Declassified UK (RSS/Atom feed)

How a failed British drone project won millions for Israeli arms firm [A Watchkeeper drone on display in 2010 (Photo: Jack Sullivan / Alamy)] On a summer’s day in 2018, a British army drone crashed near a school in Wales where students were taking part in a sports day. It marked the third time that this type of drone – the Watchkeeper WK450 – had crashed, with two more having plunged into the Irish sea. Following the incident in Wales, another three Watchkeepers [crashed][1], twice in the US and once in Cyprus, rendering around 10 percent of the fleet unusable. Many of the drones that didn’t crash were left to gather dust in storage depots amid concerns about their reliability in poor weather conditions. The Watchkeeper contract, valued at over £770m, had been awarded by the Ministry of Defence in 2005 to French arms firm Thales and Israel’s Elbit Systems. Those companies created a joint venture in Leicester named UAV Tactical Systems (U-TacS) to develop and manufacture the drones. By 2024, the Watchkeeper programme had [cost][2] the British public over £1.5bn without delivering on its core objectives. The fleet is due to be retired in 2027 – 15 years earlier than planned. “The general feeling of most people involved [in the programme] was that we were all nursing the Watchkeeper to a slow death”, one British official [confessed][3] in 2023. Despite this, the Watchkeeper programme has proven to be a boon for Israel’s arms industry. ## **Boon for Elbit** While being paid to deliver defective drones for the UK, U-TacS developed an export variant of the Watchkeeper and won a major contract to supply them to Romania. Shipping records obtained by *Declassified* reveal U-TacS has sent dozens of drone components including Watchkeeper engines to Elbit in Israel over the past 18 months. Advanced radar systems used by the Watchkeeper have also been exported to Israel by Thales in Crawley. This information might help to explain why the value of UK arms exports to Israel skyrocketed between October and December 2024, totalling more than the 2020-23 period combined. Under UK arms export regulations, any Watchkeeper components sent to Israel should have been re-exported to Romania. Yet they appear to have remained in Israel, with Elbit filing a “force majeure” declaration in its contract with Romania while testing the drones at a “secret airfield” in “northern Israel”. Open-source information analysed by *Declassified* now indicates this airfield is located in the Golan Heights, a region of southwest Syria that has been illegally occupied by Israel since 1967. The UK government acknowledges that Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights is a violation of international law, suggesting the export of Watchkeepers from Britain could be unlawful. Dania Abul Haj, a senior legal officer at the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP), told *Declassified*: “Private companies have a responsibility to ensure that their products are not being used to further Israeli crimes or illegal activities, or to maintain unlawful occupations. “Failing to adequately implement procedures to this effect may result in liability for the company’s directors both in the UK and abroad”. A spokesperson for the Department for Business and Trade said: “We don’t comment on individual export licences. “All licences have been assessed against our strict criteria. We keep these under review and can suspend or revoke any licences which are no longer consistent with UK standards”. ### RELATED [ ## Revealed: How British engines ended up in Israeli drones ][4] [READ MORE **][5] ## **Watchkeeper WK450** The Watchkeeper WK450, modelled on the Hermes 450 drone which the Israelis have “battle-tested” on Palestinians, made its maiden UK flight in 2010. It took off from Parc Aberporth, a privately-owned military testing range in Wales which [receives][6] funding from the Ministry of Defence. Thales boasted at the time that the “success of this first flight” could be “attributed to the combined efforts of the integrated Thales UK and Ministry of Defence team”. It wasn’t long, however, before major problems emerged. Between 2005 and 2015, the Watchkeeper programme “resulted in merely 146 flight hours, of which only six days on active duty, in Afghanistan”, according to [*The Lead*][7]. At one point, training on the Watchkeeper was moved from Wales to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus due to the drone’s inability to operate in poor weather conditions. This meant that “equipment that needed maintenance was shipped back to the UK for repair just to be sent back out to Cyprus”, resulting in “hundreds of thousands in additional logistic and maintenance costs”, one British official managing the programme said in 2023. During this time, the official said, U-TacS [charged][8] £18,000 per month “to self-organise accommodation in Cyprus for their two deployed technicians”. They further estimated that the cost per flying hour of the Watchkeeper was around £88,400, meaning there was “no way that the Watchkeeper programme can be considered a return on investment, let alone value for money”. Last year, the Ministry of Defence nonetheless opted to keep the Watchkeeper operational for another two years, through to 2027. This extension is [expected][9] to cost an additional £95m, “nearly 75% of the budget allotted for [the Watchkeeper’s] planned replacement”, named Project Corvus. ## **Watchkeeper X** Amidst all the problems with the Watchkeeper WK450, U-TacS developed an export variant of the drone named Watchkeeper X. This drone was unveiled at the DSEI arms exhibition in London in 2015, with one Thales executive [saying][10] it was “based on a ground-breaking, world-leading unmanned aircraft system that was designed specifically for the requirements of the British army”. That executive added: “We have now taken the knowledge and experience that we have gained over the history of the programme and looked at how we can make it more flexible, effective and readily available for our customers”. Thales and Elbit thus benefitted from a major injection of British funding amid the development of Watchkeeper X, but they also received support from the UK government for exporting the drones. In 2023, Elbit [announced][11] that it had been awarded an initial $180m purchase order to supply Watchkeeper X drones to the Romanian ministry of national defence, with the total value of the agreement potentially increasing to $410m. Yoram Shmuely, the general manager of Elbit Systems Aerospace, declared: “We appreciate the continued support and collaboration with the Israeli and UK governments and our business partners on the Watchkeeper program”. The next year, Britain’s Ministry of Defence [announced][12] the government would “continue to support the export of Watchkeeper X. This will support UK industry, growth and jobs whilst also strengthening strategic defence relationship[s] with partners and allies”. ### RELATED [ ## Exposed: The UK firms supplying Elbit Systems ][13] [READ MORE **][14] ## **Exports to Israel** Shipping documents show how dozens of drone components have been sent from U-TacS to Elbit sites in Israel since the contract with Romania was signed. The goods descriptions for those shipments include: * Aircraft parts UAV * 7 x unmanned air vehicle harnesses * UAV Flight Trials Kit * UAV Assembly * UAV System Parts – Pre Production * Military Aircraft Parts * UAV Starter Ext Harness Some of the shipments from U-TacS to Israel specifically mention the Watchkeeper programme. In 2025, U-TacS exported a “WK engine” and an “Engine WK 62.5 Hours Kit” to Elbit’s Advanced Technology Centre in Haifa. Additional military items associated with the Watchkeeper programme have been exported to Israel from Thales in Crawley, the shipping documents show. Last year, that factory sent two shipments described as “Military Aircraft Parts – I-Master” and a third “I-Master Radars (2-off)” to Elbit in Haifa. The I-Master radar system, which has been [linked][15] to the Watchkeeper programme since 2005, “delivers all-weather surveillance, pattern of life monitoring, change detection and wide area-coverage”. ## **The deal** The proliferation of these drone-related shipments might explain why the value of UK arms exports to Israel skyrocketed in late 2024 even after the Labour government’s partial arms restrictions on Tel Aviv. Between October and December 2024, the UK approved £127.5m worth of military equipment to Israel, totalling more than 2020-2023 combined, Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) [found][16]. The figures caused an uproar when they emerged publicly. “I have to ask the foreign secretary: how do you sleep at night?” independent MP Zahra Sultana [said][17] in parliament last May while asking for an explanation. Then-foreign secretary David Lammy said he didn’t “recognise” the figures Sultana had quoted and suggested she was “keen on clickbait”. The government subsequently clarified that “the vast majority of that overall value was supporting the production of items for use outside of Israel”. That included “£120m… for components to support exports of military items from Israel to a single programme for a NATO ally… for their ultimate use”. Elbit’s contract to supply Watchkeepers to Romania, which is a member of NATO, would appear to match that description. But in 2024, Elbit [filed][18] a declaration of “force majeure” with Romania, saying the situation in Gaza had affected its “ability to fulfill its contractual obligations”. This suggests that drone parts sent from Britain to Israel have not been re-exported to Romania, despite this being mandated under UK export law. It also raises questions about whether – and how – Israel might use the parts, according to Sam Perlo-Freeman, a research coordinator at CAAT. “There is absolutely no guarantee that equipment exported to Israel will actually be used for the Romania contract, and not for Israel’s own killer drones. The government makes no attempt to follow up how exported arms are actually used,” Perlo-Freeman told *Declassified*. “The UK’s collaboration with Israel in the export of Watchkeeper X drones, including the export of crucial radar equipment for them, only strengthens the Israeli arms industry, and Elbit in particular, a company that has been instrumental in the genocide in Gaza”, he said. He added that the “excuse” of allowing arms sales to Israel for onward export “is wearing very thin. A full two-way arms embargo is needed to end UK complicity in genocide and illegal war”. ## **Golan Heights** Last year, Romanian news organisation Digi24 was invited to film the Watchkeeper X drones taking off and landing at “a secret military base in northern Israel”. The outlet [reported][19]: “This is where the drones that the Romanian Army purchased are being tested. The aircraft are worth hundreds of millions of dollars”. *Declassified* has examined the videos published by Digi24 using open-source techniques including satellite imagery and geospatial analysis. The footage strongly suggests that Elbit has been using Fiq, an airbase located in the illegally occupied Golan Heights, to test the Watchkeeper X drones. A media report shows the drone landing at a runway (top), which appears to match with satellite images of Fiq airfield in occupied Golan. Additional footage was taken by Digi24 inside Elbit’s control room, where screens showed the surveillance data hoovered up by the drone over a body of water. That footage maps onto an anchorage at Ein Gev on the Sea of Galilee, which is only 10km west of the Fiq airstrip. Promotional footage shows the drone flying over a harbour (top), which appears to match with satellite images of Ein Gev in the Sea of Galilee in occupied Golan. This would not be the first time that Elbit has used Fiq airbase to test its drones. In 2017, the Swiss government [admitted][20] that defence officials had visited that airfield in 2012, 2013 and 2015 “to see flight tests of the Hermes 900 unmanned aerial vehicle”. It claimed the officials did not know the airfield was located in “occupied territory” and their visits were “contrary” to the policies of the country’s foreign ministry. In 2008, the UK government even requested that Elbit relocate test flights for the Watchkeeper WK450 from Fiq. Britain’s Ministry of Defence [said][21] it “would consider it inappropriate to use the facilities at the Golan Heights as part of the Watchkeeper program” because “it is the long held position of the UK government that the Golan Heights is occupied territory”. ## **Unlawful exports?** That the Watchkeeper X drones may have been tested at Fiq airbase raises serious questions about the legality of UK drone exports to Israel. Criterion four of the Strategic Export Licensing Criteria [states][22] that the UK government must take into account “whether the recipient has in the past tried or threatened to pursue, by means of force, a claim against the territory of another country”. It further notes that the government must judge “the likelihood that items would be used in the territory of another country other than for legitimate purposes, including national or collective self-defence”. The information raises further concerns that U-TacS, when applying for an arms export licence, may have misinformed the UK government about the goods being diverted to an unauthorised end-use location. Dania Abul Haj from ICJP said: “States have the obligation not to render aid or support to Israel’s illegal policies that aim to alter the physical character, demographic composition, or institutional structure of the occupied Syrian Golan Heights. “This position was affirmed by the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion delivered in July 2024, despite the fact that the decision concerned Palestinian occupied territory, the same legal norms apply in this case”. Haj added that under Article 7 of the Arms Trade Treaty states must take into account whether military exports “would contribute to or undermine peace and security” or be used to “commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law”. U-Tacs, Elbit and Thales did not reply to requests for comment. The post [How a failed British drone project won millions for Israeli arms firm][23] appeared first on [Declassified UK][24]. [1]: https://dronewars.net/tag/crashes/ [2]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questi… [3]: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/119511/pdf/ [4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61456 [5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61456 [6]: https://web.archive.org/web/20100418022303/http:/www.thal… [7]: https://thelead.uk/gazas-skies-cardigan-bay-drone-testing… [8]: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/119511/pdf/ [9]: https://www.army-technology.com/news/uk-throwing-good-mon… [10]: https://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.com/2015/09/thales-… [11]: https://www.elbitsystems.com/news/elbit-systems-awarded-1… [12]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questi… [13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61250 [14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61250 [15]: https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2024/06/watchkeeper/ [16]: https://caat.org.uk/news/new-figures-reveal-massive-incre… [17]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-05-20/debates/… [18]: https://militarnyi.com/en/news/war-in-gaza-disrupts-deliv… [19]: https://www.digi24.ro/stiri/actualitate/cum-arata-dronele… [20]: https://www.timesofisrael.com/swiss-say-no-more-drone-tes… [21]: https://web.archive.org/web/20230613132214/https:/www.haa… [22]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statem… [23]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-failed-british-drone… [24]: https://www.declassifieduk.org https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-failed-british-drone…

UK military refuses to give ‘running commentary’ on Iran civilian deaths [US troops at RAF Fairford in England prepare bombs to be dropped on Iran. (Photo: Alastair Grant / Alamy)] Britain’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) is refusing to tell the media or parliament how many Iranian [civilians][1] have been killed by US bombing missions from British air bases. Officials are also not commenting on whether [target lists][2] for so-called “defensive” US strikes from British soil are approved by the UK before each mission, or if they are audited afterwards. Further questions about whether the US uses artificial intelligence to compile these target lists, or whether it is allowed to load banned cluster bombs at UK bases, were rebuffed. The silence casts serious doubt on Keir Starmer’s claim that Britain is not involved in the war and is only letting Donald Trump use British bases for a “specific, limited defensive purpose”. The prime minister said US strikes from RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and the British-occupied Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia were “to destroy [Iran’s] missiles at source, in their storage depots or at their launchers.” When asked a series of simple questions about how Britain would monitor or enforce the target lists, the MoD and Attorney General’s Office refused to answer directly or make ministers available for an interview with *Declassified*. An MoD spokesperson said: “We won’t be providing a running commentary on our allies’ operations, including their use of our bases. “The United States has started using British bases for specific defensive operations to prevent Iran firing missiles into the region, which is putting British lives at risk.” This new goal of preventing Iran “firing missiles into the region” seems much broader than what is permitted by the government’s own legal advice. A [summary][3] of that position said the US should only use UK bases to “facilitate specific and limited defensive action against missile facilities in Iran which were involved in launching strikes at regional allies.” It is unclear how the UK can distinguish between missile stockpiles which Iran may need to lawfully retaliate against the US and Israel’s illegal attack, and those weapons that might be fired at civilian sites in the Gulf. Even in cases such as attacks on hotels in Bahrain, it has sometimes [emerged][4] that US troops were stationed inside. Professor Marc Weller, a former UN legal advisor, has [said][5] “it may not be realistic or practical to determine in each instance which Iranian missile facilities have targeted regional allies or, more to the point, which will do so in the future. Presumably some have been used to attack both Israel and US forces, and regional states. “Iran will certainly not be persuaded by this distinction. Its authorities will not be able to tell which US strikes launched from UK bases aim to protect UK regional allies, and which are part of the US’s overall aggressive campaign to subdue its government.” ### RELATED [ ## Did Trump bomb Iranian schoolgirls with UK-made weaponry? ][6] [READ MORE **][7] ## Artificial intelligence More than [1,300][8] civilians in Iran have been killed in US-Israeli strikes compared to at least [17][9] killed by Iranian strikes on the Gulf states. UK defence minister Al Cairns [refused][10] on Tuesday to “publish a list of any civilian deaths that result from US military strikes that have used UK military bases” when asked by Labour MP Richard Burgon. It comes as American B-1 and B-52 bombers have begun bombing Iran from RAF Fairford, despite 168 people being killed – most of them children – in a strike on a girls school in Iran earlier in the war. Starmer refused to say if the school bombing was a war crime when [asked][11] in parliament on Wednesday. The massacre at the school in Minab, southern Iran, has raised concern about the accuracy of US target lists, as the outdoor play area was visible on Google Earth since 2017. A preliminary investigation by the Pentagon found the US may have used outdated intelligence, while others are concerned about the use of AI. Admiral Brad Cooper, the head of Centcom, [said][12] the US is “leveraging a variety of advanced AI tools” to bomb Iran, adding that “advanced AI tools can turn processes that used to take hours and sometimes even days into seconds.” The MoD refused to answer questions about whether target lists for US missions from UK bases would also use AI. ## Cluster bombs Government officials further refused to comment on whether US bombers based at RAF Fairford or Diego Garcia would be allowed to use cluster bombs. Britain has signed an international treaty banning cluster munitions, whereas the US has not. David Miliband, who was foreign secretary when the ban was passed, secretly allowed the US to keep cluster bombs at UK bases for [“temporary exceptions”][13] and on a “case-by-case” basis. The exemption, revealed by WikiLeaks, came at a time when the US stockpiled cluster munitions in ships at Diego Garcia. Current British officials have also refused to comment on whether the US can deploy graphite ‘blackout’ bombs, a type of cluster munition, from British bases. The weapon, which was dropped on Yugoslavia and Iraq, is used to disable power stations and cripple a country’s electricity grid, which can lead to diseases like cholera. Trump hinted at such an option on Thursday, [threatening][14] Iran: “We could take apart their electric capacity within one hour.” Attorney General Lord Hermer, who made his career as a liberal human rights lawyer, declined to be interviewed on the potential use of these weapons, or about fighting in partnership with Israel, a country whose prime minister is wanted by the International Criminal Court. ### RELATED [ ## Rishi Sunak’s Mission Creep in Yemen ][15] [READ MORE **][16] ## Intelligence sharing As well as allowing the US to use British air bases to bomb Iran, there are also American intelligence personnel at sites in the UK and Cyprus that could be crucial to the conflict. Starmer said on 5 March that “the US and the British [are] working together to protect both the US and the British in joint bases where we’re jointly located and we’re sharing intelligence on [a] 24/7 basis in the usual way”. Members of parliament’s cross-party defence committee received a “secret briefing on operations in Iran and the wider region” from the MoD on Tuesday. They released a cryptic statement saying “Although we cannot comment on the substance of that discussion…we note, however, the considerable gap between some of the political rhetoric circulating internationally, and the reality of the UK’s support to the United States and regional partners.” This could be hinting at considerable US-UK intelligence cooperation during Trump’s illegal war. America’s National Security Agency operates sites such as RAF Menwith Hill in Yorkshire, which campaigners have previously linked to Trump’s assasination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. The Menwith Hill Accountability Campaign [said][17] that last week “the base seems busier than usual with more vehicle movements through the gates”, suggesting this could be related to operations in Iran. The post [UK military refuses to give ‘running commentary’ on Iran civilian deaths ][18] appeared first on [Declassified UK][19]. [1]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questi… [2]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questi… [3]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/summary-of-the-uk-gove… [4]: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/iranian-strike-on-hotel… [5]: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2026/03/uk-arguments-us-oper… [6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62432 [7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62432 [8]: https://aje.news/v4zrce [9]: https://www.amnesty.org.uk/latest/middle-east-millions-at… [10]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questi… [11]: https://www.thenational.scot/news/25927362.keir-starmer-f… [12]: https://archive.is/KSG1v#selection-981.0-987.387 [13]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-docum… [14]: https://www.ibtimes.co.in/us-could-knock-out-iran-power-h… [15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54712 [16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54712 [17]: https://themhac.uk/news/2026-03/concern-about-iran [18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-military-refuses-to-giv… [19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-military-refuses-to-giv…

They attack, we defend: how the media toe the line on Iran [Smoke rises above Tehran on 7 March following a strike on an oil storage facility (Photo: Alireza Sotakbar / Alamy)] The UK media’s take on the use of ‘hard power’ depends entirely on who’s exercising it. The labelling of Russia’s war in Ukraine in February 2022 was clear from the start. According to the Nexis database, 12,700 stories across the UK media in the first week of the war were focused on what was unequivocally referred to as Russia’s “invasion of Ukraine”. Clive Myrie, presenting an extended BBC *News at Ten* on the first night of the war spoke of a “huge Russian military offensive” next to a strapline of “Russia invades Ukraine” that remained on screen throughout the headlines. Tom Bradby, presenting ITV’s *News at Ten*, spoke of “a day of infamy for the Russian government and terror for millions of Ukranians”. Echoing the [statement][1] by then foreign secretary Liz Truss that this was “an unprovoked, premeditated attack against a sovereign democratic state”, he asserted that Putin had “invaded a democratic, sovereign neighbour in a war of imperial conquest.” In the wall-to-wall coverage of the US-Israel pre-emptive attack on Iran on 28 February 2026, no broadcast journalists spoke of “imperial conquest” nor did they mention the issue of Iranian sovereignty. And while coverage of the Russian invasion was consistently described as “unprovoked” – with 2336 stories in the first week – only 390 stories referred to claims that the US/Israel assault on Iran was “unprovoked” in the same period. This is despite [evidence][2] that NATO expansion contributed to Putin’s decision to invade while ‘significant progress’ was [claimed][3] in talks between the US and Iran over the future of the latter’s nuclear programme before the bombing started. ### RELATED [ ## How Britain is involved in Trump’s Iran war ][4] [READ MORE **][5] ## Illegal wars? As opposed to the single “invasion” strapline used to illustrate Russia’s aggression, the BBC’s main TV news bulletin used multiple straplines including “US-Israel attack Iran”, “Iran strikes back” and ‘Fears for Middle East war.” In contrast to the outpouring of condemnation of Russia’s actions, there were only 1,785 stories in the first week that were specifically focused on the “attack on Iran”, just 14% of the number that spoke of a “Russian invasion” four years previously. While 251 stories referred to Russia’s “illegal invasion” in its first week, there were just 82 stories in UK media that addressed Israel and America’s bombing of Iran as an “illegal attack” in the week after 28 February. Many of these simply reported comments made by Green and Liberal Democrat MPs in Parliament as opposed to asking their own questions about the legality of the attacks. Laura Kuenssberg did [press][6] the Israeli president Isaac Herzog on this point in her Sunday morning BBC programme on 8 March (and was dismissed by Herzog as asking “unbelievable questions”). The issue of legality was also addressed in a debate organised by [Channel 4 News][7] and in individual pieces by the [Guardian][8], [Reuters][9] and [Sky][10] (though that was in an interview with the Russian ambassador). These interventions no doubt expressed genuine [tensions within Labour][11] – anxious not to reopen the debate about the legality of the 2003 invasion of Iraq – about whether the US/Israeli attacks could be justified under international law. Yet, at the time of writing, only two out of the 152 stories on the BBC’s “Iran War” online pages (1.3%) and just one of the 257 stories (0.39%) on Sky News’ Iran pages – a [clip][12] of Keir Starmer insisting that he wouldn’t join a war without a “lawful basis” –come close to considering the crucial question of whether the attacks were legal or not. (For some reason, Sky’s interview with the Russian ambassador isn’t listed here). ## ‘Defensive’ Analyses of whether devastating pre-emptive strikes by Israel and the US comply with international law have been overshadowed by the [spectacle][13] of the attacks themselves and the notion that, as the *Sun* [posed][14] it on 2 March, Iran presents a ‘VERY real threat to normal Brits’. As John Irvine, ITV’s senior political correspondent, put in on the *Weekend News* bulletin the evening before: “I think it’s pretty obvious by now that the greatest threat to this entire region comes from Iran’s missile arsenal”. In particular, journalists have emphasised the “defensive” nature of the UK’s role with some 715 stories on “defensive strikes” in the first week of the coverage. Mainstream journalists have, however, failed systematically to investigate the impact of Starmer’s agreement to [facilitate][15] ‘specific and limited defensive action against missile facilities in Iran’. All too often, the tendency has been to take the claim that the UK is engaging in legitimate self-defence at face value. On the first night of the bombing on 28 February, ITV News’ correspondent, Jasmine Cameron-Chileshe, simply repeated Keir Starmer’s claim that “British planes are in the sky today as part of coordinated regional defensive operations to protect our people, our interests and our allies.” Over on the BBC’s main weekend bulletin, political correspondent Chris Mason parroted Starmer’s line word for word: “Yes, British planes have been in the sky in the region in a defensive capability and he emphasises within international law so protecting allies.” No alternative explanation was offered in either case. ### RELATED [ ## Inside the Cypriot campaign to kick out British bases ][16] [READ MORE **][17] ## Diversion tactics Instead, there has been extensive discussion of the [hollowed state of the military][18] and of the [delays][19] in sending HMS Dragon to the eastern Mediterranean to, as the BBC [put it][20], “join the UK’s defensive operations in the region”. There have been [breathless][21] accounts of UK jets shooting down Iranian drones and late-night discussions on the BBC News Channel with security analyst Mikey Kay assessing the technical capacities of UK military hardware. What there has *not* been is detailed investigation by defence correspondents of the implications of providing [‘safe passage’ for US planes][22] through UK bases and of the difficulties in assessing whether it’s possible to distinguish in reality between ‘offensive’ and ‘defensive’ bombing. Meanwhile, Gaza – whose residents are still being [attacked][23] by Israeli forces – has slipped out of the headlines as journalists focus their attention elsewhere. This has allowed Israel to step up its settlement activity in the West Bank and to present its military activity in Lebanon, where its bombs have killed [570 people][24], as another example of defensive activity. UK media have helped to normalise this by, more often than not, describing the movement of Israeli troops into southern Lebanon as an “incursion” rather than an actual ground invasion. While there were 242 stories in the first week of the war to Israel’s “incursion” into Lebanon (including 21 on BBC World), only 41 stories referred to an “invasion of Lebanon”. This included six stories on BBC World of which only three were actually about the current situation. The UK media’s compliant coverage and its failure to challenge the current foreign policy consensus is completely at odds with the UK public. 59% of those [polled by YouGov][25] oppose US military against Iran with only 25% in support. 50% are [opposed][26] to Starmer’s decision to allow the US to use UK airbases for military action against Iran with only 32% in support. Rather than reflecting this constituency, mainstream news are acting as loyal lieutenants in an illegitimate and profoundly destabilising war. The post [They attack, we defend: how the media toe the line on Iran][27] appeared first on [Declassified UK][28]. [1]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-secretary-stat… [2]: https://www.npr.org/2022/01/29/1076193616/ukraine-russia-… [3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/feb/26/us-ira… [4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62457 [5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62457 [6]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m002sgns/sunday-wit… [7]: https://www.channel4.com/news/debate-is-the-iran-war-legal [8]: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/mar/02/legality-us-i… [9]: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/are-us-attacks-… [10]: https://news.sky.com/video/iran-war-is-illegal-has-no-exp… [11]: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/emily-thornberry-t… [12]: https://news.sky.com/video/starmer-pushes-against-uk-inte… [13]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/01/middle-ea… [14]: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/38377767/iran-threat-brits-… [15]: ../../../../Downloads/us%20attack%20on%20iran%20uk%20parliament [16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62402 [17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62402 [18]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-KgjBUgnis [19]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/10/mod-critici… [20]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k1yyg475ko [21]: https://www.gbnews.com/news/iran-news-british-forces-shoo… [22]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-is-involved-in… [23]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21uFiEas2iU [24]: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/1/us-israel-attacks… [25]: https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/54243-uk-public-opinion… [26]: https://yougov.com/en-gb/daily-results/20260302-14ed5-2 [27]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/they-attack-we-defend-how-… [28]: https://www.declassifieduk.org https://www.declassifieduk.org/they-attack-we-defend-how-…