The New Statesman.

In the 48 hours following the US and Israel's attacks on Iran, the UK response didn't seem entirely clear.

However, yesterday afternoon in the Commons, a more explicit stance emerged from Kirstama.

The Prime Minister opposed the attacks, stating the government, quote, does not believe in regime change from the skies.

Stama suggested the attacks were not only against his beliefs, but also unlawful.

Trump has been openly critical of Britain's response.

Is this the beginnings of a rift between Stama and Trump?

I'm Olly Dougmore, and this is Daily Politics from the New Statesman.

I'm joined today by journalist, author and ex-foreign office special advisor, Ben Judah.

Ben has written a piece for the new statesman this week, drawing on his insights from his time inside the foreign office.

Ben, thank you so much for joining us.

And hello.

Thank you for having me.

It's an absolute pleasure.

I mean, maybe we should just start with recent events before we widen the

scope of our conversation to bring in international law. But I think also the way that foreign

policy is conducted and that relationship, the sort of the meme at the moment, right, is the

imperial court, the American imperial court. and I think we'll get into that,

particularly your comparison with Nero and Caligula perhaps, as the episode progresses.

But just immediately, what do you make of the way that Britain has responded to the war in Iran?

How have you made sense of the remarks from the Prime Minister and Senior Cabinet Ministers?

What I really think is the most important thing right now is that the Prime Minister, when all is said and done, will go down in the history books as much more of a Harold Wilson, who

...