King’s Speech

Baroness Mobarik Excerpts

Thursday 21st May 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Mobarik (Con)]

My Lords, we were once unquestionably a leading military and economic power. Today, our role is less clearly defined. We still have significant soft power through our institutions, global networks and cultural reach, and His Majesty the King embodies that soft power in a way that no one else can, but soft power cannot rest on individuals alone. It has to be reinforced by national confidence and a clear foreign and defence policy.

Britain has often been defined by its pragmatism, yet at times we have alienated and ostracised certain nations and peoples, to such an extent that meaningful dialogue and peaceful negotiation have become almost impossible. Trust can be earned only through openness, honest endeavour and a willingness to engage without prejudice. I fully endorse the Prime Minister’s decision not to join the United States in what most regard as an unlawful war in Iran. That restraint was right and showed judgment, for escalation is not the same as leadership. However, that in itself is not enough. We do not want to be drawn into conflict, but where is our diplomatic leadership? Where is the active effort to convene, influence and lead from the front in the pursuit of peace?

Britain’s soft power should be at its most effective in that gap between stepping back from military action and stepping forward with diplomatic influence. To remain a country of consequence, we must shape the conditions for peace, not merely react to them. But as someone who believes that every effort must be made in the pursuit of peace and in preventing the troubling proliferation of arms and ever-more destructive technologies across the globe, I also believe that soft power alone is not enough.

There must stand an unquestioned degree of hard power too, so that our words carry credibility and weight, as laid out in the strategic defence review. However, that strength must be grounded not in aggression but in defence and the protection of stability. Our laws should not just be ink on some document. I remind noble Lords that we are a signatory to the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, recognising that attacks on heritage are often attacks on people, history and humanity itself. That is why damage to historic sites and cultural assets in Isfahan in Iran is so deeply concerning. A city of immense historical and architectural significance, Isfahan represents centuries of artistic, cultural and intellectual achievement. Whatever the wider politics or military circumstances, the protection of civilians and of cultural heritage must remain a principle upheld by all sides because, once heritage is lost, it cannot truly be replaced.

We must use our diplomatic influence, including with our allies and partners, to help safeguard cultural heritage wherever it is under threat and to uphold the principles that we have committed ourselves to under international law. These treasures do not belong to one nation alone. They form part of the shared inheritance of humanity and reflect the very values of civilisation, respect and continuity that we seek to defend.