June 13, 2025 • 21 mins
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the UK has “grave concerns” about Iran’s nuclear program and backed Israel’s right to self-defense, while calling for de-escalation in a conflict that risks engulfing the Middle East. Starmer was speaking after Israel carried out a wave of strikes on Iran, targeting nuclear facilities and killing top military commanders. The attacks raised fears of a wider war in the region and caused a spike in the price of oil — though it later pared those gains.
Starmer spoke with Bloomberg's Mishal Hussain.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news, Prime Minister, just as
you're about to leave for the G seven, Israel's carried
out what it describes as a preemptive strike on Iranian
nuclear targets. Two hundred fighter jets, more than three hundred bombs,
the site struck, including homes. Would you say Israel is
justified in the action it's taken.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Well, I'm very concerned about the situation that is developing,
and it's obvious that for a long time we've had
grave concerns about the nuclear program that Iran is putting together,
and we absolutely recognize as Roel's right to self defense.
We the UK were not involved in this attack, and
(00:44):
we're urging all sides to de escalate and negotiate as
the way forward here, and obviously we're talking to allies
about that. We have been this week. We are intensively
talking to allies today.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
In March, US national intelligence made it public that they
did not believe Iran was developing nuclear weapons.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
So has something changed in the assessment since then.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Well, I won't go into the intelligence assessments, but we
are gravely concerned. I've just had a call with President
mccron and Chancellor Mertz to discuss the situation, and we
are all on the same page in the sense of saying, look,
the nuclear program is a real cause for concern. We're
all saying de escalate in relation to this incident, but
(01:28):
none of us were involved in the actual attack.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
Does I mean you're also gravely concerned about the fact
that Israel has taken this very made this very big
move preemptive military action. I mean you're concerned about Iran's
nuclear program, You're also concerned about Israel's choice of action.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Well, I'm concerned about escalation, of course, and I'm going
to speak to Prime Minister Nettaya who shortly after this interview,
so obviously that'll be a topic of discussion. But I
do recognize Israel's right to self defense, There's no doubt
about that.
Speaker 4 (01:58):
But I am very concerned about.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
The escalation of this situation, which is why, along with
Germany and France, were really clear that the escalation is
what is needed here.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Would the UK therefore help defend Israel from Iranian attack
as it has done before.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Well, this is happening in real time as we speak,
and I'm not going to go into operational matters. If
you'll forgive me for that, but as I say, the
principle of Israel's right to self defense is absolutely clear
and we stand by that. But this is a fast
moving situation, as you will understand.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
At the same time, we have the ongoing situation in Gaza,
the suffering. They're something that you have called intolerable and appalling.
Three weeks ago, you made this very strong statement with
Canada and France which called for three things, for how
master release the hostages, for Israel's military operations in Gaza
to cease, and for Israel to let aid into Gaza
(02:57):
in accordance with the UN, engage with the UN in it.
None of those things have happened. What action will you
take now, Well.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
You'll have seen that we've taken action in relation to
sanctions three weeks ago, but also more recently, and it
is important that we consider what other options that we have.
Speaker 4 (03:17):
I always think in these situations it's.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Better to act with allies, which is why we're coordinating
what we're doing. But the situation in Gaza is absolutely intolerable.
The aid arrangements are not adequate, nor are they going
to be adequate, and so that's why we've been consistently
calling for a return to the ceasefire.
Speaker 4 (03:37):
Of course, the release of the hostages.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
The remaining hostages have been there a very long time
in awful circumstances, but we must get that aid in
at speed, at volume, and the current arrangements are not
going to deliver that.
Speaker 4 (03:54):
And have been very clear.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
In our messaging all this and our coordination all this,
and our willingness to take action such as sanctioning.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Which you've already done and as I said, there's been
no change to the situation. An action you could take
is recognizing a Palestinian state, and President macrom is leading
on a conference at the UN next week on that
very subject.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Well, we got long standing policy as a Labor party
is labor government that recognition should be part of a process,
and so that's our approach. Precisely what's going to happen
in the conference next week, I think is unclear. And
obviously now the immediate issue the Israeli attack overnight, and
(04:39):
so there are a lot of moving parts at the moment.
But the principle, the principle we've always held is that
the only long term solution in relation to Palestine in
the Middle East is a two state solution, and although
it seems further off now than perhaps it's seen for
(05:00):
some time, we have to be clear that is the
only path through that recognition the right part of the
process has always been our long standing policy.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
So why would this not be the moment because the
action you've taken so far has not resulted in a
change on the ground, and in the West Bank there's
an expansion of settlements, and there are Palestinians being expelled
from their homes, and there are the extremist actions of
Israeli settlers. Britain has a historic responsibility, doesn't it, And
recognizing of Palestinian state was in your manifesto. Do you
(05:31):
want to be the British Prime Minister who delivers that.
Speaker 4 (05:33):
Well, we do have a special responsibility.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
You're absolutely right about that and I'm clear and our
manifesto was clear about our position on recognition. But it
must be the appropriate part of the process that will
alleviate the situation, which it doesn't exist.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
At the moment. There is no peace process.
Speaker 4 (05:52):
Well, that's why it must be part of the process.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Obviously, as you would expect, we are talking to ally
like minded countries about this very issue, but it must
be in accord with the manifesto, part of a process
that leads to a.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
Two state solution.
Speaker 2 (06:10):
It's the outcome that matters in this hugely given the
intolerable situation.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Can you see the.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Moment where you might, in fact, well, can you see
the moment where you might have to do things independently
of any process, because there isn't one. And indeed, the
Israeli government is saying openly that it's trying to prevent
the expand the establishment of a Paralestinian state through settlement expansion.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
Well, that's why we're talking to international partners about what
can be done, what should be done, what's the appropriate path,
and we'll continue to do that.
Speaker 4 (06:40):
I strongly believe that we are.
Speaker 2 (06:43):
Better, more effective when we're acting with allies with others
at the same time. That's why we took the approach
we did on sanctions, and it's the same mindset that
I bring to this.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
Speaking of sanctions, let's turn to Russia. And you've worked
very very hard on to to help the US administration
see Ukraine slightly differently, to push them further towards a
greater action on Russian and you'll be seeing President Trump
at the G seven summit.
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Do you understand what he is trying to do on Russia.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
I am clear in my own mind that President Trump
wants to bring that an end to the conflict.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
I have no doubt about.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
That, and we are moving closer. I hope to some
sort of ceasefire, some sort of deal Ukraine. President Zelenski
has been absolutely clear that he wants that unconditional cease fire. Putin,
in my ivy, was dragging his heels, which is why
I think it is important for us, together with others,
(07:40):
to say it will be consequences if Russia doesn't come
forward to an unconditional cease fire.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
And it seemed that you had it, did seem that
you had you you thought you had persuaded President Trump
on that when you went to Kiev, when you and
the other European leaders called him, you said, working with
President Trump, we're going to ramp up sanctions, and then
not thing came of it. President Trump talked tough for
a while about Vladimir Putin and then stopped. So is
he going to pressure mister Putin?
Speaker 2 (08:08):
Well, there are discussions going on the whole time, and
we're working with the Ukrainians, working with the US, as
you would expect with a trusted ally in this the
path to piece is rarely straightforward in any conflict. But
I do believe that that is what President Trump wants.
That is absolutely what the Ukrainians want peace. This is
(08:31):
a conflict of war that's been waged on them by
the aggressor, which is Russia, and so we are doing
everything we can to bring about that outcome. But as
I say, the path from conflict to piece is rarely straightforward.
But I'm absolutely determined that the UK will play a
leading part, and I'm very pleased that the UK has
(08:52):
seemed to be able to play that leading part in.
Speaker 4 (08:54):
Resolving the conflict.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
And I remind myself always that not only is this
about the sovereignty of Ukraine, which of course it is,
but it is also about our values in Europe, and
it's also about the direct impact it has back here
at home in the United Kingdom, because whether it's energy
or the cost of living, familist communities, individuals in the
UK have been impacted by what's happening in Ukraine, and
(09:19):
therefore we need to redouble our efforts to bring about
a lasting piece on a temporary piece, a lasting piece.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
Are you saying that you do believe that President Trump
will bring in sanctions on Russia, new sanctions, the kind
of measure that might pressure put In to come to
the negotiating table.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
He said on a number of occasions that's what he
will do, and we're obviously closely aligning and talking to him.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
He also said he did in the war in twenty four hours.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Well, as I said, the if you look at any
conflict historically, the past to piece has never been straightforward.
But the determination is there, the intent is there, and
I do believe we're making progress, but it must be
a lasting piece.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
You have led on this idea of the Coalition of
the Willing and a reassurance force for postwar Ukraine. Have
you got a commitment from the US that it would
provide air cover for that future force to deter Russia
from attacking Ukraine in the future.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Well, President Trump has clearly said he'll have our back,
and I've always been clear that there must be a
US element to this. But on the other hand, I
do think that Europe needs to step up in its
own right, in its own collective security and self defense.
And that's why, along with President macarn we have led,
(10:43):
as it were, on the coalition of the willing, which
is to go, if you like it, at the pace
of those that want to go furthest rather than at
the pace of those who are the most cautious, and
to start some of the planning that is going to
be needed. Then the further we get into the planning
of what's actually going we needed in the air, in
the sea, and possibly on land, the more convinced I
(11:07):
am this is the military planning that that is planning
needs to go on now. It's planning that can't go
on after the event, so that we're ready for whatever happened. Obviously,
there's a lot of moving parts. There's a lot of
questions that aren't answered yet, but the military planning is
getting to quite an advanced stage.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Now.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Having your back, as President Trump has said, is not
the same as saying I will provide US air cover.
Bloomberg's been told that the US is refusing to commit
to air cover for a post warforce.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Well, I'm not going to get into the private discussions
that we are having, but what I would say is
this that there are no two countries that act as
closely together on defense, security and on intelligence sharing as
the US and the UK, and that aspect of our
relationship is a strong today as it's ever been, and
(12:03):
my commitment to it is their President Trump's commitment to
it is there. We've discussed it between ourselves, so that
is an unshakable link between our two countries.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
It does make it difficult, though, doesn't it for you
to and would you be prepared to put us to
put British troops on the ground as part of a
post war force in Ukraine if there wasn't US air
cover to protect them?
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Well, I've always said there needs to be US protection.
I have said we would be willing to put our
troops on the ground, but there has to be that
US backstock if you like.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
So if it's not there, what happens to the worst
or force.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
We are discussing this, but I have no reason to
believe that the US and the UK wouldn't act together
as we'd done historically for many many years, as we
are doing every single day of the week. Our teams
are in constant touch with each other. As I say,
we must never lose sight of the fact that the
(13:01):
US and the UK are as close as any two
countries on defense security and the intelligence that we share
with each other.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
There's another live bilateral issue, which is the state of
your trade agreement and the hope that you will implement
it in the timeframe you yourself set was two weeks,
which would take us to next Wednesday. So will it
be implemented in that timeframe.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
We're in the final stages of implementing now. I'm very
pleased that we reach that agreement. It was a huge
relief to car manufacturing those working in the sector, particularly
JILR workers that I went to see before we started
the negotiations, and I went to see immediately after negotiations,
and so this is measured in jobs protected, jobs created
(13:41):
by this deal. We are at the implementation stage, but
we're at the end of that process, and I hope
that we can complete.
Speaker 4 (13:48):
It pretty soon.
Speaker 1 (13:49):
Now is that the same as within the two weeks
by next Wednesday?
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Oh, I'm hoping that we will complete it pretty soon.
I mean, it's important that we do. But we're making
good progress. There's nothing ex affected in the implementation and
so we haven't got any hiccups or obstacles.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
Why isn't it done yet?
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Because there are both sides agreed, what they would do
in order to implement and so we're working through what
we the UK have to do, what the US is
going to do so we can implement it.
Speaker 4 (14:17):
That was as we envisaged not.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Long after the G seven sumit. You'll have the NATO
summit coming up, and there there is a very specific
new ask, which is that the US administration says is
NATO itself says is to spend five percent of GDP
on defense, understood to be by the year twenty thirty two,
three and a half percent on core defense spending.
Speaker 3 (14:38):
Will you be committing to that?
Speaker 2 (14:40):
Well, let me go through what we've already committed to,
which is obviously two point five percent of GDP being
spent on defense by twenty twenty seven twenty eight. I
think that's earlier than most people thought we would commit to,
and that's the biggest sustain increase in defense spending since
the Cold War. With an ambition then to go to
three percent in the next Parliament set that all out
(15:03):
alongside our Strategic Defense Review. I'd sept the proposition. I've
advanced the proposition about the importance of NATO. Our Strategic
Defense Review is very much NATO first, and that all European.
Speaker 4 (15:18):
Countries need to step up.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
There's been a sort of criticism that Europe hasn't carried
its fair share of the burden.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
I think that's right.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
So I've said to European allies we need to do
more on spend on capability and cooperation. Obviously, the precise
wording that will be agreed that NATO is still a
matter of some negotiation. Well, what I'm really clear about
is that NATO has been the cornerstone of our defense
for eighty plus years. It is the most important successful
(15:51):
military alliance that's ever been and I think it's important
for that summit in just over a week's time to
be a real show of unity and to show our
responsibility not just to reflect on the last eighty years
of NATO, but to play our part in ensuring that
we continue peace in Europe.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
And that's all NATO, and that's the broad picture. But
there is now this very specific loss and your current commitment,
as your current ambition, is for three percent of GDP
spent on defense by the year twenty thirty four in
the next parliament. So could it be your ambition by
the time of this summit to raise that to three
and a half percent, because if you don't, you can't
(16:30):
really claim to be the leading European nation in NATO.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Well, I had Mark Rotter, the Sexuary General of NATO,
here in this room on Monday to discuss how together
we would go into this summit. And there's still discussions
going on as to price precisely what the wording of
what the.
Speaker 4 (16:49):
Commitment will be.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
But I mean, he was very clear to me that
he welcomed our uplift to two point five percent. It
was very pleased that we had done that. It was
very pleased with a strategic defense, It's all good.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
It's just a long way from what he and the
US says everyone's going.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
To agree to this within weeks. Forget week, We're going
to be a very difficult summit.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
To NATO, not just in our troops but also our
nuclear commitment to NATO. We're the only country that commits
our nuclear capability to NATO. And so I think he
would recognize NATO recognizes that the UK makes a huge
contribution to NATO. And I am absolutely determined that that
summit in just over a week will be a huge
(17:31):
success and an opportunity to show the strength together that
we have as NATO allies, but also to send a
very clear message to our adversaries, which is equally important
in what is a more unstable world and I think
we've seen for many, many years.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
Finally, let's return to the UK and the plans that
you've just set out for national renewal for a new
phase of your government. There are some concerns that the
growth picture is not necessarily going to with the forecast
going to support your spending plans. And there is a
group of people that Bloomberg have looked into company filings
and they've seen that thousands of company directors have left
(18:11):
the country, relocating out of the UK in the last year.
Is this a group of people that you can really
afford to use? Don't you need to have those people
here to look at the opportunities for investment?
Speaker 3 (18:21):
Might you consider an investor visa?
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Well, let me put this in the context because obviously,
and I won't go over this at great detail, but
we inherited a complete mess at the election. Almost everything
was broken, the economy, public services, you name it. We
had to take difficult but right decisions in the budget,
and that, if you like, was year one of this
(18:44):
labor government, which was clear up the mess, take the
difficult but necessary decisions. We're now very clearly moving into
sort of phase two, which is what the spending Review
ushers in, which is being clear what's the benefit from this,
what's the yield?
Speaker 4 (18:59):
Where are you putting your money?
Speaker 2 (19:01):
And I'm really proud that we're rolling out a program
of real labor values in terms of investment, whether that's
things like say as well.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
So might investors be part of it? It's just like,
is it something you're considering.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
I want more investors to come into the country. I
want top talent to come into the country. But I
would just push back a little because we've had record
investment into the UK since the last election. We've just
had London Tech Week where we had some of the
most forward leading investment investors and tech companies absolutely singing
(19:38):
the praises of the UK and why now is the
right time to invest in them.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Is also lost about a quarter of a million jobs
since since the autumn, so it's not all as rosy
as we actually.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
I mean five hundred thousand more people in work than
at the date of the last election, and the.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
Actual since since you raise taxes in the in the autumn.
This is the Bloomberg analysis that a quarter of a
million jobs have been lost.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
If he looked at the number of people in work,
it is five hundred thousand more than it was. If
you look at the commitment and spending Defense Strategic Review,
there's thirty thousand jobs in nuclear submarines size well that
we announced earlier this week, there's ten thousand jobs. And
my job is to make sure that good and well paid,
secure jobs are there and to attract that investment and
(20:25):
for international investment. I do think this is a really
important point and Bloomberg will understand this almost better than anyone.
Those global investors have a choice as to which country
they put their money in. They chose not to put
their money into the UK for many years before the election.
Now we've had record inward investment. That is because they've
(20:46):
got confidence in what we're doing. They're putting their money in,
and that to me speaks volume.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
Final thought, is President Trump coming in September for his
state visit.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Oh, he'll be coming in obviously, the Palace will all
organize the dates.
Speaker 4 (21:01):
But President Trump will be coming for his state visit
and in the autumn, and that is really good well,
the Palace will do it.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
But it is here.
Speaker 2 (21:09):
Well I hope so yes, But as I say, i'll
leave it, I want to take over the job of
the Palace. It's their job to set out exactly the
dates of the invitation. But I'm really pleased that we
will be able to showcase the close relationship we have
between the UK and the US. That's historically a close relationship,
(21:30):
and this will be a historic second visit for President
Trump and we're all looking forward to welcoming him here.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
Prime Minister, thank you very much.
Speaker 4 (21:37):
Thank you.
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news, Prime Minister, just as
you're about to leave for the G seven, Israel's carried
out what it describes as a preemptive strike on Iranian
nuclear targets. Two hundred fighter jets, more than three hundred bombs,
the site struck, including homes. Would you say Israel is
justified in the action it's taken.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Well, I'm very concerned about the situation that is developing,
and it's obvious that for a long time we've had
grave concerns about the nuclear program that Iran is putting together,
and we absolutely recognize as Roel's right to self defense.
We the UK were not involved in this attack, and
(00:44):
we're urging all sides to de escalate and negotiate as
the way forward here, and obviously we're talking to allies
about that. We have been this week. We are intensively
talking to allies today.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
In March, US national intelligence made it public that they
did not believe Iran was developing nuclear weapons.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
So has something changed in the assessment since then.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Well, I won't go into the intelligence assessments, but we
are gravely concerned. I've just had a call with President
mccron and Chancellor Mertz to discuss the situation, and we
are all on the same page in the sense of saying, look,
the nuclear program is a real cause for concern. We're
all saying de escalate in relation to this incident, but
(01:28):
none of us were involved in the actual attack.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
Does I mean you're also gravely concerned about the fact
that Israel has taken this very made this very big
move preemptive military action. I mean you're concerned about Iran's
nuclear program, You're also concerned about Israel's choice of action.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Well, I'm concerned about escalation, of course, and I'm going
to speak to Prime Minister Nettaya who shortly after this interview,
so obviously that'll be a topic of discussion. But I
do recognize Israel's right to self defense, There's no doubt
about that.
Speaker 4 (01:58):
But I am very concerned about.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
The escalation of this situation, which is why, along with
Germany and France, were really clear that the escalation is
what is needed here.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Would the UK therefore help defend Israel from Iranian attack
as it has done before.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Well, this is happening in real time as we speak,
and I'm not going to go into operational matters. If
you'll forgive me for that, but as I say, the
principle of Israel's right to self defense is absolutely clear
and we stand by that. But this is a fast
moving situation, as you will understand.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
At the same time, we have the ongoing situation in Gaza,
the suffering. They're something that you have called intolerable and appalling.
Three weeks ago, you made this very strong statement with
Canada and France which called for three things, for how
master release the hostages, for Israel's military operations in Gaza
to cease, and for Israel to let aid into Gaza
(02:57):
in accordance with the UN, engage with the UN in it.
None of those things have happened. What action will you
take now, Well.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
You'll have seen that we've taken action in relation to
sanctions three weeks ago, but also more recently, and it
is important that we consider what other options that we have.
Speaker 4 (03:17):
I always think in these situations it's.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Better to act with allies, which is why we're coordinating
what we're doing. But the situation in Gaza is absolutely intolerable.
The aid arrangements are not adequate, nor are they going
to be adequate, and so that's why we've been consistently
calling for a return to the ceasefire.
Speaker 4 (03:37):
Of course, the release of the hostages.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
The remaining hostages have been there a very long time
in awful circumstances, but we must get that aid in
at speed, at volume, and the current arrangements are not
going to deliver that.
Speaker 4 (03:54):
And have been very clear.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
In our messaging all this and our coordination all this,
and our willingness to take action such as sanctioning.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Which you've already done and as I said, there's been
no change to the situation. An action you could take
is recognizing a Palestinian state, and President macrom is leading
on a conference at the UN next week on that
very subject.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Well, we got long standing policy as a Labor party
is labor government that recognition should be part of a process,
and so that's our approach. Precisely what's going to happen
in the conference next week, I think is unclear. And
obviously now the immediate issue the Israeli attack overnight, and
(04:39):
so there are a lot of moving parts at the moment.
But the principle, the principle we've always held is that
the only long term solution in relation to Palestine in
the Middle East is a two state solution, and although
it seems further off now than perhaps it's seen for
(05:00):
some time, we have to be clear that is the
only path through that recognition the right part of the
process has always been our long standing policy.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
So why would this not be the moment because the
action you've taken so far has not resulted in a
change on the ground, and in the West Bank there's
an expansion of settlements, and there are Palestinians being expelled
from their homes, and there are the extremist actions of
Israeli settlers. Britain has a historic responsibility, doesn't it, And
recognizing of Palestinian state was in your manifesto. Do you
(05:31):
want to be the British Prime Minister who delivers that.
Speaker 4 (05:33):
Well, we do have a special responsibility.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
You're absolutely right about that and I'm clear and our
manifesto was clear about our position on recognition. But it
must be the appropriate part of the process that will
alleviate the situation, which it doesn't exist.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
At the moment. There is no peace process.
Speaker 4 (05:52):
Well, that's why it must be part of the process.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Obviously, as you would expect, we are talking to ally
like minded countries about this very issue, but it must
be in accord with the manifesto, part of a process
that leads to a.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
Two state solution.
Speaker 2 (06:10):
It's the outcome that matters in this hugely given the
intolerable situation.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Can you see the.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Moment where you might, in fact, well, can you see
the moment where you might have to do things independently
of any process, because there isn't one. And indeed, the
Israeli government is saying openly that it's trying to prevent
the expand the establishment of a Paralestinian state through settlement expansion.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
Well, that's why we're talking to international partners about what
can be done, what should be done, what's the appropriate path,
and we'll continue to do that.
Speaker 4 (06:40):
I strongly believe that we are.
Speaker 2 (06:43):
Better, more effective when we're acting with allies with others
at the same time. That's why we took the approach
we did on sanctions, and it's the same mindset that
I bring to this.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
Speaking of sanctions, let's turn to Russia. And you've worked
very very hard on to to help the US administration
see Ukraine slightly differently, to push them further towards a
greater action on Russian and you'll be seeing President Trump
at the G seven summit.
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Do you understand what he is trying to do on Russia.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
I am clear in my own mind that President Trump
wants to bring that an end to the conflict.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
I have no doubt about.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
That, and we are moving closer. I hope to some
sort of ceasefire, some sort of deal Ukraine. President Zelenski
has been absolutely clear that he wants that unconditional cease fire. Putin,
in my ivy, was dragging his heels, which is why
I think it is important for us, together with others,
(07:40):
to say it will be consequences if Russia doesn't come
forward to an unconditional cease fire.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
And it seemed that you had it, did seem that
you had you you thought you had persuaded President Trump
on that when you went to Kiev, when you and
the other European leaders called him, you said, working with
President Trump, we're going to ramp up sanctions, and then
not thing came of it. President Trump talked tough for
a while about Vladimir Putin and then stopped. So is
he going to pressure mister Putin?
Speaker 2 (08:08):
Well, there are discussions going on the whole time, and
we're working with the Ukrainians, working with the US, as
you would expect with a trusted ally in this the
path to piece is rarely straightforward in any conflict. But
I do believe that that is what President Trump wants.
That is absolutely what the Ukrainians want peace. This is
(08:31):
a conflict of war that's been waged on them by
the aggressor, which is Russia, and so we are doing
everything we can to bring about that outcome. But as
I say, the path from conflict to piece is rarely straightforward.
But I'm absolutely determined that the UK will play a
leading part, and I'm very pleased that the UK has
(08:52):
seemed to be able to play that leading part in.
Speaker 4 (08:54):
Resolving the conflict.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
And I remind myself always that not only is this
about the sovereignty of Ukraine, which of course it is,
but it is also about our values in Europe, and
it's also about the direct impact it has back here
at home in the United Kingdom, because whether it's energy
or the cost of living, familist communities, individuals in the
UK have been impacted by what's happening in Ukraine, and
(09:19):
therefore we need to redouble our efforts to bring about
a lasting piece on a temporary piece, a lasting piece.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
Are you saying that you do believe that President Trump
will bring in sanctions on Russia, new sanctions, the kind
of measure that might pressure put In to come to
the negotiating table.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
He said on a number of occasions that's what he
will do, and we're obviously closely aligning and talking to him.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
He also said he did in the war in twenty four hours.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Well, as I said, the if you look at any
conflict historically, the past to piece has never been straightforward.
But the determination is there, the intent is there, and
I do believe we're making progress, but it must be
a lasting piece.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
You have led on this idea of the Coalition of
the Willing and a reassurance force for postwar Ukraine. Have
you got a commitment from the US that it would
provide air cover for that future force to deter Russia
from attacking Ukraine in the future.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Well, President Trump has clearly said he'll have our back,
and I've always been clear that there must be a
US element to this. But on the other hand, I
do think that Europe needs to step up in its
own right, in its own collective security and self defense.
And that's why, along with President macarn we have led,
(10:43):
as it were, on the coalition of the willing, which
is to go, if you like it, at the pace
of those that want to go furthest rather than at
the pace of those who are the most cautious, and
to start some of the planning that is going to
be needed. Then the further we get into the planning
of what's actually going we needed in the air, in
the sea, and possibly on land, the more convinced I
(11:07):
am this is the military planning that that is planning
needs to go on now. It's planning that can't go
on after the event, so that we're ready for whatever happened. Obviously,
there's a lot of moving parts. There's a lot of
questions that aren't answered yet, but the military planning is
getting to quite an advanced stage.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Now.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Having your back, as President Trump has said, is not
the same as saying I will provide US air cover.
Bloomberg's been told that the US is refusing to commit
to air cover for a post warforce.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Well, I'm not going to get into the private discussions
that we are having, but what I would say is
this that there are no two countries that act as
closely together on defense, security and on intelligence sharing as
the US and the UK, and that aspect of our
relationship is a strong today as it's ever been, and
(12:03):
my commitment to it is their President Trump's commitment to
it is there. We've discussed it between ourselves, so that
is an unshakable link between our two countries.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
It does make it difficult, though, doesn't it for you
to and would you be prepared to put us to
put British troops on the ground as part of a
post war force in Ukraine if there wasn't US air
cover to protect them?
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Well, I've always said there needs to be US protection.
I have said we would be willing to put our
troops on the ground, but there has to be that
US backstock if you like.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
So if it's not there, what happens to the worst
or force.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
We are discussing this, but I have no reason to
believe that the US and the UK wouldn't act together
as we'd done historically for many many years, as we
are doing every single day of the week. Our teams
are in constant touch with each other. As I say,
we must never lose sight of the fact that the
(13:01):
US and the UK are as close as any two
countries on defense security and the intelligence that we share
with each other.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
There's another live bilateral issue, which is the state of
your trade agreement and the hope that you will implement
it in the timeframe you yourself set was two weeks,
which would take us to next Wednesday. So will it
be implemented in that timeframe.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
We're in the final stages of implementing now. I'm very
pleased that we reach that agreement. It was a huge
relief to car manufacturing those working in the sector, particularly
JILR workers that I went to see before we started
the negotiations, and I went to see immediately after negotiations,
and so this is measured in jobs protected, jobs created
(13:41):
by this deal. We are at the implementation stage, but
we're at the end of that process, and I hope
that we can complete.
Speaker 4 (13:48):
It pretty soon.
Speaker 1 (13:49):
Now is that the same as within the two weeks
by next Wednesday?
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Oh, I'm hoping that we will complete it pretty soon.
I mean, it's important that we do. But we're making
good progress. There's nothing ex affected in the implementation and
so we haven't got any hiccups or obstacles.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
Why isn't it done yet?
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Because there are both sides agreed, what they would do
in order to implement and so we're working through what
we the UK have to do, what the US is
going to do so we can implement it.
Speaker 4 (14:17):
That was as we envisaged not.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Long after the G seven sumit. You'll have the NATO
summit coming up, and there there is a very specific
new ask, which is that the US administration says is
NATO itself says is to spend five percent of GDP
on defense, understood to be by the year twenty thirty two,
three and a half percent on core defense spending.
Speaker 3 (14:38):
Will you be committing to that?
Speaker 2 (14:40):
Well, let me go through what we've already committed to,
which is obviously two point five percent of GDP being
spent on defense by twenty twenty seven twenty eight. I
think that's earlier than most people thought we would commit to,
and that's the biggest sustain increase in defense spending since
the Cold War. With an ambition then to go to
three percent in the next Parliament set that all out
(15:03):
alongside our Strategic Defense Review. I'd sept the proposition. I've
advanced the proposition about the importance of NATO. Our Strategic
Defense Review is very much NATO first, and that all European.
Speaker 4 (15:18):
Countries need to step up.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
There's been a sort of criticism that Europe hasn't carried
its fair share of the burden.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
I think that's right.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
So I've said to European allies we need to do
more on spend on capability and cooperation. Obviously, the precise
wording that will be agreed that NATO is still a
matter of some negotiation. Well, what I'm really clear about
is that NATO has been the cornerstone of our defense
for eighty plus years. It is the most important successful
(15:51):
military alliance that's ever been and I think it's important
for that summit in just over a week's time to
be a real show of unity and to show our
responsibility not just to reflect on the last eighty years
of NATO, but to play our part in ensuring that
we continue peace in Europe.
Speaker 1 (16:09):
And that's all NATO, and that's the broad picture. But
there is now this very specific loss and your current commitment,
as your current ambition, is for three percent of GDP
spent on defense by the year twenty thirty four in
the next parliament. So could it be your ambition by
the time of this summit to raise that to three
and a half percent, because if you don't, you can't
(16:30):
really claim to be the leading European nation in NATO.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Well, I had Mark Rotter, the Sexuary General of NATO,
here in this room on Monday to discuss how together
we would go into this summit. And there's still discussions
going on as to price precisely what the wording of
what the.
Speaker 4 (16:49):
Commitment will be.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
But I mean, he was very clear to me that
he welcomed our uplift to two point five percent. It
was very pleased that we had done that. It was
very pleased with a strategic defense, It's all good.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
It's just a long way from what he and the
US says everyone's going.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
To agree to this within weeks. Forget week, We're going
to be a very difficult summit.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
To NATO, not just in our troops but also our
nuclear commitment to NATO. We're the only country that commits
our nuclear capability to NATO. And so I think he
would recognize NATO recognizes that the UK makes a huge
contribution to NATO. And I am absolutely determined that that
summit in just over a week will be a huge
(17:31):
success and an opportunity to show the strength together that
we have as NATO allies, but also to send a
very clear message to our adversaries, which is equally important
in what is a more unstable world and I think
we've seen for many, many years.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
Finally, let's return to the UK and the plans that
you've just set out for national renewal for a new
phase of your government. There are some concerns that the
growth picture is not necessarily going to with the forecast
going to support your spending plans. And there is a
group of people that Bloomberg have looked into company filings
and they've seen that thousands of company directors have left
(18:11):
the country, relocating out of the UK in the last year.
Is this a group of people that you can really
afford to use? Don't you need to have those people
here to look at the opportunities for investment?
Speaker 3 (18:21):
Might you consider an investor visa?
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Well, let me put this in the context because obviously,
and I won't go over this at great detail, but
we inherited a complete mess at the election. Almost everything
was broken, the economy, public services, you name it. We
had to take difficult but right decisions in the budget,
and that, if you like, was year one of this
(18:44):
labor government, which was clear up the mess, take the
difficult but necessary decisions. We're now very clearly moving into
sort of phase two, which is what the spending Review
ushers in, which is being clear what's the benefit from this,
what's the yield?
Speaker 4 (18:59):
Where are you putting your money?
Speaker 2 (19:01):
And I'm really proud that we're rolling out a program
of real labor values in terms of investment, whether that's
things like say as well.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
So might investors be part of it? It's just like,
is it something you're considering.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
I want more investors to come into the country. I
want top talent to come into the country. But I
would just push back a little because we've had record
investment into the UK since the last election. We've just
had London Tech Week where we had some of the
most forward leading investment investors and tech companies absolutely singing
(19:38):
the praises of the UK and why now is the
right time to invest in them.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Is also lost about a quarter of a million jobs
since since the autumn, so it's not all as rosy
as we actually.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
I mean five hundred thousand more people in work than
at the date of the last election, and the.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
Actual since since you raise taxes in the in the autumn.
This is the Bloomberg analysis that a quarter of a
million jobs have been lost.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
If he looked at the number of people in work,
it is five hundred thousand more than it was. If
you look at the commitment and spending Defense Strategic Review,
there's thirty thousand jobs in nuclear submarines size well that
we announced earlier this week, there's ten thousand jobs. And
my job is to make sure that good and well paid,
secure jobs are there and to attract that investment and
(20:25):
for international investment. I do think this is a really
important point and Bloomberg will understand this almost better than anyone.
Those global investors have a choice as to which country
they put their money in. They chose not to put
their money into the UK for many years before the election.
Now we've had record inward investment. That is because they've
(20:46):
got confidence in what we're doing. They're putting their money in,
and that to me speaks volume.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
Final thought, is President Trump coming in September for his
state visit.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Oh, he'll be coming in obviously, the Palace will all
organize the dates.
Speaker 4 (21:01):
But President Trump will be coming for his state visit
and in the autumn, and that is really good well,
the Palace will do it.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
But it is here.
Speaker 2 (21:09):
Well I hope so yes, But as I say, i'll
leave it, I want to take over the job of
the Palace. It's their job to set out exactly the
dates of the invitation. But I'm really pleased that we
will be able to showcase the close relationship we have
between the UK and the US. That's historically a close relationship,
(21:30):
and this will be a historic second visit for President
Trump and we're all looking forward to welcoming him here.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
Prime Minister, thank you very much.
Speaker 4 (21:37):
Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.