UK Minister Sees No Evidence Iran Can Strike London
There is "no assessment to substantiate" Israel's claim that Iran possesses long-range missiles capable of reaching London, a UK cabinet minister has stated.
Housing Secretary Steve Reed told the BBC that there was "no specific assessment that the Iranians are targeting the UK - or even could if they wanted to," following statements by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) on Saturday that Tehran had weapons with a range of up to 4,000km (2,485 miles).
This comes after reports that Iran targeted the joint US-UK military base on the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean, approximately 3,800km from Iran.
Reed declined to disclose how close the missiles came to British territory, citing an inability to share "operational details."
Iran launched two ballistic missiles at Diego Garcia overnight into Friday; one missile failed and fell short, while the other was intercepted.
Following news of the attempted attack, the IDF stated on Saturday that it had revealed last year Tehran's intention to develop missiles capable of reaching Europe, Asia, and Africa.
"We have been saying it: The Iranian terrorist regime poses a global threat. Now, with missiles that can reach London, Paris or Berlin."
When asked about the accuracy of these claims, Reed maintained that there was "no specific assessment that the Iranians are targeting the UK or even could, if they wanted to."
"We are perfectly capable of protecting this country and keeping this country safe, whether it's here at home, or whether it's our assets and nationals across the region,"
he told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg.
Pressed further on the IDF's comments, Reed reiterated,
"There is no assessment to substantiate what's being said."
He added that even if Iran possessed the capability to launch strikes at such a range, British armed forces would be able to defend the UK.
The longest-range weapon in Iran's arsenal is believed to have a maximum range of 2,000km, which is significantly less than the distance to both Diego Garcia and London.
Reed's Conservative counterpart, Sir James Cleverly, told the programme that Iran was deploying "very, very long-range missiles," but declined to confirm whether these could reach the UK, stating he no longer had access to the intelligence reports he received as foreign secretary.
Sir Richard Shirreff, a retired British Army general and former NATO commander, advised that Israel's claims about Iranian capabilities should be taken "seriously, but as seriously as the potential for Russian missiles to come this way as well."
"But I would also say that of course Israel is going to say this, because it is in Israel's interest to broaden the war, to bring as many nations in on this war,"
he told Broadcasting House on BBC Radio 4.
'No precedent' for vote on defensive strikes
The UK government has permitted British airbases to be used for strikes targeting sites that threaten UK interests and allies in the region.
On Friday, the government expanded the targets under this "collective self-defence" justification to include Iranian sites used to threaten vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping route through which one-fifth of the world's oil passes.
Alongside RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, the UK has authorized the US to use Diego Garcia to conduct these bombing raids.
The attempted Iranian attack on Diego Garcia occurred prior to this latest decision.
Reed denied that the UK was seeking to escalate the conflict, stating it was "necessary to adapt to the new targets that the Iranians are focusing on."
Sir James acknowledged that the government had made a "misstep" by initially denying the US permission to use British bases earlier in the war, which he said had "damaged our credibility in the international sphere."
"We're relying on other countries to protect British personnel, British nationals and British interests and that is not the position we should be."
The Liberal Democrats and Green Party have expressed concern that the move risks broadening the UK's involvement in the conflict and have called for Parliament to be given a vote on allowing the US to use British bases for strikes.
Reed rejected these demands, arguing there was "no precedent for a vote in Parliament for defending British people who are under attack."
