Starmer’s Mandelson Mess and the Iranian Nuclear Threat

**Alastair Campbell** (0:07)
Welcome to The Rest Is Politics with me, Alastair Campbell.

**Rory Stewart** (0:10)
And with me, Rory Stewart.

**Alastair Campbell** (0:12)
So Rory, we're going to talk about Keir Starmer's continuing political difficulties over his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson to the ambassadorship in Washington. We're going to update people as best we can on what's going on in Iran and what's going on inside Donald Trump's mind in relation to Iran. And we're also going to talk about the Wretched War in Sudan. Where do you want to start on the Starmer vetting row?

**Rory Stewart** (0:37)
Let's take it back to the first question, which is why on earth did Starmer find it necessary to try to put a political appointee into Washington? So he had in Karen Pierce, a ambassador in Washington who had a good relationship with Trump who was very experienced, pretty straightforward, actually quite colorful, charismatic British ambassador. He's now got in Christian Turner, again, a career diplomat doing the job, instead of which he decided to make the ambassador in Washington a political appointee.
So that's the first question. And you, I think, were interested in David Miliband, who I would have been supportive of. George Osborne's been briefing ferociously to the newspapers that he was the other candidate that was being considered. It's really interesting how absolutely solemnly so many of the British newspapers keep saying George Osborne was the other candidate, was being considered. Can I just pause for that for a second? I mean, that seems incredible, isn't it? Or am I misreading the relationship between Keir Starmer and someone like George Osborne? Was he really thinking of making the former conservative chancellor, the architect of austerity, the ambassador to Washington?

**Alastair Campbell** (1:50)
Well, if he was, I think he would have created probably not as many political difficulties for himself as this has created because of the various directions he has gone in through Jeffrey Epstein and the current row about developed vetting that we'll get onto. I would hope not. I would hope not. But the point about why he wanted a non-career diplomat, I wonder if we shouldn't go even a step further back. Because what I don't think we've ever quite got to the bottom of, including through Keir Starmer's statement in the House of Commons yesterday and Olly Robbins, the now sacked permanent secretary of the foreign office and his evidence to parliamentary committee, I don't think we've quite got to the actual reason for the appointment.
The line is, the argument is that with a very unconventional presidency, Trump too, maybe it was time to have an unconventional ambassador. I think that's overstated. I can remember Tony Blair often saying, look, frankly, leaders don't really care much who ambassadors are, as long as they know they're speaking to somebody who's giving the government light.

**Rory Stewart** (2:54)
Put pause on that because I think that's really important.
I think that's critical, isn't it? Knowing that they're giving the government line. In a sense, the reason why a career diplomat is a more reliable appointment, is that the Trump administration, like them or loathe them, at least has a sense that this is a mouthpiece for the official government line. If you start appointing very, very colourful Wheeler dealer, George Osborne, Peter Mandelson types, there is a risk that Tony Blair might say, well, is this guy actually giving me the government line? Is this the Foreign Office line or is this some weird improvisation?

**Alastair Campbell** (3:28)
That I think is part of the thinking. But I think the thing we keep coming back to, because I don't, look, Keir Starmer had no real relationship with Peter Mandelson. He didn't really know him.
I do think this was much more Morgan McSweeney, who was quite close to Peter, and who maybe felt that with the support that Peter had given him, that, you know, Peter would hopefully do the job well, too, perhaps, you know, would be a kind of political signal, getting one of the new Labour people into this sort of Keir Starmer tent. But look, as, you know, and I don't want to jump all over people, but I think it was a bad judgment from the word go.

**Rory Stewart** (4:05)
Support he'd given him. I mean, the support is that Mandelson seems to have developed a close relationship with Morgan McSweeney advising him on tactics and strategy. The suggestion is also that he may have been quite helpful in introducing him to potential funders. So there was a sense in which McSweeney owed Mandelson. And I suppose Mandelson presumably was lobbying hard for the job, just as he was lobbying hard to be Chancellor of Oxford and various other things.