PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Middle East - 17 March 2026 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

I would like to update the House on the conflict in the middle east. Since the start of the conflict, we have seen Iran fire over 900 missiles and over 3,000 drones across 13 countries in the region—countries that are UK partners, and that hundreds of thousands of British citizens visit, work in or live in. Regional air defences have intercepted the vast majority of Iranian strikes, but in recent days we have seen damage to oil export infrastructure, gas facilities, ports and airports, and restrictions on the strait of Hormuz, with major consequences for the global economy; there are impacts on the UK economy, too. US and Israeli strikes across Iran are continuing. We have also seen attacks from Iranian proxy groups, and troubling escalation in Lebanon. The UK is continuing our support for British nationals in the region, our defensive military support for partners against Iranian strikes, and our intensive diplomatic activity on both security and economic issues in the UK national interest.

In Riyadh a few days ago, I saw the work to get British nationals home from across the region, and how we are protecting our people and our partners. I stressed the UK’s support and solidarity as I met counterparts from across the Gulf. Over the last week alone, I have held discussions with my counterparts from all six nations in the Gulf Co-operation Council, and with the US, Israel, key European allies and other regional partners. We want the swiftest possible resolution to the crisis to bring security and stability back to the region, and to stop Iran’s threats to its neighbours and its efforts to hijack the global economy.

The events in the middle east have consequences around the world and affect our security and our prosperity here in the UK. Our response is based on clear principles and calm leadership: we will support UK households under pressure; we will protect our people in the region; and we will defend our allies under attack. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, we will not be drawn into a wider war; nor will we outsource our foreign policy. Our decisions will be based on UK values and the UK national interest.

Let me update the House on support for British nationals in the region. At the outset of the crisis, more than 300,000 British citizens were in the region. When the air strikes started and airspace closed, many were stuck. Since then, we have been working relentlessly to help them get home. That has been a complex task. Our 24/7 crisis response centre has been working with our embassies, partner Governments and the rapid deployment teams we sent to operate on the ground. We have worked closely with airlines and laid on additional Government charter flights from Muscat and Dubai. We estimate that the number of British nationals who will have flown back from the region since the start of the war will today reach 100,000. We continue to monitor the situation to provide the latest advice, but I want to put on record my sincere thanks to all those involved in the tireless efforts to support British nationals abroad and to bring British citizens home.

Turning to the conflict, as the Prime Minister set out to Parliament, we took the decision not to be involved in the initial US strikes, or to join any offensive operations. We have taken a different position on that from the US and Israel, based on what is in the UK national interest. When Iran began to target other countries across the region, putting our partners and citizens in danger, we took the further decision to support defensive action. In Saudi Arabia, I have seen the air defences that the British Army is helping to operate to counter drones. We discussed additional defence assets, which were pre-deployed by my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary to the region before the conflict began, and we have increased support since. We have jets operating from sovereign base areas in Cyprus, and eight in Qatar, including in the joint UK-Qatari squadron. As I speak, British Typhoons and F-35s are flying in defence of the eastern Mediterranean and across Jordan, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq. The UK’s defensive military action is supporting the wider region, with four extra Typhoons, three Wildcat helicopters and a Merlin helicopter already deployed. We are increasing our naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean, as HMS Dragon and RFA Lyme Bay approach. As the House is aware, we have given permission for US forces to use long-standing basing at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to support defensive strikes against the ballistic missiles that are targeting the Gulf, but let me confirm again the point that the Prime Minister made last week: our Cyprus base is not being used in those US operations.

We want to see an end to this war as quickly as possible. The longer it goes on, the more dangerous the situation becomes, and the more pressure on the cost of living here at home. Iran’s capabilities have been massively degraded, but the conflict has confirmed the threat that the regime poses through its weapons and its proxies, and why for so long there has been an international determination that Iran should never be able to develop nuclear weapons. As the conflict eases or ends, we will need some form of negotiated agreement to contain and constrain the future threats from ballistic missiles, drones, proxies and Iran’s nuclear programme, and to safeguard international shipping.

In the past seven days, we have seen Iran particularly focus its strikes on economic infrastructure in the Gulf: oilfields in Saudi; ports in Oman; strikes against commercial ships from Thailand and Malta; and threatened mines in the strait of Hormuz. Iran is seeking to hijack the global economy. It is holding hostage supplies of oil, gas and fertiliser, affecting prices and supply chains across the globe, threatening the cost of living here at home, and causing real worry for our constituents across the country. That is why the Prime Minister laid out yesterday how the Government will stand up for working people here in Britain, including by providing support for households with heating oil costs, and by maintaining the energy price cut and cap. Last week, we joined 31 other countries in the biggest co-ordinated release of oil in the International Energy Agency’s history, while maintaining our economic pressure and sanctions on Russia. As we welcome President Zelensky to London today, we are determined that war in the Gulf must not become a windfall for Putin. We continue to stand with Ukraine.

Reopening the strait of Hormuz is vital for market stability, and for the cost of living for British households. However, as the Prime Minister has said, this is a serious and complex issue, and there is no easy fix. We are discussing this with international partners in Europe and Asia, Gulf partners and the US. These discussions are separate from the conflict itself, as the US has said; countries around the world have been clear that they do not want to see escalation, or be drawn into a wider conflict, but they do want to see the strait open and functioning, and they do not want to see the fundamental principle of freedom of navigation undermined. Because it is an international shipping lane, multiple nations need to be involved in planning the way forward. Our discussions will continue to reflect serious, expert military and commercial assessments of what is credible and feasible, so that commercial shipping can return as soon as possible, as the conflict subsides.

I turn to Lebanon, which I am extremely concerned is on the precipice of a widening conflict that risks disastrous humanitarian consequences. In recent days, I have spoken to the Lebanese Prime Minister and the Israeli Foreign Minister, as well as holding discussions with the US, France and other European and Gulf partners. We need urgent diplomatic action to avert further escalation, but amid that danger, it is possible that there is also a moment of diplomatic opportunity, and we must bring all support and pressure to bear so that it is seized and not squandered.

Let me set out the UK position. First, we condemn the appalling attacks by Lebanese Hezbollah, which has fired hundreds of rockets at northern Israel. This must cease immediately. The actions of this proscribed terrorist group, at the instigation of the Iranian regime, are once again drawing the people of Lebanon into a conflict that they do not want and that is not in their interests.

Secondly, we support the sovereignty of Lebanon. We welcome the commitments made by the Lebanese Government, including the significant decision to ban Hezbollah’s military activities, and we will continue to support the Lebanese armed forces—they, not Hezbollah, are the sole legitimate defender of Lebanon.

Thirdly, we are extremely worried about the civilian consequences of current Israeli operations. An estimated 1,000 people have been killed, and one in seven Lebanese civilians have reportedly been displaced from their homes. This scale of humanitarian displacement is unacceptable and risks devastating consequences. This weekend, I announced that the UK would provide an additional £5 million in essential humanitarian aid, and today I can announce a further £10 million of humanitarian support to provide emergency medical care, shelter and other lifesaving assistance in Lebanon and the region. This will help prevent further displacement and instability that would risk escalating regional problems and have a wider impact on other countries beyond the region.

Fourthly, we believe that diplomatic progress can be made, as there is a shared interest across Lebanon and Israel in seeing an end to the Hezbollah threats and seeing peace and stability return. Both the Lebanese and Israeli Governments have expressed an interest in joint talks. We strongly support this path, the framework for which is in Security Council resolution 1701, as it presents the best route to lasting peace, security and stability beyond the region. The UK stands ready to provide diplomatic support to this process.

This conflict in the middle east is affecting countries across the region and the world. These global events are impacting our security and economy here at home. This Government are resolute in our determination to protect the safety, security and prosperity of British people and our partners. We are pursuing the swiftest possible resolution to the conflict, and security and stability, in the national interest of the United Kingdom. I commend this statement to the House.

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

I want to put on the record the thanks of the Opposition to our brave armed forces in the region and to those en route, as well as our thanks to the diplomatic and consular staff for all their efforts to support the quarter of a million British nationals in the region. We also thank our GCC allies for their care in hosting the thousands of British nationals who have returned home via their commercial carriers—Emirates and Etihad Airways—through the air corridor that they secured.

British nationals in the region, our assets and interests, and our allies continue to be on the receiving end of indiscriminate targeting by Iran’s despotic regime. As our friends in the GCC have said, the regime has pursued a nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programme, and sponsors terrorist proxies, whose destabilising activities across the region and interference in domestic affairs of state have threatened us all. The world would be a safer place free from the tyrants of Tehran.

While Iran attacks our military bases, targets British nationals, holds Lindsay and Craig Foreman captive and indiscriminately fires missiles and drones on its neighbours, we cannot stay silent or inactive. The UAE’s Minister of International Co-operation, Her Excellency Reem Al Hashimy, has called Iran’s actions “unhinged”. Our friends in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have rightly stated that Iran must stop the attacks on economic infrastructure. We have consistently called on the Government to work closely with our friends in the Gulf. We must back our allies in their attempts to safeguard their regional airspace, freedom of navigation and economic and national security. Given the concerns that they have raised in recent weeks, what assurances and confidence did the Foreign Secretary give our friends in the Gulf about the depth and reliability of our support to them? What specific commitments did she make to them about better protecting our bases and allies in the region? The way that our friends and close security partners who host British armed forces have been subjected to outrageous, unprovoked aggression has been painful to watch. Britain cannot stand by while our allies do the heavy lifting to protect us all.

Take Bahrain, for example, with whom we signed the C-SIPA—comprehensive security integration and prosperity agreement—in 2024. I am yet to receive a substantive answer from the Government on how we are mobilising the agreement to better protect our ally and our naval base near Manama. What commitments has the Foreign Secretary given to ensure that British assets would be made available to bolster our allies’ defences? Will minehunter vessels be returning to our base in Bahrain, and will a destroyer, which can take down projectiles, be in the region?

What discussions has the Foreign Secretary had with Israeli Ministers on the Iranian-backed terrorist organisation Hezbollah, whose actions are undermining regional stability and the Lebanese Government and causing terrible hardship for both the Lebanese and Israeli people? Can she advise the House on any actions that the British Government are taking to support practical efforts to see Hezbollah disarmed? What is her assessment of the capacity of the Lebanese armed forces to deal with this threat?

Earlier this month, the Minister for the Middle East summoned Iran’s terrorist representative in London. What was discussed? Will the Foreign Secretary summon him again? Has she held any direct discussions with her Iranian counterpart?

As well as threatening regional security, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps threatens our homeland. It has been designated a terrorist organisation by every corner of the world, including the United States, the European Union, many members of the GCC and our Commonwealth partner, Canada. At this time of war, why does the UK diverge from the rest of the world? What leverage over Iran are the Government exacting for taking the position of not acting? If the Government bring forward legislation to proscribe the IRGC, the Opposition will stand ready to work with them. That also applies to the source of funding of the Iranian regime—what steps is the Foreign Secretary taking with our partners to cut off the financial flows that fund the Iranian regime through the international financial system?

The Foreign Secretary referred to her conversation with Secretary Rubio. Can she confirm that Britain is being kept informed of US actions, both militarily and diplomatically? What kind of agreement on Iran’s nuclear programme would she find acceptable, given the Government’s preference for a negotiated settlement? What is her assessment of the international efforts to reopen the strait of Hormuz? I say that following the Prime Minister’s statement yesterday about a new viable collective plan. What are the details of that plan?

Finally, Iran’s close friend Putin must not profit from this conflict in the middle east. What is the coalition of the willing doing to collapse Putin’s financial flows, make the shadow fleet unviable and stop refineries in India, China and Turkey buying Russian crude oil and funding Putin’s assault on Ukraine? Will the Foreign Secretary also join me in commending our Ukrainian friends for their support of our Gulf allies, when they themselves are under constant attack? This is a consequential moment for the world, and strong and consistent British leadership is required.

I thank the shadow Foreign Secretary for her questions; I will take each in turn. Not only are we working immensely closely with our Gulf colleagues and partners, but we are providing them with direct military defensive support, including with our F-35s and Typhoons, which are in operation over the region. We are taking action, including against drones, and providing basing support against the ballistic launchers and missiles that are targeted at the Gulf. We will continue to work closely with those partners, including looking to the future to see how we can support them with the latest anti-drone technology, learning from the experiences of Ukraine.

I have had discussions with the Israeli and Lebanese Governments on Lebanon and the threat from the terrorist group, Lebanese Hezbollah, and the threat from that Iranian-backed organisation is clear. Once again, it has been exposed in recent weeks as doing the bidding of the Iranian regime. Hezbollah does nothing to stand up for the Lebanese people.

On the IRGC, I gently point out to the right hon. Lady that she was Home Secretary for some time and did not introduce the legislation necessary to address some of the wider security issues. However, we continue to fully sanction not just the IRGC, but much more widely across the Iranian system, to keep up the pressure. We do so alongside our allies and alongside the defensive military operations that are in place. Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. That would be a threat not just to the region, but to the world. That is why I, alongside my French and German counterparts, led the work to ensure that we could trigger the snapback response to reintroduce sanctions on the Iranian regime back in October, before this conflict started. We will need to keep our focus on preventing not just the nuclear threat, but the ballistic threat, the proxy threat and the threat to the strait of Hormuz.

The issues around the strait are complex; that is the reality. That is why we need to ensure not only that we are guided by military and commercial expertise, but that planning is in place, drawing together countries across the world because there is international interest in the strait, and that is what we will continue to do.

Finally, I could not agree more with the shadow Foreign Secretary on her point about Russia and Ukraine. Russia and Putin cannot be allowed to benefit from this crisis. We see the long-standing links between Russia and Iran and the threat that both countries pose. Today, as we welcome President Zelensky to London, we continue our steadfast and, I believe, cross-party support for Ukraine. That support must continue, because we know that Ukraine’s security is our security.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement and for her focus on the impact on our constituents from the fallout of this conflict. Specifically, what are our allies and partners in the region, who now find themselves under fire from Iran, asking of the UK Government, and are we able to deliver?

When I met the Gulf Co-operation Council, our partners welcomed our support and our long-standing commitment to their security, stability and territorial integrity. At the moment, they face challenges from the ballistic missiles threat, so we are providing basing in support of the US defensive operations. They also face threats from drones and cruise missiles, so we are providing jets to help strike them down and some of the long-standing air defences that I saw in Saudi. They also face significant economic threats, because Iran is now deliberately targeting their economic infrastructure to escalate the situation more widely. That is why we are working closely with them on a way forward for the strait of Hormuz.

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement.

The war of Trump and Netanyahu—cheered on uncritically by Reform Members and the Conservatives—has put our citizens and troops in the region under immediate threat from Iran’s reckless retaliation, and worsened the cost of living crisis for households here in the UK. The Government’s first priority must be to protect our citizens, our troops and our allies facing unprovoked attacks. They must also take action on the huge cost increases here at home. I wish to put on record my party’s thanks to our brave service personnel for their work to keep our citizens safe.

We also now face the possibility of another major escalation. Reports suggest that a ground invasion of Lebanon by Israeli defence forces is imminent. Hezbollah is a brutal terror organisation and must be disarmed, but that must be achieved by working with leaders in Beirut and through international organisations. Will the Foreign Secretary tell me what further steps she will take to pressure the Netanyahu Government to cease their devastating strikes on Lebanon, and pull back from plans for a ground offensive? Will she also set out what new steps the Government are taking to halt and reverse the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements in the west bank?

The IRGC is also a terrorist organisation and should be proscribed here in the UK. Can the Foreign Secretary explain to the House why she has still not done that? We know that UK bases have now been used by the US to conduct strikes in Iran. The Prime Minister told this House that those strikes would be only defensive. To assure the House of that, it is crucial that the UK monitors the outcomes of US actions. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm whether the Government have been supplied with that information by US forces or, if not, will she confirm whether the Government have asked for it?

It was wholly predictable that Iran would retaliate by closing the strait of Hormuz. Donald Trump has now made a shameless plea that NATO allies should clean up the mess that he initiated. Liberal Democrats are clear that we cannot afford to be dragged by Trump into this costly foreign adventure. Can the Foreign Secretary confirm that the Government will seek to secure an emergency resolution from the UN Security Council, calling for a multilateral approach to reopening the strait of Hormuz? Will she commit to bringing a vote to this House before any UK forces are sent to operate in the strait?

On Lebanon, as I made it clear in my statement, the threat from Lebanese Hezbollah is serious. This is a terrorist organisation that is doing the bidding of the Iranian regime, not standing up for the Lebanese people. The Israeli and Lebanese Governments have a shared interest in tackling Hezbollah, and there is an opportunity for both of them to engage in diplomatic talks and discussions, which we want to support. We urge Israel to support those talks and that process, and not to pursue the huge displacement of civilians, with all its humanitarian consequences. We want to see a shared set of operations against Hezbollah, including support for the Lebanese armed forces on that as well.

More widely, the hon. Member is right to recognise the support for our armed forces and the work that they are doing to secure the safety not just of British citizens in the region, but of our partners and the wider energy and economic infrastructure as well.

On the strait of Hormuz, the focus at the moment is on the practical measures that will help to restore shipping once the conflict subsides, and to ensure that Iran cannot continue with a long-term ability to hold the global economy hostage, which is affecting us here at home.

I commend the Prime Minister for his decision not to get involved in this war of choice. While we are all distracted by Israel’s illegal bombing of Iran and Lebanon, Israel has also occupied the west bank and, in the month of Ramadan, closed Masjid al-Aqsa, which is the third holiest Muslim site. It is in East Jerusalem, which, under international law, has been declared as being illegally occupied by Israel. This is a particularly pernicious and vindictive action. Can the Secretary of State please tell us what discussion she and the Foreign Office have had with their Israeli counterparts, and will she ask them to please reopen the Masjid al-Aqsa and allow the worshippers in, especially as Eid al-Fitr will be celebrated by the end of this week?

My hon. Friend is right to raise real concerns about the escalation in the west bank. This is a critical issue—both for the west bank and the rights of Palestinian people in the west bank, and when it comes to addressing concerns around illegal settlements and settler violence—and it is fundamentally part of the wider issues around the peace process for Gaza and the future of a two-state solution. As we deal with the ongoing conflict in the middle east involving Iran, it is really important that we do not lose focus on the 20-point plan and wider issues around the west bank. We are continuing to raise these issues with the Israeli Government and more widely in the region and beyond.

If an Iranian rocket attack—hopefully this will never happen—successfully penetrated our defences and caused severe damage and casualties on a British base, is the Foreign Secretary ruling out any response by the RAF against the source, such as a battery, from which those missiles had been fired?

The right hon. Member will know that we are already taking defensive military action in support of our partners, against threats to them, and we take immensely seriously any threats to UK bases or military assets. He would not expect me to comment on operational issues, but he knows how seriously we take the UK’s military and defensive capabilities.

I commend my right hon. Friend on her statement, and I thank her and her offices for the safe return of two of my constituents who were caught up in the original bombings.

I support what my right hon. Friend says about the Government’s position not to get embroiled in this war of choice, but I note her equivocation around potential involvement in relation to the strait of Hormuz. If we are able to have further details about that, as appropriate, it would be really helpful. To what extent does she think that the international community’s lack of action—that includes from the UK—in holding Israel to account for its illegal actions in the west bank and Gaza has potentially made its action in Iran more likely?

On the strait of Hormuz, I should be clear that the discussions that are under way are separate from the conflict, as the US itself has made clear. One thing that is being looked at is what is possible as the conflict ends or subsides. On the wider issue of Israeli operations in the west bank, I have myself raised these issues in the UN Security Council, and we will continue to do so. We take these issues immensely seriously. We also have to recognise the ongoing threats and challenges from the Iranian regime.

The Foreign Secretary said that the situation in the strait is complex, and so it is, but it is not that complex. Her Government or military must have war gamed this in the past, because it was foreseeable. Can she say when a plan will emerge and who she is discussing it with? Will she please reassure the House that she is not simply talking to the United Nations, because if we expect the United Nations to keep the strait open, we will be here talking about this at Christmas?

I said in my statement that we were having discussions about the strait with our European partners, our Gulf partners, the United States and other countries who also have a strong interest in supporting freedom of navigation. This is complex. The nature of technology, including new drones—sea drones and air drones—the different kind of threats and the issues around commercial confidence make all of this complex. That is why we need to do this based on expert advice and multilateral discussions. All these issues can only be addressed through international partnerships.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for confirming today that British foreign policy is being decided by the British Government and not outsourced either to Washington or to Tel Aviv.

At the weekend, Israeli police killed two young Palestinian brothers and their parents in the occupied west bank, shooting all four in the head and face as the family returned from a Ramadan shopping trip. Mohammed was five, and Othman, who was blind and had special needs, was seven. Their mother and father were driving them through their home town of Tamoun late on Saturday when Israeli forces opened fire. Eleven-year-old Khaled, who survived the shooting, told Reuters that Israeli police who dragged him out of the car said, “We killed dogs.” Does this not show the need for the UK to take tough action against Israel for the expansion of illegal settlements in the west bank and the wider crimes being committed by settlers in the west bank?

The case that my hon. Friend describes is deeply disturbing. It is essential that all Governments follow international law and maintain international standards around human rights and civilian protection. The case is extremely distressing and obviously needs full investigation.

When there is no long-term plan for military intervention, it is civilian populations who pay the price. We know that from Iraq, Libya and elsewhere. Given the importance of international law, which I hope the Foreign Secretary supports, will she tell me what the consequences are for Israel for its actions in Lebanon? Just as importantly, when it comes to RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia, what assurances has she been given that there will be no targeting of civilians from those bases?

The UK Government continue to follow and to be guided by international law—that is an important part of our principles and values. On RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia, there are operational arrangements in place for our military, and an agreement was reached to use them for defensive purposes.

The illegal war started by Israel and the US is shifting focus away from the atrocities that we are seeing happen daily in Gaza and the west bank. This morning I listened to the mother of Hind Rajab. In the week when the film about her was nominated for an award, her name has become a symbol of strength for the children of Gaza. Investigations have shown that 355 bullet holes were found on the car in which Hind hid with dead members of her family—overwhelming evidence of the terror that she faced while trapped and frightened. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the horrendous actions of the Israel Defence Forces in this case, and so many others, as we have heard today, can only be described as barbaric and inhumane? Can she say what this Government are doing to challenge these atrocities and barbaric actions, and does she have more to say than just warm words?

I heard part of that deeply distressing interview this morning. Not only does there have to be compliance with international standards, humanitarian law, international law and full investigations of any violations, but we have to ensure that there is a peace process, which is desperately needed, for Gaza and the west bank as part of a two-state solution. Only that will deliver peace and respect for human rights across the region.

One of the most depressing things about the Foreign Secretary’s statement is that she seems to have failed to learn from the failure of her predecessors of both Governments, who were repeatedly warned that if the violence and cruelty in Gaza were left unchecked, it would spread out across the entire region and possibly consume it in flames. We find ourselves in exactly that position. I was struck by the passage of her statement concerning Lebanon, because it is almost completely the same as passages that were said about Gaza at the start of that conflict—“We are very concerned, we are protesting to the Israelis, and we are sending some aid, but there is really nothing we can do”.

I have three questions. First, we have been supporting the Lebanese armed forces for many years now, so do we believe that the Lebanese have a right to self-defence, and if they do, how will we support them in the defence of their civilian population? Secondly, what will the Foreign Secretary do to prevent Lebanon from becoming a new Gaza—a phrase that has been used by Israeli officials about this conflict? Thirdly, if she is not willing to do either of those things, how many Lebanese is an acceptable number for us to see killed over the next few weeks?

Because of the immense scale of risks and the already horrendous humanitarian consequences in Lebanon, I have spoken directly to both the Lebanese Prime Minister and the Israeli Foreign Minister in recent days about exactly that. That is also why we have identified the interest shown, and the steps that the Lebanese Government have taken to propose direct talks are really important. It is essential that the Israeli Government support those and take steps forward for those, instead of taking ground offensive action, and that countries across the world support that process. This should become a diplomatic opportunity in a way that we have not seen before. It would be devastating if that were instead thrown away by extended conflict and by the Israeli operations that we have seen.

I reiterate the thanks to the Foreign Secretary for reconfirming that Britain will make independent foreign policy decisions in the interests of our own people. Many of my constituents are still stuck in countries in the middle east and the surrounding areas because of the closure of airspace, and some are still struggling to gain visa extensions to stay in those countries where they are on holiday. What work is the Foreign Secretary doing with airlines to ensure that those people can get flights back? For many of them, it has been several weeks.

I am happy to pursue further the cases that my hon. Friend raises. The work being done by the 24/7 crisis centre that the Foreign Office set up, by our rapid deployment teams and by our consular teams in the region has enabled an estimated 100,000 British citizens to return home since the conflict started. Some of that is through additional charter flights that we put on, particularly from Dubai and Muscat, and some through working closely with the airlines to ensure that there are flights to the UK and routes that British citizens can take. There have been some areas where airspace has been restricted again and there have been additional problems, but we continue to work with anyone who is finding it difficult to return home.

I wonder whether the Foreign Secretary, in all her travels, has been considering the effects on the United Kingdom, and not just on energy prices but on fertilisers. Has she, by any chance, engaged in any conversations with countries that are some of the world’s biggest suppliers of fertilisers, such as Canada, whose Prime Minister was here, or indeed with the United States? While events continue in the middle east and there is absolutely no indication that her words are having any effect at all in opening up the strait of Hormuz, there may be something she can do to open up markets that British people can benefit from.

I can confirm that I am seeing the Canadian Foreign Minister later this week. There are many international discussions under way. One of the things that I discussed with the Saudi Energy and Transport Ministers, whom I met while in the Gulf, was some of the work that they are doing, for example, to look at re-routing on different commercial routes and so on to ensure that different supply chains can keep moving.

The right hon. Gentleman is right that fertiliser is one of the important issues here. Most people have been focusing on oil, but fertiliser is hugely significant for a lot of different areas, and we continue to work across Government and internationally on what routes there might be. Also, bluntly, we want this conflict to reach an end as swiftly as possible, so that these global arteries for trade and transport get moving again.

The Government are right not to be drawn into this war and that it needs to end, including with a negotiated agreement. I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s comments about the situation in Lebanon, where I used to live and work as an aid worker. Does she share my serious concern at the conduct of the Israeli military, with at least 28 attacks on hospitals and health facilities in Lebanon so far and threats of forced displacement? The tactics used in Gaza were criminal and must not be exported with impunity.

My hon. Friend is right that the humanitarian consequences of the Israeli operations are extremely serious already. It is estimated that over 800,000 Lebanese civilians have been displaced from their homes, which is already causing emergency problems with shelter. I have discussed this with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, as well as directly with the Lebanese Government, and it is why we are providing £15 million in humanitarian assistance, both to Lebanon and to other neighbouring areas, to support people facing displacement.

It is reported that the UK’s national security adviser was in the room at Iran-US nuclear talks last month, just before the war began, and it appears that diplomatic options were still viable and there was no solid evidence of an imminent missile threat to Europe, or of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. Does the Foreign Secretary therefore believe that a negotiated path between Iran and the US was still possible at that time? If so, surely that means that the initial US-Israeli strikes were premature and therefore illegal.

The UK did provide support for negotiations and diplomatic processes around the nuclear discussions; we thought that was an important track and wanted it to continue—that was one of the reasons for our position on the initial US strikes. Also, as we look forward, we need to ensure that the approach covers not just the nuclear threats but the ballistic and drone threats to the region, as well as the proxy threats and the threats to the strait of Hormuz. It is also of central importance that we prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

Thomas More, a former occupant of your chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, once famously said that when we cut down laws to defeat the devil, we are defenceless when the winds turn against us. In conflict the enemy always has a vote, and Iran has chosen to restrict the strait of Hormuz. Does the Secretary of State agree that we need to get back to a rules-based order and that the UN convention on the law of the sea should make it clear to Iran that firing upon defenceless maritime vessels and restricting passage in international waters is wrong, and that that provides us with an opportunity for a way forward?

I agree about the importance of maritime law, freedom of navigation and the law of the sea. Those are fundamental international principles and that is why the UK, as an international trading nation, has long supported them. It is also one reason why we have supported Bahrain’s UN Security Council resolution—we were a co-sponsor—because we also see the UN charter as part of the underpinnings of international law.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement. I am slightly struggling to see what it adds to the answer to the urgent question we had yesterday, but it is always nice to see the Foreign Secretary. When she asks the US Government to de-escalate, what do they say in response?

We have long been clear that, ultimately, we need a swift resolution to this conflict. We are providing the basing support for the US to be able to take defensive action against the military launches and the weapons that are being pointed at the Gulf, and we are also providing broader defensive support, but as the Prime Minister said yesterday, we need a swift resolution. We also know that, as the conflict ends, we will need a negotiated settlement that will prevent Iran from being able to rearm and pose an ongoing threat to the region and beyond. That is the best way to get stability and security in the UK’s national interest.

While this war of choice is raging, Netanyahu’s forces have been murdering innocent Palestinians—men, women and disabled children —in the west bank, so what further action will the Foreign Secretary take to stop Israel repeating what happened in Gaza in the west bank and in Lebanon?

As I set out in our concerns on Lebanon, we are urging the Israeli Government not to pursue further ground operations but instead to pursue the opportunity of talks and a shared interest with the Lebanese Government, who we continue to support. We have raised our deep concerns and condemned some of the decisions made by the Israeli Security Cabinet in the west bank, because they risk setting back the potential for peace and for the two-state solution that the Gaza peace process should have been an opportunity to move towards. We cannot let that process fall off track.

In the Foreign Secretary’s statement—all six pages of it—there was not a single word of criticism of the illegal, reckless action of Trump and Netanyahu in launching the strikes that have set off this conflagration in the middle east. If the Foreign Secretary is not prepared even to criticise that, what hope can the British people have that the UK Government are standing up to the aggression of Trump and Netanyahu behind closed doors? Can she assure us that she and her Government are showing more backbone behind those closed doors? And can she assure us that she is investing in building a special relationship with allies we can really rely on, who believe in human rights, diplomacy and peace?

This Government take decisions according to UK values and the UK’s interests. I know that there are different perspectives on foreign policy. There are some who believe that we should agree to and join in with everything that the US does. There are some who believe that we should always criticise and oppose everything that the US does. We believe that it is in the interests of the UK and the people across the UK to pursue UK values and UK interests in a hard-headed, serious and calm-headed way.

I pay tribute to the staff of the British embassies in Doha and across the middle east for their professional work in incredibly challenging circumstances. On a separate note, the economic crisis flowing from this war will have a disastrous effect on the poorest countries in the world, plunging people into deeper poverty and leading to an increased risk of conflict. Will my right hon. Friend explain what her Department is doing with international allies to mitigate those risks?

We have been monitoring and assessing the impacts, particularly of the restrictions on the strait of Hormuz and the restrictions around oil and fertiliser. We have been looking at the impacts that that can have, not just on the UK but on some of the most fragile and vulnerable countries across the world. We are monitoring that and looking at how we work with other countries to address that, and I would be happy to provide my hon. Friend with more information, because we have been considering this.

In June last year, Mr Trump told the world that the Iranian nuclear sites had been “completely destroyed”, but the last few weeks prove that he did not believe that to be true. Last week, the President told the world that the war was nearly completely won and that he needed no help. He has said in recent months that NATO is useless. He now appears to need both help and NATO. Does the Foreign Secretary agree with me—and, I believe, with many in the House—that the President himself is becoming an increasingly unreliable and erratic ally and partner, and that the UK is therefore right to be strategically questioning and sceptical about his pronouncements and his motives? I also echo the view of many people across the House that our remaining sceptical and questioning should not be an excuse for sitting idly by, wringing our hands and offering earnest words but no action in support of humanitarian aid to safeguard the lives of ordinary Lebanese and Palestinians and those in the west bank, because to sit and do nothing would make us as culpable as the guilty.

Our relationship with the US on security and the economy is deep and long-standing. I was first briefed on our security co-operation as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee more than 25 years ago, and it has strengthened and deepened since then. Our focus needs to be on the substance of that relationship and the real issues, not on rhetoric or statements. That is immensely important, and it is because we take seriously the humanitarian issues that we are now providing £15 million of humanitarian support for Lebanon and talking to the Lebanese Prime Minister. We are raising the issue of Lebanon not just with the Israeli Government but with the US, with European partners and with other Gulf partners.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement and in particular for her commitment to Lebanon, which does not want this war any more than we do. Others have also noted that while the world is focused elsewhere in the middle east, Israeli forces have stepped up their deadly attacks on Palestinians in the west bank. The accounts of the killing of the Bani Odeh family in the village of Tammun are utterly harrowing. One witness described to the BBC the little kids crying before they were killed in their car on the way back from their family shopping trip. Can the Foreign Secretary reassure me that she will keep calling out these crimes and make it clear to the Government of Israel that this cannot continue?

I agree with my hon. Friend; we have seen these deeply disturbing reports. This comes against a backdrop not just of increased settler violence but of settlement expansion and the decision of the Israeli Security Cabinet to extend control over the west bank in a way that we strongly condemn. That is deeply damaging. It goes against all the long-standing international agreements and arrangements, it is counterproductive and it sets back the process of peace and the two-state solution.

In this overarching statement on the middle east by the Foreign Secretary, it is surprising that she did not take the opportunity to condemn the continuing genocide in Gaza, the brutality of the occupation of the west bank, the destruction of Palestinian villages there, the invasion of Lebanon by Israel and the continued supply of British weapons. Trump has declared war on Iran without any war objective or war plan, and we are involved in that. Can she end this nonsense about whether we are sending defensive or offensive strikes from this country? The reality is that if a bomber takes off from RAF Fairford and bombs civilian targets in Iran, we are involved in that act of aggression against the people of Iran. Should we not join Spain and say no to the USA?

We have taken a different approach to the US and to Israel over this conflict, and that has been guided by our principles and our assessment of the UK’s national interest. But I would also say to the right hon. Gentleman that there have been Iranian airstrikes against our partner countries—countries that were not involved in those initial strikes and countries where 300,000 British citizens were either visiting or resident—and strikes on hotels as well as on energy and civilian infrastructure in places across the Gulf. If the UK had done nothing, when we had the ability to take out the missiles and the drones while they were in the air, I think people would have found that extremely difficult to understand.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for her wide-ranging statement, including the support she outlined to protect British nationals in the region and to ensure that humanitarian aid gets into Lebanon, and the efforts to ensure that British consumers with heating oil are protected from price rises. Over 1,500 properties in my constituency depend on that.

May I ask specifically about Iran? Iran has been a threat to the UK, around the world and to many of our partners. It has been a destabilising force directly and through its proxies for many decades. Is it her assessment now that whatever the circumstances of how this war came about, we have an opportunity to permanently de-escalate and neutralise the threat from Iran so that the whole world can benefit from more peaceful circumstances without it?

Iran continues to be a long-standing threat to international security through its attempts to develop a nuclear programme and to regional security through its proxies and its ballistic missiles programme, but also to its own people in some of the brutal repression that we have seen. It will be important as this conflict subsides and as we come out of it that there is a medium and long-term containment plan to prevent the threats in all these different areas from Iran to its neighbours, so that we cannot see this kind of threat again.

In answer to an earlier question, the Foreign Secretary rightly said that Ukraine’s security is our security. But in answer to the last question, she equally set out why the current regime in Iran is a threat to our security, both through proliferation—a level of enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon—and the IRGC, which not only slaughters thousands in Iran but has been responsible for plots, which have been foiled, on our own soil. It is all very well the Foreign Secretary saying that she wants to see a swift resolution, but when diplomacy so far has failed and the Government will not join our allies in the attacks, how does she think this will end?

When there are important decisions to be made about UK forces and operations they might be a part of, it is immensely important to look at whether there is a purpose—a clear structure—to the operations and a lawful basis for them, and whether they are in the UK’s interest. We will continue to work with our Gulf partners, European partners and allies and partners across the world on how we maintain the pressure together for a swift resolution that not only restores security to the region, but ensures that we have economic prosperity as well as national security protected.

I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement. It was reassuring to hear her say that we will not be outsourcing our foreign policy—something I think we should all agree with. Is she confident that the United States properly understands that its actions in the middle east have not only made peace in Palestine much more difficult to achieve, but have provided cover to Israel for its ongoing offensive in Palestine and its aggression against Lebanon?

Because the regional stability and security issues around the middle east have so many wider ramifications, some of the Gulf countries, for example, that I have spoken to are not only immensely seized by the issues around the Iranian threat and the direct threat to their airspace and communities, but are raising with me issues around Palestine, Gaza and Lebanon. This ought to be a moment for intense international diplomacy in support of regional security and not for allowing wider escalation and regional threat that would pose long-term instability for the region.

The one thing Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu knew full well when they entered this illegal war unilaterally was that the strait of Hormuz would be a place of strategic weaponry, if you want to call it that, for Iran to use against all other nations. Some European countries have unilaterally now decided to open negotiations with Iran, such as France and Italy. They have done that because they are not participating in any direct military action. My question for the Foreign Secretary is: if the Iranians said, “We would allow UK ships to pass through the strait of Hormuz, but you must prevent America from using your base,” would we comply?

I can say to the hon. Member that we are working closely with our European allies, including France, Germany and Italy, on a range of these issues. I do not think that his characterisation of the situation is right.

I want to express my sorrow at the death and suffering of civilians, wherever that is happening in the region. I commend the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister for their calm and principled approach to this crisis, which is rooted in respect for international law. Could she expand on efforts that she, the Prime Minister and our allies are taking to de-escalate this conflict and to seek a diplomatic solution that will put the interests of those civilians front and foremost in our minds? We hear far too much about regimes and actors in this region; we need to hear more about the rights of civilians.

My hon. Friend is right that at every stage we have been urging the protection of civilians. That is immensely important as part of this and is also why we need to work so immensely hard to prevent further escalation. It is one of the issues we have been raising particularly around Lebanon, where I am concerned that we are on the brink of what could be much greater devastating humanitarian consequences. It is also why we have been looking forward to what diplomatic process and settlement process could prevent Iran from posing a threat in future.

The morning after the drone attack on RAF Akrotiri, the Foreign Secretary said in the media round that the drone had struck the runway at RAF Akrotiri. I clarified that with the Ministry of Defence, which went on to confirm that it in fact struck the hangar. The hangar in question was widely reported in the media as containing the U-2 spy planes of detachment one of the US air force’s 9th operations group, which is tasked with flying intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions over the middle east. To that extent, given that the Foreign Secretary stated that Cyprus is not being used in those US operations, could she clarify unequivocally whether Operation Olive Harvest is being used by the US to fly reconnaissance over the middle east in defensive support of these US operations? If she is sure that it is not, could she confirm what conversations she has had with the US that made her come to that assessment?

The hon. Member is right about the strike around the hangar. The request from the US to provide basing support for the operations against the ballistic missiles was a request for RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia. The agreement that we have reached to provide that basing support is confined to RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia.

It is abundantly clear to any fair-minded geopolitical observer that the US-Israeli actions in Iran were commenced without the cover of law and without a plan to follow the initial impulse of kinetic violence. But it is equally clear that the United Kingdom was caught short in our responsiveness and preparedness, particularly in relation to the island of Cyprus. Following the drone attack on that particular hangar, the Cypriot Government expressed disappointment in the UK, and the Cypriot Foreign Secretary has openly speculated about the future of our sovereign base areas. What work has the Foreign Secretary or her ministerial colleagues done to repair the damage with Cyprus, which is, after all, an incredibly valuable diplomatic and defence ally?

It is because regional instability increased in the early part of this year that, since January, we have been pre-deploying additional jets to Cyprus—to the sovereign base—exactly to provide additional protection for Cyprus, including additional air defence and radar capabilities. We took that issue very seriously and continue to do so. I have spoken with the Cypriot Foreign Minister on a series of occasions, and, as the hon. Gentleman will know, the Defence Secretary has not only visited the sovereign base in Cyprus but met the Cypriot Government. We take our partnership with the Cypriot Government, and the defence of operations around Cyprus and the eastern Mediterranean, immensely seriously.

I think, and hope, that everybody in this Chamber, including the official Opposition, now agrees that Donald Trump had absolutely no plan when he agreed, along with Israel, to this illegal invasion of Iran. Their first action was to bomb a school, killing more than 160 schoolchildren—mainly girls—and over 1,500 people have been killed and more than 20,000 injured. The whole region is in flames, and the obstruction of the strait of Hormuz is affecting the global economy. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that no UK warships should join this illegal war, and that there should be no boots on the ground to deflect from what is essentially Trump’s “Operation Epstein Fury”?

We took a different view from the US on this conflict. We also think it right to provide defensive support to partners in the region who were never involved in the initial strikes but are being targeted by the Iranian regime. We want to see a swift resolution of the conflict because that is in the interests of the region and of the UK.

I wholly appreciate that none of this is of our making or choice, but when the Foreign Secretary says that Iran’s action in the strait of Hormuz is an attempt to hijack the world economy, does that not put a direct focus on what is in the United Kingdom’s interest? If we take no action, we assist Iran’s attempt to hijack the global economy, but if we take action, are we not inescapably in this war?

It is exactly because the strait of Hormuz is an important global artery for the global economy that we are working internationally with partners on a way forward. We recognise the complexity of the situation, and are taking a serious approach to the detail to ensure that partnership work is viable, effective and in the UK’s national interest, because we cannot afford to get it wrong.