As the confrontation between the United States and Iran intensified, the Prime Minister’s first instinct was not to stand shoulder to shoulder with our closest ally and largest trading partner. It was to step back. Worse than that, for a time he refused permission for the Americans to use RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus — a sovereign British base — even as the region burned and even as Iranian missiles were being fired in its direction.

Iran was not lashing out in some abstract geopolitical vacuum. It was striking airports and hotels used by British nationals. It was targeting military infrastructure in the Gulf that houses our personnel. Two missiles were aimed towards Cyprus. British lives were at risk. And Britain — under Starmer — chose cowardice.

Iran is not some misunderstood regional actor. For decades it has been the principal exporter of instability and terrorism across the Middle East and beyond. Our own security services have spent years disrupting its networks, its proxies and its plots.

The Prime Minister himself has admitted that Tehran was behind multiple planned atrocities on British soil in the past year alone. A regime that targets our citizens, threatens our allies and funds terror across continents is not a problem to be managed. It is a threat to be confronted.

Yet when confrontation loomed, this Government’s message was one of retreat. Only after sustained political pressure — and after the sheer absurdity of the situation became impossible to defend — did Starmer perform his now familiar U- turn.

Permission was finally granted for the use of British bases, carefully caveated, carefully limited, carefully worded to disguise the fact that he had been dragged there.

While the Prime Minister prevaricated, others were prepared to say what needed to be said. As leader of Advance UK Ben Habib put it on social media platform X: “I am amazed there is any sane minded person in this country that would not wish to take out the mullahs in Iran. They have been a source of regional and global instability for decades. They export terrorism to the West. If they get the bomb, they would use it, AGAINST US. Of course military action needs careful consideration. It must not be entered into without a defined aim. There should be no mission creep.

"But bomb the regime to the point that the Iranian people can take over? ABSOLUTELY. Iran is now engaged. It is bombing Saudi, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait. No quarter should be given to it. We should allow the US to use our bases. A very good reason why Chagos must NOT be handed to Mauritius. I am all for a UK first policy but Iran is an exception. Chop off the head of this snake.”

That is clarity. You may agree or disagree with the prescription, but it is a position rooted in reality and in the understanding that national security begins with recognising your enemies and backing your allies.

Contrast that with the chorus of voices — from the Greens, Restore Britain and to the Liberal Democrats as well as others — who would have Britain sit on its hands while a hostile regime rains missiles across a region packed with our citizens and our forces.

Their argument amounts to this: do nothing, say nothing, hope for the best. It is the foreign policy of the ostrich. The most alarming aspect of this episode is not the inevitable U-turn. It is what the initial refusal revealed. A Prime Minister instinctively uncomfortable with power.

A Government more concerned with the optics of involvement than the reality of responsibility. A leadership that had to be pushed into protecting its own people. Britain cannot afford that.

We are not a bystander nation. We have global interests, global allies and global enemies. Our bases exist to be used. Our alliances exist to be honoured. Our citizens have a right to expect that when they are under threat their Government will act without hesitation.

This weekend should have been a demonstration of resolve. Instead it was a case study in drift, corrected only at the last possible moment.

The world is becoming more dangerous by the day. The regimes that wish us harm are not hesitating. They are not agonising over messaging. They are acting.

If Britain is to remain a serious country, it needs serious leadership — leadership that understands that strength deters conflict, that alliances matter, and that when British lives are at risk the answer is not to step back and hope someone else will deal with it.

Because weakness, once displayed, is always noted. And it is never forgiven.