For those reading the runes, it was significant that when Rishi Sunak decided to send the armed forces into action publicly for the first time he quoted a former American president.
“This must not stand,” the prime minister told aides after the Houthi rebels in Yemen attacked British and American warships. It was an echo of the words George Bush senior used after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990.
Relations have not always been warm between Downing Street and the White House, but when President Biden’s team decided before Christmas that they wanted to build a coalition of the willing to deter the Houthis, “we were first to put our hand up”, a senior British government source said.
Sunak, who has a reputation for investigating every conceivable angle of a problem before acting, impressed senior figures in Washington with his conviction. “Right from the get go, from the end of last year, he was the one pushing quite hard to ensure some kind of military response,” one said. “It felt more black and white. Let’s do a little whack-a-mole. That didn’t feel entirely characteristic.”
Even as he approved Thursday night’s raids, in which four Typhoon jets from RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus armed with Paveway IV bombs attacked sites in Yemen from which the Houthis had launched drone attacks on shipping in the Red Sea, Sunak was taking off for Ukraine where he met President Zelensky, addressed the Ukrainian parliament, announced £2.5 billion in aid and signed a decade-long security guarantee.
Advertisement
The twin events last week were a reminder that 2024 is lining up to be a highly significant year — and not just because it might lead to a change of government in Britain. The Middle East is in turmoil at a time when much of the democratic world goes to the polls, elections could bring the return of Donald Trump, the war in Ukraine is deadlocked and security chiefs regard a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan as a medium-term threat.
For Sunak, these events enabled him to project himself as a serious global leader — a welcome distraction from problems at home, but for both him and Sir Keir Starmer they are a wake-up call that whoever wins the election will inherit a situation of global turbulence.
Both leaders are determined to stay close to the Americans. “There was clear satisfaction in the US system when the UK put up its hand as quickly as it did,” a Foreign Office source said. “It rekindled the warmth. It’s nice for us to remind them that when someone goes with them on something like this, it’s going to be the UK.”
Insiders say the US military and political establishment was sensitive to the fact that Britain, unlike America, has an embassy in Tehran, given the likelihood of retaliatory attacks by Iran, which backs the Houthis. Diplomatic sources say the Americans were conscious of the risk to Britons there.
The same concerns were discussed by ministers on the national security council, where intelligence chiefs predicted that the Houthis would claim the attacks were tied to Israel’s war with Hamas. However, senior government sources sought to downplay the risk to British diplomats, insisting they were confident that the UK’s interests were secure.
Advertisement
Central to the US handling of the crisis was Jake Sullivan, Biden’s national security adviser, who pressed for a coalition to be constructed before military action began. His view was endorsed by Sunak when the prime minister chaired the first of three Cobra emergency meetings on the Houthis in the week before Christmas. “The view was we needed to provide clear warnings and we wanted an air gap between forming an initial grouping of countries and taking action,” one security source said.
Sunak chaired the second national security council meeting in the Cobra rooms under the Cabinet Office between Christmas and new year and a third last week. He repeatedly told aides that Britain had a special responsibility as the home of the International Maritime Organisation and as a country where trade accounts for 70 per cent of GDP to protect “the principle of maritime law and the freedom of navigation”.
Victoria Prentis, the attorney-general, was clear that Houthi attacks on shipping in the Red Sea and the direct attack on HMS Diamond gave a clear legal justification. A source who has read Prentis’s legal advice — a summary of which was published online — said: “It’s one of the shortest I’ve seen: a clear threat and a clear case for self-defence.” Another minister said: “It was about as straightforward as these things get.”
At 7.45pm on Thursday, Sunak informed the full cabinet of his decision to join the raids, then boarded a plane for Kyiv. After that, Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, chaired a privy council briefing in the Cobra rooms with John Healey, the shadow defence secretary, and Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker. Starmer joined by a secure video link from the northwest, where he was doing a campaign event.
Senior government sources say that if the bombing had taken place during the Christmas recess, as first expected, parliament would have been recalled after the event to debate the attacks. But Starmer has made clear that he supports the the government’s action and decision to wait until Monday, when Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, will make a statement to MPs.
Advertisement
This positioning is understandable since Starmer might have to take similar decisions before the end of the year. Labour insiders say they would have done the same thing.
The fly-in-the-ointment in terms of US relations came as a result of briefings out of cabinet that military action was imminent and the public statements of Shapps, who said “watch this space” when asked about attacking the Houthis.
He had been in phone contact with his US opposite number, Lloyd Austin, unaware until the story broke last week that the American defence secretary was in hospital with prostate cancer. Shapps saw his interventions as part of rolling the pitch so that the attack did not seem to come out of the blue.
But a senior diplomat said: “There was some real annoyance at the defence secretary for his ‘watch this space’ comment. The leaks in the hours before the attack really pissed off the Americans to the extent that engagement on the political side suddenly evaporated. We had planes in the air with pilots flying over dangerous, difficult terrain. They were pretty grumpy about operational security.”
Labour officials are working hard to ensure that relations are strong if they win power. Starmer made a point of telling his MPs last week that he was in “regular contact” with Sullivan. It is understood the pair have had “a couple of telephone conversations” about the situation in Gaza. David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, also has close links with senior Democrats, particularly on Capitol Hill.
Advertisement
Diplomats and Labour officials say it is likely that Starmer will visit Washington to cement relations in the coming months, though a date has not been finalised. This could involve a meeting with Sullivan and other senior aides or with Kamala Harris, the vice-president. The protocol on these occasions is that Biden could not formally meet someone who was not head of government but would do a “drop in”, stopping by the meeting for a brief chat.
Whoever wins the British election, pencilled in for November, will have to ensure a workable relationship with whoever wins the White House that same month. Unlike in 2016, when the British embassy in Washington was left flat-footed by Donald Trump’s victory, considerable efforts are being made by Dame Karen Pierce, the ambassador, and her team to get alongside possible Trump-world nominees for key posts.
They have been aided by work at the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank, which is drawing up lists of capable Trump loyalists so that he has competent people to pick from. It is thought likely that, if Trump wins, Mike Pompeo — a former secretary of state and head of the CIA — could return, and British officials know him well.
Officials say that the prospect of a change in Washington, with Trump far less likely than Biden to support Ukraine, was a factor in Sunak going to Kyiv so early in the year. This year will also bring the G7 and Nato summits and the Munich security conference, where Britain hopes EU nations will follow Sunak’s lead.
Sunak was the first foreign leader to address the Rada, the Ukrainian parliament, which helped bolster Zelensky, who has been in conflict with MPs about conscription. He received ten standing ovations. Witnesses claimed there were MPs with tears in their eyes.
Advertisement
Having played the role of conciliator in Kyiv, Sunak will this week try to keep his own party together. He faces a showdown with the Tory right over the government’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda. Leading members of the European Research Group are set to vote for amendments tabled by Robert Jenrick, the former immigration minister, on Tuesday, without which they say Sunak will never get a plane off the ground.
If the amendments do not pass, Suella Braverman, the former home secretary, confirmed this weekend that the rebels would join Labour in seeking to vote down the entire bill at third reading on Wednesday unless Sunak adopts their approach. Only 29 Conservative MPs would need to vote against the government to produce another humiliating defeat.
Sunak’s domestic problems will get worse when detailed seat-by-seat polling is published showing that Labour is on course to win even previously safe Tory seats. The MRP poll, funded by a wealthy Tory donor, will be released in stages and is expected to cause panic on the backbenches when MPs with huge paper majorities learn that they are on course to lose their seats.
One rebel even suggested that Sunak had timed his Ukraine visit to distract attention from his domestic problems.
A minister disagreed. “This is not a case of ‘look over here, not over here’. This is core protection of UK national security. I’m not sure the president of the United States cares about our immigration issues.”
