the things he said about Britain's role in Afghanistan, for instance, or some of our ships being completely useless, he has just applied so many insults to us that it isn't just about us, it's also about him.

28:57I think you're right. I think what we're all learning is that his rhetoric is fierce. It comes off the top of his head, apparently without much thought. I mean, you raise the issue of his criticism of the UK's performance in Afghanistan. I mean, that was so woefully wrong. 457 of our own people lost their lives on the front line in Afghanistan that he was palpably talking nonsense. And I think even he recognised that subsequently. But it was hurtful at the time that the president of the country that's always been our staunchest ally, and we've been an ally of theirs, should be so ill-informed to make such crass comments.

29:36It just makes you wonder what really does go on inside his head. Lord Dannett, what do you make of this ceasefire deal? Is it going to go the distance? Well, Camilla, frankly, I don't know. As I said earlier, I think the litmus test will be whether international shipping can pass through the Straits of Hormuz. I think we all recognise that's important. But again, you know, you come back to the whole business about the Straits of Hormuz. Why did the Americans not realise that this was a critical, vulnerable point, that effectively the Iranians had their foot on the West's neck by being able to close the Straits of Hormuz at their own whim and will?

30:14That should have been realised at the start and steps taken to make sure that they could not do that. But now we're paying Iranians, apparently, a million dollars per ship. So we've got them installed and controlling these waters when they weren't before. Presumably, they're then going to plough that money, which they want in cryptocurrency and Chinese Bitcoin, back into presumably rearming and, I suppose, working on their nuclear plans. Well, you make a very good point. Of course you do. And if we're trying to work out who has won and who has lost in this, I think I previously characterized this as a very expensive away score draw.

30:55And certainly the ability now that the Iranians have generated for themselves to be able to extract money out of ships passing through the Straits is a situation that favors them. It wasn't there before. So it's very hard to argue that the United States has been victorious over this. That's frankly just the wrong word to use. I think if you look at where we are now and where we were six weeks ago, I think the US would have to accept that it's in a less good place. Certainly the international economy is in a less good place. And how on earth does the world's greatest superpower, possibly the most powerful country in history, end up getting a draw against a tinpot regime like Iran?

31:35Because it misappreciated how tinpot or not the Iranian regime was or the Iranian's capability is. I mean, the fact that even until the last couple of days, the Iranians were still able to strike targets up and down the Gulf and in Israel with ballistic missiles is just indicative of the stockpile they had at the start. and the fact that it still had a decision-making capability and a process whereby they could continue to launch these attacks. I think there was a serious gap in the United States' intelligence and understanding, and the Israelis as well, of just how deep and broad the Iranian military capability was and continued to demonstrate its own success.

32:17But couldn't Europe and indeed the UK, had they been at the races on this, have exerted more influence over Donald Trump so that some of the decisions he made, which have now resulted in a score draw, didn't happen in the first place. I mean, we can criticise President Trump, but frankly, the absence of European allies in this entire, well, I suppose some will call it a catastrophe, in this entire scene, I mean, they're so conspicuous by their absence, despite the Prime Minister popping up in the Gulf today. Yes, you're right. Of course, you have to go back to where we were at the start of this.

32:52crisis. The Israelis began it, I think, probably when Mossad discovered that the former supreme leader and his chief cohort were all in one place at one time, and they struck. And that then precipitated the start of a major operation, which the Israelis and the Americans had been planning for quite some time. Now, the effect of it starting like that meant that there was no opportunity for Donald Trump to have put together a coalition of the willing to talk to countries like the UK and France and Germany to say, we're thinking of doing this because Iran really poses a severe threat to the stability of the Middle East and therefore the stability of the world.

33:31None of that happened. And I think also Donald Trump demonstrated his misunderstanding of what NATO is. He seemed to be saying two or three weeks ago, come on, why aren't you supporting us when you're all NATO members and we've supported you in NATO? What he was forgetting is that NATO is a defensive alliance. and the strength of it as a defensive alliance has been Article 5, an attack on one is an attack on all. It's not just a permanent team of players that when the team captain, self-appointed, the Americans, decide that they want to go to war, that we all follow along. That was a misunderstanding and a misapprehension on his part.

34:08Whether he's learnt that lesson, I don't know, but looking at what we know about Donald Trump, I doubt it. Lord Dannett, in terms of the moral questions this conflict raises, is it ethical to attack a foreign power because it's a good opportunity rather than because they pose an immediate threat? Well, I think just because it's a good opportunity, I think it is wrong. I think there are definitely ethical doubts about that. I think you have to look more widely at Iran and its regime over the last 5, 10, 15, probably a better part of 40 years, just to see the extent to which they have exported malicious terror, sponsoring Hamas, sponsoring Hezbollah, sponsoring the Houthis, undoubtedly have posed an existential threat to the Houthis.

34:57Israel and therefore by extension a threat to other countries in the Gulf and wider international peace and security. So I think there was a case to reduce Iran's capacity to be a malign influence. As I said a moment or two ago, the opportunity was taken because the supreme leader was found to be in one place with his chief advisors and was taken out. On the basis that was taking advantage of an opportunity. But if you take the wider point that Iran was a malign influence in the world, then decapitating its leadership, yes, was a good opportunity, if you like, and perhaps justifiable. I think historians and analysts will discuss this for many a year to come.

35:41General Lord Richard Dannett, thank you very much indeed for joining us on The Daily Tea. Thanks, Camilla. Thanks, Tim. It's a difficult one, this, Tim, isn't it? Because one would expect the former head of the British army to be very hawkish and be completely supportive of what Trump is doing. But as is ever the case, with military types that are used to precision planning, looking around corners, you know, playing a game of 3D chess, that is not what the US president has done. No. And that's why I picked him up on the question about opportunity and ethics. Do you attack Iran because you happen to know everyone's going to be in the same place at one time?

36:14Well, that does make sense in terms of military strategy, because Iran has been attacking us in different forms for a very long time. So we are in effect at war with them already. On the other hand, if you act opportunistically, you haven't done what was done in past conflicts and made a case globally for why you're going to do it, or building a diplomatic coalition that means that even if countries like us don't get involved, we would say, fine, go ahead, we can see the argument for it. Exactly. He didn't consult anybody else. That was the problem. Because you think back at previous recent conflicts, and you know that conversations did take place between Reagan and Thatcher, or indeed Blair and Bush before buttons were pressed by big orange fingers.

36:52And it's interesting we now have some insight into what other people in the White House were saying about the conflict when it started. And J.D. Vance appears to have been critical. Marco Rubio was ambivalent. General Cain said, let's not overestimate how much the Israelis know. Yes. So the decision came down to Donald Trump. From what we know thus far, it doesn't look like there was some kind of Israeli-controlled lobby within the White House pushing the president. He made the decision to act at that point. Well, also because he wanted to weaponise his own big-man rhetoric. That's left righties, though, in the Telegraph audience.

37:31I mean, some are supportive, some are ambivalent, some are against... But all have a very low opinion of the Prime Minister in the Gulf. They're united in their condemnation of Starmer. Kenneth Flemington says, and precisely what use will Starmer be once he's there, as much use as a chocolate teapot at tea time, I would suggest. Quite happy to receive chocolate teapots that you and I can eat. Lisa, by the way, but if you had a chocolate teapot in the Gulf where it's very hot, I think that's difficult. Adrian Stamm says, You've got nothing to offer Starmer. Stay at home and address your domestic crisis.

38:03Again, Lord Dannet makes a really good point there. Is he just doing once again a Never Hear Keir thing where he doesn't want to face the music at home? So I'm going to turn up in Saudi Arabia. Paul Kopp calls him a fool, desperate to look relevant. While everyone can see he is useless on the world stage, he has ensured we carry zero relevance with world powers. I hope Trump makes him look stupid. Well, I'm sure we can guarantee that in the next few days. Jonathan Carrington says, Why does Starmer feel he has to travel to the Middle East? He refused to play a part in the offensive and now wants the kudos of being seen to support his...

38:38Insurance isn't one-size-fits-all. That's why drivers have enjoyed Progressive's Name Your Price tool for years now. With the Name Your Price tool, you tell them what you want to pay, and they'll show you options that fit your budget. So, whether you're picking out your first policy, or just looking for something that works better for you and your family, they make it easy to see your options. Visit Progressive.com. Find a rate that works for you with the Name Your Price tool. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company & Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited by state law. Will, come back! You're going to get soaked!

39:09At least I won't get soaked by high furniture prices. This week at Darwin, save 45 to 65 % store-wide with special financing for 36 months. Plus, get a free golf umbrella with qualifying purchase. Spend just$34.99 and get$200 in marketplace or outlet lamps, rugs, and accessories absolutely free. It's like getting soaked with savings. Through Monday at Darwin Furniture. Restrictions apply. See store for details.

39:39police fire. Starmer is a spineless and totally ineffective PM. Jonathan, get off the fence. We need to know where you stand on this. If Britain's going to do nothing, why can't it do nothing by Zoom? That's what the Greens would say. And Tim Chesney says, no one anywhere in the world is remotely interested in what Starmer has to say. He has destroyed the UK's international reputation and is seen as all talk and no action, weak, facilitating and entirely useless. On that note, we'll be back tomorrow, 5pm. Thank you.