Rishi Sunak says strikes against Houthis in Yemen part of ‘single, limited action’ amid fears of escalation
Rishi Sunak has said the strikes conducted against Houthi rebels in Yemen were intended as a “single, limited action” amid questions about the UK’s long-term strategy.
The British military joined forces with the US on Thursday night as it launched attacks against Houthi bases in Yemen, in retaliation for the group’s targeting of international trade in the Red Sea.
The prime minister updated MPs in the Commons for the first time since the strikes were carried out last week, following criticism that parliament was not consulted beforehand.
Mr Sunak told MPs all planned targets had been destroyed in the strikes and there had been no reports of civilian casualties.
The prime minister also explained why he had not informed parliament before the military action took place.
“I can tell the House today that our initial assessment is that all 13 planned targets were destroyed,” he said.
Politics latest: Sunak faces MPs after strikes on Houthis
“We have seen no evidence thus far of civilian causalities, which we took great care to avoid.”
The prime minister said the strikes on Houthi linked sites in Yemen only came after the group, which is backed by Iran, launched almost 30 “unacceptable” attacks on commercial ships since 19 November, including an attack on British and American warships on 9 January.
“They fired on our ships and our sailors, it was the biggest attack on our navy for decades, and so we acted,” he said.
Some have raised concerns the strikes risk inflaming tensions in the Middle East.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Houthi sites before and after airstrikes
SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn asked Mr Sunak “what comes next”.
“How far is he willing to go in relation to military action? Because we cannot have an escalation which leads to further regional instability,” he said.
The prime minister said the action was contained, but that the government would “not hesitate to protect our security and our interests, where required”.
“I obviously won’t speculate on future action,” he said.
“What we conducted was intended as a single, limited action and of course we hope that the Houthis will now step back and end their reckless and destabilising attacks, but of course we will not hesitate to protect our security and our interests, where required, and we would of course follow the correct procedures as I believe we did so in this case.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Lights are flashing red on global dashboard’
A spokesman for the Yemeni armed forces in the Houthi-controlled north of Yemen said in a televised statement the bombardment would “not go unanswered and unpunished”.
They also linked strikes with the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas, saying it would not deter their support for the Palestinians.
But Mr Sunak said the UK’s decision to take part in the strikes was “completely unrelated” to the conflict between Israel and Hamas, as well as the civil war in Yemen.
In response to a question from Labour MP Apsana Begum, who cited a recent poll showing a majority of the British public “want a ceasefire in Israel-Gaza”, the prime minister said: “We shouldn’t fall for their [the Houthis’] malign narrative that this is about Israel and Gaza. They target ships from around the world.
“It is a direct response to the Houthis’ attacks on international shipping.”
Read more from Sky News:
Cameron warns of ‘danger and instability’ in the world
The firepower the UK and US have in the Gulf
During his statement to MPs, Mr Sunak came under pressure to commit to higher military investment – including by Sir Julian Lewis, the Conservative chair of parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee, and Richard Drax, the Tory MP for South Dorset, who said defence “needs a lot more money – more than 2.5%” of GDP.
The UK currently spends 2% of GDP on defence each year, but the prime minister has said he intends to increase this to 2.5% in the long-term.
Migrants convicted of sex offences in the UK or overseas will be unable to claim asylum under government plans to change the law to improve border security.
The Home Office announcement means foreign nationals who are added to the sex offenders register will forfeit their rights to protection under the Refugee Convention.
Politics latest: Tory-Reform coalition would be disaster, warns PM
As part of the 1951 UN treaty, countries are allowed to refuse asylum to terrorists, war criminals and individuals convicted of a “particularly serious crime” – which is currently defined in UK law as an offence carrying a sentence of 12 months or more.
The government now plans to extend that definition to include all individuals added to the Sex Offenders’ Register, regardless of the length of sentence, in an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which is currently going through parliament. It’s understood they also hope to include those convicted of equivalent crimes overseas.
Those affected will still be able to appeal their removal from the UK in the courts under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
More than 10,000 people have now been detected crossing the Channel. Pic: PA
It is unclear how many asylum seekers will be affected, as the government has been unable to provide any projections or past data on the number of asylum seekers added to the Sex Offenders’ Register.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Sex offenders who pose a risk to the community should not be allowed to benefit from refugee protections in the UK.
“We are strengthening the law to ensure these appalling crimes are taken seriously.”
Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls Minister Jess Philips said: “We are determined to achieve our mission of halving violence against women and girls in a decade.
“That’s exactly why we are taking action to ensure there are robust safeguards across the system, including by clamping down on foreign criminals who commit heinous crimes like sex offences.”
Read more:
PM ‘doesn’t want to see strike action’
Former Streeting aide avoids jail after exposing himself
The Home Office would like voters to see this as a substantial change. But that’s hard to demonstrate without providing any indication of the scale of the problem it seeks to solve.
Clearly, the government does not want to fan the flames of resentment towards asylum seekers by implying large numbers have been committing sex crimes.
But amid rising voter frustration about the government’s grip on the issue, and under pressure from Reform – this measure is about signalling it is prepared to take tough action.
Conservatives: ‘Too little, too late’
The Conservatives claim Labour are engaged in “pre-election posturing”.
Chris Philp MP, the shadow home secretary, said: “This is too little, too late from a Labour government that has scrapped our deterrent and overseen the worst year ever for small boat crossings – with a record 10,000 people crossing this year already.
“Foreign criminals pose a danger to British citizens and must be removed, but so often this is frustrated by spurious legal claims based on human rights claims, not asylum claims.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Has Labour tackled migration?
The Home Office has also announced plans to introduce a 24-week target for appeal hearings (known as “first-tier tribunals”) to be held for rejected asylum seekers living in taxpayer-supported accommodation, or for foreign national offenders.
The current average wait is 50 weeks. The idea is to cut the asylum backlog and save taxpayers money – Labour have committed to end the use of asylum hotels by the end of this parliament.
It’s unclear how exactly this will be achieved, although a number of additional court days have already been announced.
The government also plans to crack down on fake immigration lawyers who advise migrants on how to lodge fraudulent asylum claims, with the Immigration Advice Authority given new powers to issue fines of up to £15,000.
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has called on government officials to address questions related to US President Donald Trump’s memecoin and his media company.
In an April 25 letter to Jamieson Greer, acting director of the US Office of Government Ethics (OGE), Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts and California Democratic Senator Adam Schiff requested that officials address concerns about Trump’s memecoin after the president announced a dinner and White House tour for some of the individuals who held the most TRUMP tokens. The two senators requested that Greer provide information on safeguards and guidelines related to whether foreign actors and others could buy political influence with the president, potentially impacting his policy positions and federal pardons.
“President Trump’s announcement promises exclusive access to the presidency in exchange for significant investment in one of the President’s business ventures,” wrote the two senators.
“In promising such access, this proposition may implicate several federal ethics laws and constitutional prohibitions, including the federal bribery statute and emoluments clauses of the US Constitution. It also raises the troubling prospect that foreign actors are using the memecoin as a vector to buy influence with President Trump and his associates without needing to disclose their identities publicly.”
The letter was sent the same day Warren reportedly expressed similar concerns about Trump’s potential conflicts of interest with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). According to an April 25 Reuters report, the Massachusetts senator urged SEC Chair Paul Atkins to ensure that oversight of Trump’s media company was “free from undue political interference and influence from the President and his administration.”
Related: Trump’s WLFI crypto investments aren’t paying off
Though ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, Warren does not have the authority to direct Congress’s agenda with Democrats in the minority. Two Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives have already called for Trump’s impeachment over his memecoin dinner.
Warren added:
“The American people deserve the unwavering assurance that access to the presidency is not being offered for sale to the highest bidder in exchange for the President’s own financial gain.”
At the time of publication, it was unclear who among the top TRUMP memecoin holders would attend the dinner, scheduled to be held on May 22 at Trump’s golf club in Washington, DC. Speculation and analysis of users suggested that Trump supporters, including Tron founder Justin Sun, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, and others, could attend, though none had been confirmed as of April 28.
Magazine: Trump’s crypto ventures raise conflict of interest, insider trading questions
Crypto users betting on the outcome of the snap election to determine the next Prime Minister of Canada appear to be favoring a Liberal Party victory as residents head to cast their votes.
As of April 28, cryptocurrency betting platform Polymarket gave current Canadian Prime Minister and Liberal Party candidate Mark Carney a 79% chance of defeating Conservative Party candidate Pierre Poilievre in the race for the country’s next PM. Data from the platform showed users had poured more than $75 million into bets surrounding the race, predicting a Poilievre or Carney victory.
The odds suggested by the platform, as well as those from many polls, show a nearly complete reversal of fortunes between the two candidates after former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned in January. Trudeau and, by association, many in the Liberal Party, faced criticism over the handling of Canada’s housing crisis and questions about how he would face US President Donald Trump’s then-proposed tariffs.
Following Trudeau’s resignation, Trump stepped up rhetoric disparaging Canada, repeatedly referring to the country as the US’s “51st state” and Trudeau as its “governor.” The US President also imposed a 25% tariff on goods imported from Canada in March. The policies seem to have led to increasing anti-Trump sentiment in Canada, with many residents booing the US national anthem at hockey games and making comparisons between the president and Poilievre.
This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway