Keir Starmer accused of being 'crushingly naive' after calling for a 'diplomatic' de-escalation in Iran

At a Downing Street press conference on Thursday, the Prime Minister made clear that the "long-standing British position" is the "best way forward for the region and the world is a negotiated settlement with Iran", where they "give up their nuclear ambitions".

He said: "That’s why I took the decision that the UK would not join the initial strikes on Iran by the US and Israel. That decision was deliberate, it was in the national interest, and I stand by it."

Airing his criticism of the PM's handling of the conflict, Sir Michael said there are "several reasons" why he is being "delusional" about the scale of the threat to the UK.

He told GB News: "I think he's delusional. The Prime Minister, frankly, is being crushingly naive.

"He says proudly that he will act in Britain's interests. Well, I don't think that Iran having a nuclear weapon, which is clearly what they've been aiming for for decades, is something that would have been in the United Kingdom's interests."

He argued the Iranian regime "having intercontinental ballistic missiles or long range ballistic missiles" is also "not in Britain's interest.

Sir Michael stressed: "Even with medium range missiles, they're able to strike at distances of up to two and a half thousand kilometres away, and their proxies can push further than that, as far as Cyprus.

"I don't think it's in the United Kingdom's interests to have an Iranian regime murdering tens of thousands of its own people and presenting a threat to international aviation and maritime trade in the region is concerned.

"So I don't see how he can argue, as he did at his press conference yesterday, that it's in the United Kingdom's interests to allow the theocracy of that regime to have continued."

Highlighting legislation within the United Nations Charter and international law, the ex-Attorney General made clear that nations can act in self defence against Iran, even before they have suffered an attack, due to the threat of nuclear weapons.

Sir Michael said: "One thing I think is clear about international law is that Article 51 of the United Nations Charter does empower countries to act both in self-defence and in the defence of others, and where we see a regime that is building nuclear weapons, one has to be wilfully blind not to see the danger that regime has been posing to the West and continues to pose.

"And therefore, under any concept of international law, you don't have to wait until you're struck first in order to strike back, in the same way that an armed police officer on the streets of London doesn't have to wait for the bad guy to to shoot at him first, he can shoot someone who is presenting a deadly threat.

"That same concept applies in international relations. You don't have to wait until they have a nuclear weapon and then you're hamstrung; you can act accordingly."

Sir Michael said given "many countries around the world" have seen that it is "within international law to take this action", the British Government under Sir Keir is "wrong" in its approach.

Questioned on whether there needs to be "boots on the ground" as a next step in the action against Iran, Sir Michael told the People's Channel it would be a "regressive step".

He concluded: "That would be a regressive step, particularly for the United States. I think their hope is that the people of Iran will rise up. The difficulty is, of course, that the regime has been so incredibly repressive that a lot of people will be very fearful of doing that.

"Because of the reprisals which frankly have been savaged, the use of military-grade weapons against thousands of civilians, the torture of civilians and so on. So I think that will clearly act as an anchor against those who wish to rise up.

"I think both Israel and America will be well aware that there are people just waiting to step up to the plate and remove this odious regime, which will actually, when it does happen and if it does happen, be a game changer for the Middle East and really improve world affairs."

Our Standards: The GB News Editorial Charter