(1 day, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
(Urgent Question): To ask the Foreign Secretary if he will make a statement on the threats posed by Iran to British interests.
I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker, for granting me an urgent question in this role for the first time. I fear that it will not be the last, but I am grateful to you for doing so.
I am grateful to the right hon. Member for his urgent question, and I welcome him to his new role. He has always been a good colleague and friend, and I thank him for his service to this country, not only as a former Minister but in his past career.
The Government take the threats posed by Iran to British interests extremely seriously. We have acted robustly in response to them, and we will continue to do so. Iran’s hostile activity, both directly and through its proxies and networks, continues to pose a significant threat to the United Kingdom, to our partners and allies, and to the rules-based international system. We know the threats posed by Iran, whether that is directly or through partners such as the Houthis, militias in Iraq, Lebanese Hezbollah and many other groups that the right hon. Gentleman is more than aware of. We will act, because protecting the British public and defending our national security is the Government’s first duty.
Yesterday the Government sanctioned two Iranian IRGC—Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—officers for their role in state threats activity. In relation to Iran, we have sanctioned nearly 240 individuals and entities whose actions threaten our people and security. We will continue to keep all those tools under review, and will not hesitate to take further action where appropriate.
Yesterday I summoned the Iranian ambassador to the Foreign Office in response to Iran’s activity, and informed him candidly and forcibly that this Government condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the Islamic Republic of Iran’s continued attempts to undermine the safety and security of the United Kingdom and our allies.
Yesterday the Foreign Secretary signed a statement with 35 other Foreign Ministers across the Five Eyes and Europe, making it clear that we will not tolerate state threats activity on our soil and that we are committed to facing those threats together, and earlier this year we strengthened our legislative toolkit through the national security framework. These measures provide enhanced powers to investigate, expose and counter hostile activity that threatens our security, and the right hon. Gentleman will know that we immediately designated the IRGC and the Islamic Movement of Companions of the Right under that framework. We will continue to work closely with the police, intelligence agencies and international partners to identify, disrupt and deter hostile activity directed against the United Kingdom and our allies.
As recent events have demonstrated, the threat from Iran is not theoretical. The Prime Minister made it clear yesterday that the incident at RAF Fairford was highly likely to have been co-ordinated in Iran and was almost certainly directed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, although investigations remain ongoing. More recently, in September, law enforcement agencies disrupted an alleged plot targeting Jewish communities in Manchester that involved individuals suspected of links to actors in Iran. We will continue to take the action necessary to protect the public, safeguard our democratic institutions, defend communities at risk and ensure that those responsible for threatening British interests are held to account.
I am grateful to the Minister, whom I call a friend, for his response today. However, after almost a decade of consistent Foreign Office advice to reject photographs with Iranian officials, and particularly handshake photographs, because of the propaganda tool that it gives the regime, it seems that our Foreign Secretary has just been ambushed in New York. Either he was ambushed by a snapper, or there has been a change of policy. It is important that we understand which, because although it is certainly clear that the Foreign Secretary did not look happy, Araghchi was absolutely beaming. If that was not deliberate, has the Foreign Office changed its advice, and if so, why?
Frankly, following the Iranians’ threats against UK airbases that both the Minister and the Prime Minister have mentioned, the state threats that the head of MI5 has listed, which have been reported today, the murder of 40,000 of their own people, their expansion of violence in Yemen by using the Houthis to target civilians in Riyadh, and their attacks on Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, I would be very grateful to know what made the Foreign Secretary believe that it was worth giving them a propaganda win.
Perhaps the Minister will tell me that this does not matter, but he knows better than that. He knows that images project a message, and in this case they project the message that the Iranian regime is equal to the moment. Well, it is not. The reality is that the Iranian regime—and, in fact, Mr Araghchi himself—is merely a front for the IRGC, which is of course the terror group responsible for the murder of thousands in Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Iraq and elsewhere.
I will finish by asking the Minister a few questions. Was the Foreign Secretary aware of his Iranian friend’s threats to the United Kingdom before he decided to shake hands with him and have it photographed? Was he aware that the US and Israel had given warning to the British Government that the Iranian regime’s threats to US airbases in the UK were credible? Lastly, has the policy of the UK now reverted to not giving propaganda wins to such a vile regime?
The Foreign Secretary followed the standard practice of previous Foreign Secretaries of both parties, and of those of many countries, in meeting with the Iranian Foreign Minister. In fact, Foreign Ministers including William Hague, Philip Hammond, Boris Johnson, the right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Sir Jeremy Hunt), Liz Truss, David Cameron and others all engaged with Iran.
It is important to understand what the Foreign Secretary raised with Foreign Minister Araghchi. He met with him to strongly raise the UK Government’s objections to Iran’s behaviours, to protect our interests. He told the Foreign Minister that Iran should choose de-escalation and diplomacy, instead of prolonging war and conflict. He underlined the importance of restoring freedom of navigation, and of the reopening of the strait of Hormuz. He reiterated the UK’s unwavering resolve to combat threats from Iranian-backed groups on UK soil, including attacks on the British Jewish community. He made it clear that we will not tolerate intimidation, threats or hostile activity on UK soil, and set out the measures that we would take in response. He also raised a matter that I know will be of great interest to the House: the ongoing detention of Craig and Lindsay Foreman. He repeated our call for their immediate release, and stressed that their welfare remains a priority for the Government.
The right hon. Gentleman knows full well that Iran’s threats to the UK are public. Indeed, the evidence that the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and others have set out is public, so we are fully aware of the threat that Iran poses to the UK, our interests, and our allies and partners. I am not going to comment on intelligence matters at the Dispatch Box—he knows why I will not do that. I strongly encourage him to avail himself of opportunities for Privy Council briefings, which we would be very happy to arrange. I know that the Leader of the Opposition and others have taken up those opportunities, and he is very welcome to come in and have a briefing on these matters.
The right hon. Gentleman rightly raised issues relating to Iran’s threats—not just directly to the UK and our interests, but more broadly, including to partners in the Gulf. What Iran has done in relation to Kuwait, Bahrain and other partners is utterly unacceptable. I met with all our Gulf partners in New York over recent days to reiterate our support for them, and we are engaged in heavy diplomatic and other efforts to find a resolution. Just this morning I spoke to my Saudi counterpart and the Foreign Minister of Yemen about the appalling Houthi attacks in recent days, not only on the people of Yemen but on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including the attacks at the airport in Riyadh and other threats.
The right hon. Gentleman can be absolutely assured that, whether it is direct threats from Iran or indirect threats through its proxies, partners and others, we take these matters incredibly seriously. A substantial amount of our diplomatic and other effort is involved in countering them, and I welcome his engagement and co-operation in the national interest on these issues.
I welcome the calling out of what seem to be the IRGC’s actions in Fairford, not just by the UK but by more than 30 of our friends and partners, from Albania to the USA. I thank them for standing in solidarity with us.
Much of the IRGC’s divisive work, whether it is feeding antisemitism or through bots wearing kilts, is done quietly in the shadows and often online. This time, it looks like the Iranians have been caught out through the diligence of a local resident. Does the Minister agree that our approach needs to change and that we need to be clear about what Iranian attempts to hurt our country look like—both offline and online, with more examples—so that the public are confident enough to identify such attacks, just as they did at Fairford?
My right hon. Friend raises very important issues. It is a fact that Iran poses threats across a range of domains, and she rightly raises the issue of misinformation and disinformation. I know that her Committee has been doing very important work on that, and the Government have taken that on board. We have announced a new centre for information defence, which the Prime Minister referred to yesterday, but she is absolutely right to say that we need to be open-eyed about the threats that are posed. We certainly attempt to keep the public informed about the nature of those threats, not just in this country but abroad, and we will continue to implement a range of measures to deter and disrupt them.
Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)
The Iranian regime is a threat to global security, to the UK’s interests and to its own citizens. The question is how best to respond to that threat, while protecting people at home. The unilateral US and Israeli attack on Iran and the conflict that has followed have driven up prices for British families, while emboldening the Iranian regime.
I visited Oman last week, and I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. At the maritime security centre, we were told that shipping rates are less than half what they were prior to the conflict, with a mere 35 to 50 vessels passing through Omani waters in the strait of Hormuz each night—every one of them at risk of attack from Iranian drones or missiles. What steps are the Government taking, with other maritime nations, to protect shipping and secure safe passage through the straits of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab, to keep food on our shelves and fuel in our tanks at prices that British consumers can afford?
The hon. Member raises the reason why all this matters, which is that the threats are not just to our security, but to our economy; they affect the prices that British people, and indeed people around the world, pay for energy—and for consumer goods on the shelves, because this disruption to energy has a wider implication, in that fertiliser and other things that come out of the Gulf also have an impact on prices. I am delighted that he visited Oman. I was in Oman just a few weeks ago. It is a key partner and friend, and its long-standing historical relationship with the UK is crucial to us. We and His Majesty the King look forward to welcoming His Majesty the Sultan of Oman to the UK soon. It is a crucial partnership for us.
The hon. Member is absolutely right to talk about maritime security and the work we do in that domain. I am glad that he saw that work during his visit. Just last week, I visited our Joint Maritime Security Centre at Portsmouth, in which incredible work is done jointly by the Royal Navy, Border Force, UK Maritime Trade Operations and a range of civilian and other agencies. It is crucial that we understand the threats to shipping, and that we are able to provide information to mariners and avoid threats and risk. We continue to work internationally with partners on this issue, just as at the UN General Assembly in New York, the Foreign Secretary, working with Bahrain and others, brought together nearly 80 countries to stand up for the principles of international navigation. It is crucial that we recognise that this is not just about what happens in the strait of Hormuz or the Red sea; this is a threat to the very principles of freedom of navigation and global trade. We need to stand up and defend those principles.
Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)
In July, the Government took the very welcome step of designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, thus criminalising support for its hostile activities. Given Iran’s support for the Houthis, their recent attacks on Saudi Arabia and their threats to international shipping in the Bab al-Mandab strait and the Red sea, are the Government considering taking this step against the Houthis, or are they looking at proscribing the organisation as a terrorist group?
My hon. Friend knows that I do not comment on future designations, but he can be assured that we take the threat posed by the Houthis, both in the region and more broadly, incredibly seriously. As I have said, I spoke with the Foreign Minister of Yemen this morning. I am also utterly appalled to hear that the Houthis are using child soldiers, and are carrying out forced re-education of citizens in areas that they have taken. Attacks are currently taking place around Taiz, where there is a humanitarian crisis, and hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced. This is not just about the appalling kinetic attacks we have seen on Saudi Arabia and in Yemen, but the humanitarian suffering caused by the Houthis’ actions. We stand with the recognised Government of Yemen, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others. My hon. Friend rightly points to the work that we have done on the IRGC, the IMCR and individuals, and that relates to the sanctions we issued just yesterday.
When the Iranians risked the lives of armed forces personnel by attacking RAF Akrotiri earlier this year, Labour Members took great pleasure in mocking the Leader of Opposition for suggesting that a direct attack required a direct response. Does this latest episode not prove that when we do not respond with force, our enemies are encouraged to come at us yet again?
I am absolutely assured that we will respond to defend our bases, our allies and our partners—and, indeed, UK interests in this country—with absolute resolution and vigour.
I welcome the Minister’s response. As a member of the International Development Committee, I regularly hear about conflicts such as the wars in Gaza, Lebanon and Yemen, in which Iranian proxies are actively fighting, destabilising those countries, and causing death and despair. What is the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office doing to support victims of Iran in these countries, and to ensure that Yemen, Lebanon and Palestine have functioning states, free of Iranian influence?
I completely share my hon. Friend’s objective of eliminating Iranian influence and that destabilising factor in all those contexts. She rightly mentioned a number of them, and I have already mentioned what we are doing in Yemen. We have also announced an additional £10 million for the United Nations humanitarian appeal to respond to that terrible situation. She also points to Lebanon; we are working closely with the Government of Lebanon to respond in a range of ways to the crisis there.
Does the Minister agree with me that it sends a strange signal when people suspected of mounting a terrorist attack backed by Iran are let out on bail? Does he also share my concern at recent media reports of several—fortunately foiled—terrorist attacks that were being planned by people who came into this country illegally, on boats crossing the channel?
As the right hon. Member will understand, I will not comment on the ongoing investigations into the events at RAF Fairford, or on police operational decisions, which are very much for them. However, on his broader point about threats and challenges, he will know that MI5 identified at least 15 credible Iranian-backed plots to kill or kidnap people in the UK in 2022 and 2023 alone. This is obviously activity over a sustained period of time. We have made it clear to the Iranian regime at the highest levels that this must end immediately.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
As we know, Iran’s use of criminal networks and online disinformation is a threat to national security, and to safety on British soil. I welcome the recent designations, but does the Minister agree with me that further sanctions are required on Iran and the IRGC to restrict their capacity?
My hon. Friend will know that I do not comment on future designations, but I can assure her that we will continue to keep open all possibilities for deterring and disrupting Iranian state threat activity on our soil, or indeed elsewhere. We keep those measures under regular review; I think the action we have taken in recent weeks is testament to that.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
The incident at RAF Fairford proved yet again a point that we have long known, which is that Iran is an exporter of terrorism and violence around the world—not just in the UK, but, crucially, in the region. We have seen the support for Hezbollah undermining security in Lebanon, and we have seen the attacks on our ally Saudi Arabia. What are the Government planning to do to increase the support that we provide to our allies in the region to counter the Iranian threat?
The hon. Member is right about the scale of the threat, which is exactly why we announced measures and made a statement yesterday with many countries, who are joining our efforts to respond to those threats. Whether it is the air defence support we are supplying in Saudi Arabia at the moment and the air-to-air refuelling, or the work we did to support air defence for many Gulf partners when they were undergoing attacks, we will not cease in our efforts to support our partners and allies in responding to and defending themselves from unprovoked Iranian aggression.
Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)
Just this morning, the chief of MI5 warned about the implications of artificial intelligence reducing the barrier to advance terror and cyber-attacks on the United Kingdom, so what work have the Minister and his colleagues done to assess how Iran is using this technology and how we can defend ourselves?
The implications of AI for our defence and security are obviously significant. My hon. Friend knows that important work is being done by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Artificial Intelligence on this issue. It is crucial that we look at this not just in any one context—he rightly mentions the risk of Iran or others using this technology—because it of course applies more broadly. I can assure him that we are leading international conversations on these issues.
I have a lot of time for the Minister, as he knows. I hope he will confirm to the House that he has read the Intelligence and Security Committee report on Iran, published in July 2025, because many of the issues that it covered have been raised on the Floor of the House today. It was in 1862 that the first Iranian became a British national—a dual national in this country. We now have about 120,000 British Iranians living in this country. Not all of them are dual nationals, but many of them are. Given that Iran does not recognise dual nationality, and given that many British Iranians travel to see family in Iran, what further consideration has the Minister given to the Foreign Office’s travel advice, as the Iranian regime is, unfortunately, detaining people illegally?
The right hon. Gentleman rightly illustrates the risk to people. I strongly encourage anyone, whether dual national or otherwise, to read and heed the FCDO travel advice for Iran. These are very serious threats. We know of the risks involved; people have been detained, and I referred to one very high-profile case. We encourage people to follow the advice very closely. I will certainly look at the report that he mentions.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Minister for his responses to questions so far, and I reiterate the concerns raised by colleagues about online disinformation, which is clearly designed to undermine our democracy in this country. What are the Government doing to tackle hostile activity by Iran and its network of proxy groups?
We are acting against the threats posed by Iran and proxy groups in a number of ways. I mentioned the statement that we signed in the past few days; also, in June, we issued a joint statement with 23 other countries relating to the lethal plotting and other malign actions by the IRGC, an intelligence organisation, the Quds Force and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, including threats against dissidents, journalists, and Jewish and Israeli communities. They are undertaking a wide range of activities, and we need to work with key partners to deter and disrupt that activity.
What assessment have the Government made of the threats we face from the IRGC or its proxies, and of the impact of February’s US-Israeli attack? Did that attack strengthen or weaken the regime in Tehran, internally and externally? Do those assessments show whether the UK has become more or less exposed, since February, to events such as those we witnessed recently?
The hon. Gentleman knows that I will not comment on intelligence assessments. What I will say is that we continue to seek diplomatic resolution of the crisis in the strait of Hormuz. There is a huge amount of common ground between all partners on Iran. First, it cannot be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. It must cease its attacks on partners and allies. In our interests, it needs to stop malign activity in our country, as well as others, and of course, it needs to stop the repression of its own people. I think there is a lot of common ground, but I will not comment on specific assessments.
Rachel Blake (Cities of London and Westminster) (Lab/Co-op)
The threat of Iranian surveillance is very real in my constituency; faith and residential communities have shared with me the real fear that they face. What processes do the FCDO and the Home Office have in place to make sure that communities are as safe as they possibly can be, and that intelligence is appropriately shared?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight those threats. I co-operate very closely with the Security Minister and others on these matters. I referenced the number of plots that MI5 had identified. Of course, those threats continue, and we have seen some very high-profile examples, which the Prime Minister and others have referred to. My hon. Friend can absolutely be assured that we are putting in place the necessary protective security arrangements, including with faith communities, and particularly the Jewish community, and that we are very aware of where threats are originating from. That is the nature of the response that we have conveyed directly to the Iranian regime.
The regime is using every opportunity to reach deep into our communities and society. Even charities in this country are at risk. The Charity Commission has embarked on an investigation into the extent to which the regime, particularly the IRGC, is percolating into the sector. What assessment has the Minister made of whether Iran has got itself involved in British charities? If he believes that it has, how will he expunge that particular malignancy?
The right hon. Gentleman raises the important wider issue of Iran and other hostile states attempting to undermine or use mechanisms in the UK to conduct their activities. I welcome the work that the Charity Commission is doing. We will look very seriously at any findings that come out of that investigation. Crucially, this is a matter for the Security Minister and our agencies to look at. We take any threats or activity of that nature incredibly seriously, and we will not hesitate to act.
Markus Campbell-Savours (Penrith and Solway) (Lab)
There is wide acknowledgement of Iranian efforts to weaponise social media in order to promote Iran’s propaganda, spread disinformation and shake UK politics. What work is being done to hold to account social media companies whose algorithms boost dangerous content?
It is an important question. My hon. Friend will know of the work that has been done through the Online Safety Act 2023 and other measures, but the wider challenge and threat of disinformation is growing. We spend a lot of time in this place focusing on Russian disinformation and the billions that Russia is spending on it, but of course it is not just Russia; it is also Iran and others. That is exactly why the Prime Minister is bringing together our capabilities, and responding to the Foreign Affairs Committee recommendations with a new centre for information resilience.
There is a real fear that Iran has achieved the aim of its attack on RAF Fairford. We have seen the US respond by removing very important military capability away from Europe and away from the United Kingdom. Does the Minister agree—he is very thoughtful on this point and sympathetic to it—that there is a need for increased military spending? Will he use his office to put pressure on Downing Street and the Treasury to come forward with a settlement for our armed forces that ensures we have the capabilities to properly defend RAF Fairford and the many other bases up and down the country?
The right hon. Gentleman will know that we are spending hundreds of millions on defensive measures around bases in the UK. He will also know that operational decisions of the United States are based on a range of factors. The US rightly continues, as our closest defence and security partner, to retain a very significant presence in the United Kingdom. He will also know that we have raised defence spending. We are spending £300 billion over the course of this Parliament. We have increased it to 2.7%, from the 2.3% under his Government. We will continue on that track to 3.5% by 2035.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
Two weeks ago, the Liberal Democrats were clear that if Iran or the IRGC were confirmed to be behind the plot at the RAF base at Fairford, every Iranian diplomat who assisted in acts of terror should be expelled, up to and including the ambassador. That has now been confirmed. What does the Foreign Secretary intend to do, and when?
As I said, the investigations into the RAF Fairford incident are continuing and it is right that they are able to take their course. The Prime Minister yesterday set out the situation very clearly and the Iranian involvement in it. What I would say is that I have conveyed at the highest levels—indeed, I summoned the Iranian ambassador yesterday to make it absolutely and categorically clear—our condemnation of Iran’s actions and our expectation that it ceases them immediately. We always ensure that diplomats operating in the UK are able to do so in accordance with the Vienna convention. We keep all of that always under review.
I thank the Minister very much for his answers. All of us in the House recognise the Minister’s commitment to the job he does. The hostile activities of the Iranian regime, both through state actions and dangerous proxies across the middle east, pose a direct and undeniable threat to the national security of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The Minister and I share many things, including the view that Iran’s worsening track record of human rights abuses and religious persecution, and the hanging of prisoners whose only crime is peaceful protest, needs to stop. Will he outline what robust co-ordinated steps the Government are taking, alongside our international allies, to dismantle Iran’s cyber-warfare capabilities and its funding of global terror? Can he reassure my constituents in Strangford and across Northern Ireland that our own domestic infrastructure is fully secured against Iranian state-sponsored cyber-threats?
We are fully aware of the threats that Iran poses. Our agencies do important work in identifying those threats and responding to them. We have excellent teams that work in cyber-defence. Of course, cyber-defence is a responsibility of all in society—businesses, individual citizens, Government and agencies—so we all have to play a part in that endeavour. On internal repression in Iran, including of religious minorities, I share the hon. Gentleman’s deep concerns and abhorrence at the use of the death penalty. That is exactly why we maintain diplomatic relations. We engage closely, through our ambassador and others, to raise those concerns and to hope for a better future for all people in Iran and globally.