Connect with us

Published

on

Rishi Sunak must stand up to the “Brexit purity cult” of Eurosceptics on the Tory benches to find a solution to the Northern Ireland Protocol deadlock, Sir Keir Starmer will say.

The Labour leader will use a speech in Belfast to urge the prime minister to take on the European Research Group (ERG) in order to resolve the issues over Northern Ireland’s post-Brexit trading arrangements.

Sir Keir will say he will offer “political cover” at Westminster if Mr Sunak can deliver an agreement with the European Union which is in the national interest.

“The time for action on the protocol is now. The time to stand up to the ERG is now,” Sir Keir will say on Friday.

“The time to put Northern Ireland above a Brexit purity cult, which can never be satisfied – is now.”

The protocol has overshadowed politics in Northern Ireland since it was agreed by then-prime minister Boris Johnson as part of the Brexit deal in a bid to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland.

Members of the unionist community are unhappy with the difficulties it creates for trade between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) refusing to co-operate with forming a devolved executive in Stormont until the issues are resolved.

More on Northern Ireland

After arriving in Belfast on Thursday, Sir Keir said there was a “small window of opportunity” to find a solution before the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement in April – seen by many as an unofficial deadline for an agreement and a potential visit from US President Joe Biden.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Firms ‘unhappy’ with Brexit

“We’ve got to use the anniversary to fix minds, get the country and its political process moving forward again – deliver for the people of Northern Ireland,” he will say.

Any deal seen as conceding too much to Brussels could trigger a revolt on the Tory benches, but Sir Keir will offer Labour support to Mr Sunak.

“Whatever political cover you need, whatever mechanism in Westminster you require, if it delivers for our national interest and the people of Northern Ireland, we will support you,” he will say in the speech at Queen’s University.

Read More:
What is the Northern Ireland Protocol and why does it matter?
New Taoiseach Leo Varadkar says he is ‘willing to make compromises’ over Northern Ireland Protocol

The Labour leader will call on the PM to recognise the mistakes made by some Tory ministers who had viewed the Irish government as “adversaries” on Brexit.

“That has damaged the political process here in Northern Ireland – no question. And it’s certainly not the spirit of 1998.”

The UK government says the protocol is not working and wants to override it with new legislation if the EU does not agree to changes – a move Brussels has warned is “illegal and unrealistic”.

Earlier this week, a new data-sharing agreement between the UK and EU was hailed as a “new basis” for resolving the impassethough the prime minister’s official spokesman stressed: “There are still significant issues at the heart of the protocol that need addressing.”

Labour has suggested a new veterinary agreement for trade in agricultural products between the UK and EU, which it claims would eliminate many of the checks, while a trusted trader scheme could also avoid some bureaucracy.

Sir Keir will also use the speech to hail the Good Friday Agreement – which brought peace to Northern Ireland – as “the greatest achievement of the Labour Party in my lifetime, without question”.

“But of course, the real achievements – the real pride – belongs to the people and communities here in Northern Ireland,” he will say.

It comes as Sir Keir’s own Brexit strategy appeared to be called into question by a Labour heavyweight.

Sir Keir Starmer, left, with Sadiq Khan in June 2022. Pic: AP
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer with Sadiq Khan in June 2022. Pic: AP

London Mayor Sadiq Khan used a speech on Thursday night to condemn ministers’ silence on the “damage” Brexit has done to the economy, and to call for a “pragmatic discussion” about re-joining the single market.

Although the criticism is aimed at the Conservative government, it could also be seen as a veiled swipe at Sir Keir’s stance on Brexit.

Sir Keir, despite campaigning for Remain in the 2016 referendum, has recently taken a hardline position, ruling out bringing back free movement of people and arguing there is “no case” for rejoining the EU’s single market.

“Look, we have left the EU and there is no case for re-joining the EU or for going back into the single market,” he told reporters on Thursday.

“But what I do think we need to do is move beyond what I think is a pretty inadequate deal… and make Brexit work. And that is my priority.”

Continue Reading

World

UAE says navigational error caused oil tankers to collide near Strait of Hormuz

Published

on

By

UAE says navigational error caused oil tankers to collide near Strait of Hormuz

A crash between two oil tankers on a major shipping route near the UAE was likely caused by a navigational misjudgement by one of the vessels, officials have said.

The Adalynn and Front Eagle tankers collided and caught on fire on Tuesday near the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow channel which connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman.

Israel-Iran latest: Tehran warns US against intervention

In a statement issued today, the United Arab Emirates’ energy ministry did not draw any link between the crash and an upsurge in electronic interference amid the Israel-Iran conflict.

Interference has disrupted navigation systems near the strait since the two countries began firing missiles at each other last week.

The multinational US-led Combined Maritime Force’s Joint Maritime Information Centre said in an advisory this week that it had received reports of interference stemming from near Iran’s Port of Bandar Abbas and other areas in the Gulf region.

Tehran has not commented on the collision or reports of interference.

The UAE coastguard said it evacuated 24 people from the Adalynn, while personnel on Front Eagle were reported safe with no pollution visible after a fire on its deck.

Read more from Sky News:
Why Israel-Iran conflict poses cost of living threat
Who has been targeted in Israel’s strikes?

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

The Strait of Hormuz – which handles around a fifth of the world’s seaborne oil – links the Gulf to the northwest with the Gulf of Oman, the Arabian Sea beyond.

The Adalynn, owned by a company based in India, had no cargo and was sailing towards the Suez Canal in Egypt, according to monitoring service TankerTrackers.com.

The Front Eagle was on its way to Zhoushan in China – and loaded with two million barrels of Iraqi crude oil, the tracker said.

TankerTrackers.com said on X that the Front Eagle was moving southbound at a speed of 13.1 knots when it “executed a starboard [right] turn, resulting in a collision” with the Adalynn.

The exact cause of the collision, which resulted in no injuries or spills, is still unclear.

Continue Reading

World

US President Donald Trump says he ‘may or may not’ strike Iran as Israel’s air war continues

Published

on

By

US President Donald Trump says he 'may or may not' strike Iran as Israel's air war continues

US President Donald Trump says he has yet to decide whether the US will join Israel militarily in its campaign against Iran.

Asked whether the US was getting closer to striking Iran’s nuclear facilities, Mr Trump said: “I may do it. I may not do it.”

Speaking outside the White House on Wednesday, he added: “Nobody knows what I’m going to do…Iran’s got a lot of trouble, and they want to negotiate.

“And I said, ‘why didn’t you negotiate with me before all this death and destruction?'”

Mr Trump said Iran had reached out to Washington, a claim Tehran denied, with Iran’s mission to the UN responding: “No Iranian official has ever asked to grovel at the gates of the White House.”

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran would not surrender and warned “any US military intervention will undoubtedly cause irreparable damage” to US-Iranian relations.

Read more:
Why did Israel attack Iran?

More on Iran

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The families caught up in Iran-Israel attacks

Strikes continue

Hundreds have reportedly died since Iran and Israel began exchanging strikes last Friday, when Israel launched an air assault after saying it had concluded Iran was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon, a claim Tehran denies.

Israel launched three waves of aerial attacks on Iran in the last 24 hours, military spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin has said.

Israel deployed dozens of warplanes to strike over 60 targets in Tehran and western Iran, including missile launchers and missile-production sites, he said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Can Iran’s leadership be toppled?

“The aim of the operation is to eliminate the existential threat to the State of Israel, significantly damage Iran’s nuclear programme in all its components, and severely impact its missile array,” he said.

Early on Thursday Israel issued an evacuation warning to residents of the Iranian Arak region where Iran has heavy water reactor facilities. Heavy water is important in controlling chain reactions in the production of weapons grade plutonium.

Meanwhile Iran says it has arrested 18 people it describes as “enemy agents” who it says were building drones for the Israelis in the northern city of Mashhad.

Iran also launched small barrages of missiles at Israel on Wednesday with no reports of casualties. Israel has now eased some restrictions for its civilians.

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

Read more:
Trump’s words designed to stoke tension, confuse and apply intense pressure on Iran
MAGA civil war breaks out over Trump’s potential decision to join conflict with Iran

The US is working to evacuate its citizens from Israel by arranging flights and cruise ship departures, the US ambassador to the country has said.

In the UK, Sir Keir Starmer chaired a COBRA emergency meeting on the situation in the Middle East, with a Downing Street spokesperson saying: “Ministers were updated on efforts to support British nationals in region and protect regional security, as well as ongoing diplomatic efforts”.

Continue Reading

World

UK attorney general ‘has questions’ on legality of Israel’s actions in Iran

Published

on

By

UK attorney general 'has questions' on legality of Israel's actions in Iran

The UK government’s top legal adviser has raised questions over whether Israel’s actions in Iran are lawful, according to a source familiar with discussions inside the government.

The source suggested to Sky News that Attorney General Richard Hermer’s thinking, which has not been published, complicates the UK’s potential involvement in the Iran-Israel conflict.

If the attorney general deems Israel’s actions in Iran to be unlawful then the UK is restricted in its ability to help to defend Israel or support the United States in any planned attacks on Iran.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source said that the attorney general’s concerns limit UK involvement in the conflict “unless our personnel are targeted”.

US President Donald Trump is currently weighing up his options for Iran and has repeatedly suggested the US could get involved militarily.

Members of the Israeli special forces check the remains of a suspected ballistic missile in northern Israel.
Pic: Reuters
Image:
Members of the Israeli special forces check the remains of a suspected ballistic missile in northern Israel.
Pic: Reuters

This would likely involve the use of US B-2 bombers to drop bunker-busting bombs to destroy Iran’s nuclear facility built deep into the side of a mountain at Fordow.

These B-2 bombers could be flown from the UK base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, strategically close to Iran.

More on Iran

The US could also choose to fly them the far greater distance from the US mainland.

Under a long-standing convention, the UK grants permission to the US for the base to be used for military operations.

The US military could also request the use of the UK military base in Cyprus, for refuelling planes.

Any refusal by the British could complicate US military action and, diplomatically, put pressure on the trans-Atlantic relationship.

Israel’s justification

Israel has justified its war by claiming that Iran poses an “imminent” and “existential” threat to Israel.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has cited his country’s own undisclosed intelligence claiming Iran was on the brink of obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The Israeli government also claimed, without publishing evidence, that Iran was planning an imminent attack on Israel.

They also cited the recent International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report which concluded that Iran had been “less than satisfactory” in “a number of respects” on its international compliance over its nuclear activities.

It is not clear what aspect of Israel’s justification for military action the attorney general has concerns over.

The Attorney General’s Office has told Sky News: “By long-standing convention, reflected in the ministerial code, whether the law officers have been asked to provide legal advice and the content of any advice is not routinely disclosed.

“The convention provides the fullest guarantee that government business will be conducted at all times in light of thorough and candid legal advice.”

The UK armed forces have previously rallied to help defend Israel from Iranian missile and drone strikes when the two sides engaged in direct confrontation last year.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Michael Clarke and Dominic Waghorn answer your questions about the Israel-Iran conflict

In April 2024, RAF typhoon jets shot down drones fired from Iran.

The UK military was also involved in efforts to defend Israel from a ballistic missile attack in October 2024.

But the UK has not been involved in the current conflict, which began when Israel targeted Iranian nuclear facilities and scientists as well as more definitive military targets such as missile launchers and commanders.

The UN’s nuclear watchdog has previously raised concerns about any attack against nuclear facilities because of the inherent danger but also the legality.

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

A number of resolutions passed by the IAEA’s general conference has said “any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency”.

Israel believes that Iran’s nuclear programme has a military use, which makes it a legitimate target.

Read more:
US senator claims Iran is building missiles that can ‘murder Americans’
Moscow switches to crisis mode after Trump’s Iran threats

It believes the regime is aimed to enrich uranium to develop nuclear weapons.

Tehran, however, has always insisted its nuclear programme is for civilian use.

The site of an Iranian missile attack on Israel. Pic: Reuters
Image:
The site of an Iranian missile attack on Israel. Pic: Reuters

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has also condemned Israel’s use of armed force against Iran as a violation of the United Nations (UN) Charter and international law.

Interpretations of International Law

Different countries adopt varying interpretations on the use of force in response to future attacks.

The first legal position is that nations can act preventatively to deflect threats.

The second is that they can act to deflect future armed attacks that are imminent.

The third is that states can only act to deflect attacks that have occurred.

Flames rise from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been struck by an Israeli missile in Tehran. Pic: AP
Image:
An oil storage facility after it appeared to have been struck by an Israeli missile in Tehran. Pic: AP

That third position is generally considered to be too restrictive and the first as too broad.

The grey area lies with the second position, and it rests with the definition of “imminent”.

The concepts of “proportionality”, “necessity” and “imminence” are key considerations.

International law scholars have told Sky News that Israel may pass the “proportionality” test in its actions against Iran because its targets appear to have been military and nuclear.

But whether there was the “necessity” to attack Iran at this point is more questionable.

The attorney general would likely be considering the key legal test of the ‘imminence’ of the Iranian threat against Israel – and whether it is reasonable to conclude that an attack from Iran was “imminent” – as he weighs the legal advice issued to UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.

There is always nuance with legal advice, judgements rest on a variety of factors and advice can evolve.

In the run up to the 2003 Gulf War, the US and UK justified their action by arguing that Saddam Hussein possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction – a claim that turned out to be wrong.

The then-attorney general’s advice, which evolved, was central to Tony Blair’s decision to join President Bush in attacking Iraq.

Continue Reading

Trending