Lord Anderson of Swansea
Main Page: Lord Anderson of Swansea (Labour - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Anderson of Swansea's debates with the Leader of the House
(1 day, 10 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, the key justification of President Trump in launching this war of choice was that it was a pre-emptive action on his part because Iran was poised to produce nuclear weapons. Has not that claim been blown out of the water by the evidence just given to Congress by his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, that Iran had not sought to enrich uranium since the massive attacks last summer, and that therefore there was no justification for pre-emption, as suggested by the President? Does this not justify our Prime Minister in his cautious response to the US demand for assistance and his tilt towards closer co-operation with our European allies?
As I said in my initial response, the Prime Minister has been absolutely correct in ensuring that we focus on international law and on our interests. We should not underestimate the threat of Iran—it is a serious threat to us. That is why the previous Government and this Government have put so much effort into ensuring that it does not get nuclear weapons. With our E3 partners, we have engaged in extensive negotiations in the lead-up to snapback, and Iran chose not to accept our demands; faced with Iran’s continuous nuclear escalation, we were compelled to trigger that snapback, and we ensured that we got decisive UN Security Council support for that. We are absolutely clear about the requirement to ensure that Iran does not develop nuclear weapons remains—it is a threat that is serious. We also need to understand its actions in the region, not only to do with its proxy facilities but even in what this terrible regime has been doing to its own population. We should be clear about the threat that Iran is to the whole of the world.