The Pentagon expressed strong disapproval towards UK Labour leader Keir Starmer on Monday, criticizing what it described as his “overly cautious” response to U.S. military actions against Iran.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak faced backlash for allegedly jeopardizing the UK’s Special Relationship with the U.S. by preventing American bombers from utilizing British bases for the attack on Tehran that occurred on Saturday.

Starmer risked further straining relations with the White House by labeling the operation, which resulted in the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader, as possibly unlawful and likely to lead to further complications.

In a forceful statement, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth commended Israel for its pivotal involvement in the military strike, while criticizing the more cautious and legalistic stance adopted by Britain and other European nations.

“Israel has clear objectives that we appreciate,” Hegseth stated. “Effective partners are invaluable. Unlike many of our usual allies who hesitate and overanalyze, questioning the necessity of using force.”

In response to Iran’s retaliation against civilian targets in Gulf states and the RAF Akrotiri base in Cyprus, Starmer modified his stance slightly on Sunday. He announced that U.S. jets would be allowed to operate from British bases for the specific purpose of targeting Iranian missile facilities.

He told MPs on Monday that an estimated 300,000 British nationals in the Gulf region were ‘at risk’ as Tehran targeted hotels and airports. But he ruled out going further, saying he would not participate in US-led attempts to bring about ‘regime change from the skies’.

Donald Trump said the PM took ‘far too long’ to lift the ban on US forces flying from RAF Fairford, in Gloucestershire, and Diego Garcia, in the Chagos Islands.

An airstrike on an Iranian police centre also damaged residential buildings around it in Niloofar square in central Tehran on Sunday 

The Pentagon vented its fury at Keir Starmer (pictured leaving 10 Downing Street) on Monday for his ‘pearl-clutching’ over the US attacks on Iran

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (pictured at a news conference on Monday) praised Israel for its central role in the offensive – but savaged the legalistic approach taken by Britain and other European allies

Birds fly in the opposite direction of an explosion in the Iranian capital of Tehran on Monday as the US and Israelis continued their strikes on the nation 

Smoke billows after an Israeli airstrike in Bourj Al Barajneh, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, on Monday 

Aftermath of an Israeli and the US strike on a police station in Tehran on Monday 

The US President said he was ‘very disappointed in Keir’ over his attempts to hand sovereignty of the strategically vital Diego Garcia to Mauritius.

Sir Keir acknowledged that Mr Trump had ‘expressed his disagreement’, but insisted it was in Britain’s national interest to abide strictly by international law.

He told MPs repeatedly that any military action had to have a ‘lawful basis’ and a ‘viable thought-through plan’ – and suggested the US had neither. Downing Street said the PM’s commitment to upholding international law was ‘iron-clad’.

Kemi Badenoch suggested that the PM was distancing himself from US actions on Iran to avoid further alienating Muslim voters and so-called ‘progressives’ who deserted Labour for the Greens in last week’s by-election. She accused Sir Keir of trying to placate voters ‘whose political loyalties are swayed by conflicts in the Middle East, not the British national interest’.

‘It isn’t international law or principle,’ she said. ‘It’s pure, partisan, political calculations from a party that has surrendered its right to govern our country.’

She added: ‘Why is it that under this Prime Minister, international law always seems to be at odds with our national interest?’ The Tory leader said British people ‘will be wondering why our country’s response has been so weak’.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said the PM’s dithering was ‘pathetic’, adding: ‘Our Prime Minister is not a leader, he’s a follower, and he looks weak in the eyes of everybody.’

The row came as:

The PM marched against the Iraq War in 2003 and declared it illegal. He told MPs on Monday he was determined to prevent Britain being dragged into another legally questionable conflict in the Gulf.

‘We all remember the mistakes of Iraq, and we have learned those lessons,’ he said.

‘Any UK actions must always have a lawful basis and a viable, thought-through plan.

‘President Trump has expressed his disagreement with our decision not to join the initial strikes,’ he said. ‘But it is my duty to judge what is in Britain’s national interest, and that is the judgment I made. I stand by it.’

Former Tory security minister Tom Tugendhat, who served in the Iraq war, said there was ‘zero comparison’ with the current situation as there are no plans for a UK ground invasion, although President Trump later said he was prepared to put ‘boots on the ground’.

A legal opinion drawn up the PM’s controversial Attorney-General Lord Hermer ruled that the assault on Iran could not be deemed self-defence despite the regime’s long history of attacks on the West, including targets in the UK.