Like Blair and Starmer before him, Burnham has found his Middle East war

Prime Minister Andy Burnham has found his Middle East war. British RAF fighter jets are being sent to Saudi Arabia to defend its cities and critical oil infrastructure from Yemeni Houthi strikes, Defence Secretary Wes Streeting announced last week. Streeting also urged Britons to stockpile essentials to prepare for potential attacks, or emergencies "caused by hostile state actors or terrorists", including Russia. This coincides with Trump threatening renewed strikes against Iran and Tehran warning of retaliation against western infrastructure in the region if the US restarts the war. In a week in which the Sultan of Oman was given a full state visit with military parades and a banquet at Windsor Castle, Britain’s post-imperial interests are - to a worrying extent - reliant on inflows of capital from the Arabian Gulf. Unlike the UK, which privatised its North Sea oil riches in the 1980s, the Gulf states have accumulated huge sovereign wealth funds with which to acquire assets in the West. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The UK was a key backer of the Saudi-led coalition that attacked Yemen after Ansar Allah (Houthis) seized the capital Sanaa in 2014. Today, the Houthis are on the offensive, expanding the battleground into the kingdom in strikes on Saudi airports and oil assets, as well as offensives inside Yemen against Saudi-backed forces. British ties to the Al Sauds go back a century, and include lucrative arms deals that have oiled the wheels of the British military industrial complex. Yemen, Bab al-Mandab and Saudi Arabia: Tehran’s strategic calculus in the balance Read More » The Al-Yamamah arms deal in the 1980s was the biggest - and most corrupt - in British history. Burnham’s predecessor Tony Blair shut down the inquiry into the deal in 2007 after warnings from the Saudis that they would withdraw intelligence sharing on terror threats. Burnham was always a strong supporter of the US-led order, including voting for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. But the "order" Britain clings to as a junior partner is now falling apart, thanks to Donald Trump and his efforts to form a Washington-Moscow entente over the heads of Europe and Nato. For his predecessor Keir Starmer, UK support for Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza helped finish his premiership, as Iraq did for Blair. There is a warning there for Burnham. Saudi Arabia has waged a western-backed war and siege against Yemen for 11 years that has killed hundreds of thousands. Over the weekend, a barrage of Saudi strikes hit targets across Yemen, killing four members of a family in Sanaa and dozens more casualties nationwide. "We do not belong to either side, yet our homes were bombed. What have we done wrong?" said Mamdouh Saleh, a survivor. What Saudis feel about the war is hard to gauge, in a kingdom where digital surveillance has replaced the old system of religious control, and foreigners are suspected of disloyalty. During his decade-long rule, Mohammed bin Salman has escalated the use of the death penalty, with more than 350 people executed last year, mostly non-Saudi migrants condemned for non-capital crimes. When a Saudi was asked by writer Arwa Esmail what he thought about the kingdom's nationalistic ideology, he answered sarcastically: "Pass me a bowl of lentils", a reference to the prison diet of those who dare speak out. A 'defensive' mission The UK Ministry of Defence messaging on this deployment is that it is defensive. This is rather like the agreement by Starmer to let the US use UK bases to launch "defensive" strikes on Iran’s missile infrastructure to protect UK allies in the region after Trump and Israel launched an unprovoked war on Iran. Perhaps voters will give Burnham the benefit of the doubt. Right now, he is enjoying a political honeymoon. Moves to make everyday life easier for people have marked him out as a more able and sympathetic leader than the remote and tone-deaf Starmer. The Burnham poll bounce now has a by-election win against the Greens' Zack Polanski under its belt. Yet a number of policy decisions the government has made this week cast further doubt that Burnham marks a clean break with Starmer. These include ruling out a rise in Capital Gains Tax to equalise with income tax in the upcoming budget, a measure to reduce wealth inequality. Burnham' admitted that Labour got it wrong on Gaza, and imposed sanctions on Israeli settlements. But he is still treating pro-Palestine protesters as criminals Stronger controls over the privatised water companies, including near-bankrupt Thames Water, have yet to include nationalisation, which would signal that Burnham meant what he said about ending 40 years of neoliberalism. Approving the Jackdaw gas field breaks Burnham’s previous support for ending new gas and oil, and shows that climate pledges are disposable, while the larger Rose Bank field is in the balance. This is being done, we are told, to reduce reliance on expensive US gas imports, but in truth will make no difference to the cost of living. The promised new energy wealth fund, starting with £2bn ($2.6bn), is a good move, if 40 years late: Norway has in that time accumulated $2.3 trillion, in contrast to a UK national debt of $4 trillion, part of Margaret Thatcher's catastrophic privatisation legacy. Burnham admitted that Labour got it wrong on Gaza, and imposed sanctions on Israeli settlements. But he is still treating pro-Palestine protesters as criminals. Burnham doubled down on the Palestine Action ban in the House of Commons during Prime Minister’s Questions last week. He insisted that the proscription of the direct action group followed a "rigorous and evidence-based process". These are words he may have to eat if the Supreme Court throws out the absurd ban that has seen thousands of elderly people arrested for carrying harmless signs. This is business as usual and hardly distinguishable from Starmer’s government. Labour Zionism Following the Green Party’s backing of a "Zionism is Racism" motion at its annual conference earlier this month, Burnham told parliament that Labour would not cooperate with the Greens politically until it abandoned the policy, which he described as antisemitic. Labour, feeling strong after their Holborn victory over Polanski, sees this as an opportunity to attack the Greens. UK Green motion on Zionism: Why we need to change the conversation Read More » Brighton Labour leader Bella Sankey said by allowing the motion to pass and "vilifying Jewish self-determination and a two state solution", the Green Party of England and Wales "now sits alongside the British Union of Fascists, and the National Front and other extremist actors". In truth, the motion was backed by eminent Israeli historian Ilan Pappe and a 95-year-old Holocaust survivor, and many, though not all, Jewish Greens. The Zionism is Racism motion, and its call for a single secular Palestinian state to replace genocidal, apartheid Israel, was always going to set off political grenades both inside the Green Party and beyond. It has sparked a media onslaught, including a vile antisemitic cartoon in the Telegraph, against Polanski, which he has withstood with steadfast courage and principle. For Palestinians, Zionism in practice has meant ethnic cleansing, a century of violence and colonialism, and now genocide. The belief that Palestine belongs exclusively to the Jewish people, and that Palestinians can only have a "state" if Israel at some distant future point lets them, is hardwired into the British political system. After all, it was British imperial leaders who explicitly saw Zionism and a homeland for Jews in Palestine as a tool of colonial control, in Winston Churchill’s infamous racist statement, to deny self-determination to indigenous Arabs, or any other indigenous people, calling them the “dog in the manger”. A century on, the UK is engaged in a war in the Middle East to protect Saudi oil, another pillar of Churchill's imperial dominion. Burnham may come to regret this. He should use any leverage that the UK has to end the war by pushing Riyadh to cut a lasting ceasefire deal in Yemen. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.