W hatever you think about Donald Trump and his catastrophically stupid war in Iran (just my view), the decision by the US to evacuate all of its bombers from the RAF base in Fairford in Gloucestershire feels like a bit of a humiliation for Britain. It’s certainly very unsettling, seeing as their presence there has been a symbolic and, in fact, hugely important contribution to the security of the UK ever since the United States Air Force stationed forces there to bomb Berlin during the Second World War. It rather does add to the feeling that the US commitment to the defence of Britain, the Atlantic Alliance and the very future of Nato is increasingly transactional and contingent on the whims of an irascible and unpredictable American president.
I mean, we’ve known that for some time – but when some of the most potent air assets on earth are suddenly repatriated to Missouri and the like, it is nonetheless a shock. Sobering. Why has it happened?
Lots of speculation. It could be the Americans have been spooked by the alleged attempted terror attack on Gloucestershire on September 27th, with what Andy Burnham described as the “strong indication that Iran played a part" in the slightly bizarre incident. Trump certainly made no secret of his dismay at the release on bail of those arrested.
Maybe the White House decided to make a performative gesture to signal their annoyance with the British – especially the initial unwillingness by Keir Starmer to allow them to use RAF Fairford in the early attacks on Iranian targets. That’s since been reversed to the ludicrous, indeed oxymoronic, policy of permitting the use of the base for the “defensive” bombing of Iranian facilities – but, even so, there’s still a good deal of American resentment about British fastidiousness. As Trump insists, “They weren’t with us when we needed them.
Why should we help defend them when they need us?” It could even be that the Americans have been told by Burnham that they can’t use Gloucestershire if Trump really is going to carry out his threat to “annihilate” Iran and drive its people “into hell” if they resist his “peace deal”. He can do all that, albeit with more logistical difficulty, from the American homeland; but the further damage to the UK-US relationship is apparent, even if he doesn’t go through with his terrifying ultimatums, and even if Burnham is right to want no part in such a crime against humanity. There are other potential explanations.
A simple fear that some Iranian agents might be lucky enough to destroy an aircraft, maybe with some home-made drone. The very long perimeter of the Fairford base is actually hard to defend. Or there’s the possibility, that cannot be spoken openly, that Trump wants to de-escalate the bombings and keep his aircraft safe back home.
We will learn more in the coming hours and days, no doubt. What is certain is that the UK feels less safe and more vulnerable this morning than it did 24 hours ago. It makes one reflect on what the transatlantic partnership is really all about, and what we are sacrificing if we, the British, insist on making our loyalty to the United States conditional and subordinate to international law and the veto of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
Are we more or less secure as a result? Or do we merely make Britain more of a target for terrorism and “hybrid warfare” ordered by Tehran and the Kremlin? Where is the European defence and security pact that will allow us to preserve our sovereignty?
To the world, Britain must look feeble – unable to patrol one rural base and repel some lads in vans , let alone secure its own borders along the English Channel . The British are goaded by Russian harassment and interference, their prime minister’s home fire-bombed by paid amateurs, and unwilling to sacrifice the comforts of consumerism and the welfare state in order to re-arm and promote vital national interests. Unsettling indeed.
Source: The Independent
