Starmer Accused Of Using War To Drag UK Back Toward EU

Prime Minister Keir Starmer is facing a political firestorm after signalling a major shift toward closer ties with the European Union — with critics accusing him of using the Iran conflict as cover to quietly reverse Brexit.

Speaking at Downing Street, Starmer argued that instability in the Middle East and strained relations with the US make deeper cooperation with Europe “too big to ignore.” He pointed to economic and security benefits, hinting that closer alignment with the single market could serve Britain’s interests.

But the backlash was immediate and fierce.

Tory And Reform Figures Cry “Brexit Betrayal”

Shadow Foreign Secretary Priti Patel accused Starmer of “shamelessly” reopening Brexit divisions to distract from domestic failures, claiming Labour is looking for “someone or something to blame.”

Former cabinet minister Simon Clarke went further, saying the Prime Minister is exploiting the Gulf crisis to achieve what he “always intended” — dragging Britain back into the EU’s orbit.

Reform UK’s Richard Tice dismissed the strategy as “ludicrous,” branding the EU a struggling economic bloc with weak defence investment.

Meanwhile, arch-Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg warned that any move toward Brussels must be reversed, arguing Britain has outperformed major EU economies in recent years.

Labour Pushes For Quiet Realignment

Behind the scenes, pressure is mounting within Labour for deeper integration.

Senior figures including David Lammy and Wes Streeting are reportedly open to rejoining the customs union, while London Mayor Sadiq Khan has backed a broader return to EU structures.

Starmer insists he will not formally rejoin the single market or restore free movement. But he admitted existing steps already move Britain closer — and suggested more could follow.

Quiet Policy Shifts Already Underway

The government has already begun edging toward alignment with Brussels in key sectors.

A proposed food and farming agreement would tie the UK to EU regulations indefinitely — without giving Britain a say in how those rules are made. Meanwhile, the UK has signed up to rejoin the Erasmus programme at significant cost.

Officials are now reviewing other parts of the economy where alignment could be expanded.

“Common Sense” Or Stealth Re-Entry?

Labour sources frame the shift as pragmatic — removing what they call “Tory Brexit barriers” that have slowed growth and driven up costs.

Critics, however, see something very different: a slow-motion reversal of Brexit, carried out piece by piece while avoiding a direct political fight.

With a UK–EU summit planned for the summer, the battle lines are now clearly drawn — and the question is no longer whether Britain moves closer to Europe, but how far Starmer is willing to go.

source

Good idea, Brexit was a totally stupid move.

Excellent news

We are so forked' Keir' thinks he knows what he's doing! next thing you know we will be paying Macron' to empty the French' migrant camps direct onto Eurostar to stop the boats🤔

1 minute ago, sammieuk1 said:

We are so forked' Keir' thinks he knows what he's doing! next thing you know we will be paying Macron' to empty the French' migrant camps direct onto Eurostar to stop the boats🤔

Well he knows the idea of a post Brexit deal with the U.S. was always a pipe dream.

That BREXIT supporting Brits have been cheering Trump on from the cheap seats only for Trump to deliver a watertight argument for the UK rejoining the EU is a delicious irony.

This could save Sir Keir! What a delight it is to have a sane, rational leader. 🇬🇧

The arguments to rejoin are progressively more and more compelling -

Millions voted to leave the EU in 2016—but almost as many millions voted to remain. That was a decade ago, and many of the arguments made against leaving have since been strengthened or simply proven right.

At the same time, we shouldn’t treat a referendum result as immutable truth. You can’t vote the earth to be flat, and political decisions—especially ones with long-term consequences—can be revisited when the evidence changes.

It’s also worth remembering that many countries require a two-thirds majority for major constitutional change. That certainly wasn’t the case in 2016: it was a simple majority, effectively first-past-the-post, and not even legally binding.

There’s another point that often gets overlooked: nothing in the UK’s constitutional framework (yes, we do have one—it’s just not codified in a single document) requires a referendum to make or reverse decisions like this. Referendums are actually rare in British political practice, unlike in some other countries where they are routine.

So there’s a strong argument that a further referendum isn’t necessary to rejoin the EU. Much of what Brexit dismantled—agreements, cooperation mechanisms, regulatory alignment—could be rebuilt through government action. The institutional frameworks still exist; reconnecting to them is more practical than many assume.

As for full rejoining, the most democratic route may simply be through a general election: a party could stand on a clear manifesto commitment to rejoin, win a mandate, and then carry the process through. If 52% once was “the will of the people", then a clear electoral mandate now is something even harder to argue with.

Relations with the US are strained, relations with the EU are good. So it makes sense to talk to the EU about developments.