Published: 10 November 2026
The UK government says it has not joined offensive action in the war between the United States, Israel and Iran, but it allows US forces to use some British bases for what it describes as defensive operations. That position is now under pressure on several fronts. On Monday, US forces moved aircraft out of RAF Mildenhall after a reported Iranian threat, weeks after a security incident at RAF Fairford, while unions and opposition critics argue the arrangement risks drawing Britain in. This guide sets out where the UK stands and what each side argues.
Where the UK government stands
After meeting US Secretary of State Marco Rubio in August, Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said Britain had not joined offensive action and had allowed its bases to be used for defence by allies, including Gulf allies. He said the priority was a lasting ceasefire rather than escalation, as reported by the Guardian. Bloomberg reported in July that Prime Minister Andy Burnham had agreed to keep his predecessor Keir Starmer’s policy on base access, a position that, in the words of analysts, evolved in stages from refusal to conditional cooperation.
The latest: Fairford and Mildenhall
LBC reported that five British men were arrested outside RAF Fairford in September, after which the US removed its B-1 bombers from the base on security grounds. Fairford had been used by US bombers for strikes on Iran. On Monday, according to the Wall Street Journal as reported by LBC, US refuelling tankers were diverted from RAF Mildenhall to Germany and other locations after an Iranian threat. The WSJ said the exact nature of the threat was still being discussed by US officials. A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said it does not routinely comment on the activity of other nations. This is a developing story, and details may change.
The arguments on each side
Supporters of the current approach argue that the alliance with the United States is central to British security, that allowing defensive operations protects allies and shipping lanes, and that stopping short of offensive action keeps Britain out of the war itself. The government says it prioritises a ceasefire and the cost of living.
Critics say the line between defensive and offensive is hard to draw when strategic bombers launch from British territory. In August, the general secretaries of ten unions representing more than 2.3 million workers, including Unison, wrote to Mr Burnham urging him to revoke permission for US strikes from RAF bases, which they described as helping to escalate an illegal war. Khem Rogaly of the Transition Security Project, which coordinated the letter, argued that allowing bomber strikes from Gloucestershire could make Britain complicit in war crimes. These are the critics’ claims, and the government rejects the suggestion that it has joined offensive action.
What it is costing households
The unions’ letter claimed that the average household’s annual energy bill had risen by £221 since the war began, and that monthly food bills were forecast to rise by £32.80. Those are the unions’ figures, not official statistics. The Associated Press reported that Chancellor John Healey said the war was not something the government wanted, but that it had to deal with the economic effects, and that the war has pushed inflation up to 3.5% and trimmed next year’s expected growth to 1% from 1.6%, according to the independent Office for Budget Responsibility. The AP’s Budget report also covers the £100 energy payment. For the detail, see our guide to the January energy price cap and our explainer on why the Bank of England raised rates to 4%.
The security picture at home
The conflict also sits within a wider security debate. Reports on the government’s household preparedness guidance listed hostile activity from Russia and Iran among the threats Britain faces. We explain that advice in our guide to the government’s stockpiling checklist.
What could change
After the US midterms, Mr Burnham said the result presented an opportunity to refocus on the cost of living and to find a resolution to conflict in the Middle East. We cover that in what a Democratic Congress could mean for Britain. There is no confirmed change in either government’s position yet. Follow developments in our Politics and World sections.
Quick answers
Is the UK at war with Iran? The government says it has not joined offensive action and that base access is for defence by allies. Critics dispute where the line falls.
Why were US aircraft moved from RAF bases? LBC reported a security incident at Fairford in September and an Iranian threat at Mildenhall this week. The exact details have not been fully confirmed.
