That’s not ideal when the country is edging towards war while also picking a fight with its biggest ally, the United States. But perhaps it’s inevitable once you realise which particular muppet is shaping UK policy. Frankly, I’d rather have Fozzie Bear deciding whether to send an aircraft carrier to defend British bases than the Labour cabinet member who's now driving these decisions. There’s nothing funny about what’s happening in the Middle East. Our response demands clear heads, not politicians with foam and felt for brains.
The British public has mixed feelings about this war. I certainly do. I'd love to see the terrorist Iranian regime smashed but I’m not convinced Donald Trump has the patience or strategy to see this conflict through. He could easily walk away and leave everyone else to pick up the pieces. And we don't owe Trump. He didn’t consult us before launching these strikes. He’s insulted British military efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now he’s threatening to slap a 15% tariff on our exports to boot. Some ally.
But we do owe something to Cyprus, which hosts British military bases and has become a target as a result. And our relationship with the US goes much deeper than just one wayward president. At the very least, we should allow American aircraft to operate from British bases. That’s what allies do.
Eventually, after the usual U-turn, that’s exactly what Britain agreed. But the delay tells us something pathetic about Starmer. The man supposedly running the country isn't in charge. Instead, Starmer appears to have handed the keys to Labour’s own version of Beaker, the long-suffering assistant to Dr Bunsen Honeydew on The Muppet Show. I’m talking about Ed Miliband.
Incredibly, Miliband now seems to be setting Labour’s foreign policy. Reports suggest Miliband pushed Starmer to deny US bombers access to British bases, backed by those renowned strategic masterminds Rachel Reeves and Yvette Cooper.
Miliband’s record on war speaks for itself. Back in 2013, when Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people, the West faced a choice. David Cameron wanted Britain to join the US and France in limited military strikes. Miliband, then Labour's leader, blocked it.
The Commons voted against action. The strikes never happened. Assad carried on slaughtering his own population. Nine more brutal years of war followed. Miliband has always insisted his conscience is clear. It usually is.
He cast himself as the peacemaker, the man who stopped Britain blundering into another Middle Eastern conflict. But if you won’t act when a dictator gasses civilians, when exactly will you act? Apparently not even against Islamic State.
In 2015, when MPs voted on airstrikes against ISIS in Syria, Miliband again refused to back military action. If you won’t stand up to one of the most barbaric terrorist movements in modern history, who exactly are you prepared to fight?
Violence clearly isn’t entirely against Miliband’s principles, though. Just ask his brother.
The 2010 Labour leadership contest was one of the nastiest political knife fights in recent memory. David Miliband entered as favourite. His younger brother quietly stitched together union deals and brutally stabbed him in the back. Ed Miliband is happy to shed political blood, even of a sibling, if it benefits his career.
And now this man is shaping Labour’s response to an increasingly dangerous world. Britain is led by muppets. No wonder the rest of the world is laughing at us.
