Peter Mandelson’s flaws were mistaken for credentials to represent Britain in the court of a rogue president, according to a new analysis. The disastrous appointment of Mandelson as Britain’s ambassador to Washington has triggered further outrage in Westminster, sharpening opposition calls for the prime minister to resign and reinforcing Labour MPs’ belief that Keir Starmer should not lead them into a general election.
Labour MPs’ craving for better leadership is balanced by fear of a contest producing someone worse. Depressed inertia may keep Starmer in post until next month’s local and devolved elections, which are expected to confirm public disappointment with Labour and contempt for its leader. High living costs weigh more on voters’ minds than diplomatic appointments, but the Mandelson saga has contributed to cumulative disillusionment.
Starmer’s defence is ignorance reinforced with righteous fury at the concealment of important facts from Downing Street. He says no one told him that Mandelson’s security vetting raised red flags, and he could have aborted the appointment had he known. He fired Olly Robbins, the Foreign Office permanent secretary who signed off on Mandelson’s security clearance, to express his commitment to procedural rectitude.
Robbins told parliament’s foreign affairs select committee that his department was acting on a clear message from Downing Street that Mandelson was heading to Washington no matter what. The announcement had been made, and nothing should impede his journey. Starmer’s claim not to have been in the loop is supported by Robbins’s testimony, getting the prime minister off the technical charge of having knowingly misled parliament.
How pressure was applied and by whom will be subject to speculation, with reference to Morgan McSweeney, the former Downing Street chief of staff and Mandelson protégé who resigned earlier. Starmer wants focus on Cabinet Office corridors, not on the decision to pick Mandelson. He regrets it as a lapse of judgment, apologising to victims of Jeffrey Epstein, who were failed by the appointment. The problem was Donald Trump, whose chaotic style posed diplomatic challenges that only an exquisitely crafty political operator might rise to.
