Owen Polley: Leadership deficit shown up at Stormont and Westminster

In the House of Commons, Rachel Reeves told MPs that inflation was expected to continue to fall this year. The Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) also forecast that the economy would grow faster than previously expected, after an initial slowdown, and unemployment would soon start to come back down.

This news, unveiled in the chancellor’s Spring Statement, was of course completely overshadowed by the war in Iran and other parts of the Middle East.

In the sparse coverage that the statement managed to attract, the media focused on the likelihood of surging oil prices and the stock market’s reaction to the conflict. Ms Reeves’ sunnier predictions seemed to be fatally undermined by international turmoil, even though she claimed that the government’s policies were suited to an ‘uncertain’ world.

The chancellor’s statement would normally dominate news coverage the next day.

This time, there was little room compared to the far more compelling story that Donald Trump had disparaged Sir Keir Starmer, saying he was ‘no Churchill’. The US president’s remarks fed the perception that the prime minister is a weak and wavering leader.

The situation in Iran is admittedly more complicated than it has been depicted, but the criticism of Starmer’s reaction to the war is justified. In Northern Ireland, the same is true of the response of the First Minister, Michelle O’Neill, who is even more lacking in leadership qualities, never mind credible opinions on foreign affairs.

The Islamic Republic in Iran is clearly one of the vilest regimes in the world and its sympathisers in the west are thoroughly contemptible. Even Sinn Fein has tried to distance itself from the ayatollahs and disguise the historical sympathies of republicans for Iran’s revolutionary movement.

Iran has treated its people brutally at home, while exporting terror abroad.

There is no contradiction, though, in deploring the regime and hoping ardently for its removal, while worrying that the US and Israel’s attacks could backfire.

In Belfast and other cities, Iranian expats celebrated the killing of Ayatollah Khameini with dancing and song. It was hard not to share their joy.

And it’s tempting to assume that, if the regime in Tehran is overthrown, it would be replaced by well-educated, secular Iranians like these.

I suspect, though, that the dissent that had broken out across Iran prior to the war was not all about westernised women ripping off their hijabs, or a reaction to the enforcement of an extreme version of Islam.

This is a massive country of over 90 million people, most of them living in conservative, religious areas rather than Tehran. The protests were driven initially by inflation, shortages and economic crisis, even if they began to include political demands for freedom, which we in the west tend to focus on and sympathise with.

Many historians believe that it was a tendency to overestimate the strength of the westernised elite in Iran and underestimate the power of Islamism that meant the US failed to predict the 1979 Iranian revolution, and the overthrow of the Shah.

The point is that President Trump, by his own admission, does not have a clear strategy to secure Iran’s future this time, even if his war is a success. It is incredibly difficult to predict whether the regime can be overthrown, but even harder to forecast what might come in its place.

The so-called ‘Arab Spring’ was a warning that you can remove brutal dictators, who are odious but at least predictable, and get chaos and Islamism in their place.

The situation in Iran is different, because it’s difficult to imagine an even more radically Islamic regime taking hold. But the uncertainty, as well as the threat of civil war and the prospect that friendly governments could be destabilised, will at least cause thoughtful people to be nervous.

With all this in mind, it’s not surprising that Starmer has reservations about the conflict. He would be stupid not to.

At the same time, his lack of decisive action when Iran attacked the RAF Akrotiri base in Cyprus in particular was just another sign that he is not made of the stuff a leader needs. The facility was probably bombed because of the presence of US spy planes, but it is sovereign British territory, and its targeting demanded a firm defensive and diplomatic response.

In Northern Ireland, in contrast, most of us do not expect or even want leadership from the so-called ‘first minister for all’, Michelle O’Neill. Still, it was lamentable that she refused to attend government briefings on the situation in the Middle East. This was seemingly on the basis that it was a “briefing by the British on their military operations” and her attendance might be perceived as approval for the armed forces.

This was always a threadbare excuse, as the meetings are intended to provide important information to the devolved administrations. The major parties at Stormont were at least united in their criticism of her decision, but it showed graphically that Sinn Fein and good government can never be reconciled.

From that party, with its sympathies for violent demagogues, hard-left politics and ‘anti-imperialist’ terror organisations across the globe, this is hardly surprising. The consistent lack of leadership from Starmer, who came to power promising to restore the credibility of Britain’s government, is more serious and shocking.