Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news, Prime Minister, just as you're about to leave for the G seven, Israel's carried out what it describes as a preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear targets. Two hundred fighter jets, more than three hundred bombs, the site struck, including homes. Would you say Israel is justified in the action it's taken.
Well, I'm very concerned about the situation that is developing, and it's obvious that for a long time we've had grave concerns about the nuclear program that Iran is putting together, and we absolutely recognize as Roel's right to self defense. We the UK were not involved in this attack, and we're urging all sides to de escalate and negotiate as the way forward here, and obviously we're talking to allies about that. We have been this week. We are intensively talking to allies today.
In March, US national intelligence made it public that they did not believe Iran was developing nuclear weapons.
So has something changed in the assessment since then.
Well, I won't go into the intelligence assessments, but we are gravely concerned. I've just had a call with President mccron and Chancellor Mertz to discuss the situation, and we are all on the same page in the sense of saying, look, the nuclear program is a real cause for concern. We're all saying de escalate in relation to this incident, but none of us were involved in the actual attack.
Does I mean you're also gravely concerned about the fact that Israel has taken this very made this very big move preemptive military action. I mean you're concerned about Iran's nuclear program, You're also concerned about Israel's choice of action.
Well, I'm concerned about escalation, of course, and I'm going to speak to Prime Minister Nettaya who shortly after this interview, so obviously that'll be a topic of discussion. But I do recognize Israel's right to self defense, There's no doubt about that.
But I am very concerned about.
The escalation of this situation, which is why, along with Germany and France, were really clear that the escalation is what is needed here.
Would the UK therefore help defend Israel from Iranian attack as it has done before.
Well, this is happening in real time as we speak, and I'm not going to go into operational matters. If you'll forgive me for that, but as I say, the principle of Israel's right to self defense is absolutely clear and we stand by that. But this is a fast moving situation, as you will understand.
At the same time, we have the ongoing situation in Gaza, the suffering. They're something that you have called intolerable and appalling. Three weeks ago, you made this very strong statement with Canada and France which called for three things, for how master release the hostages, for Israel's military operations in Gaza to cease, and for Israel to let aid into Gaza in accordance with the UN, engage with the UN in it. None of those things have happened. What action will you take now, Well.
You'll have seen that we've taken action in relation to sanctions three weeks ago, but also more recently, and it is important that we consider what other options that we have.
I always think in these situations it's.
Better to act with allies, which is why we're coordinating what we're doing. But the situation in Gaza is absolutely intolerable. The aid arrangements are not adequate, nor are they going to be adequate, and so that's why we've been consistently calling for a return to the ceasefire.
Of course, the release of the hostages.
The remaining hostages have been there a very long time in awful circumstances, but we must get that aid in at speed, at volume, and the current arrangements are not going to deliver that.
And have been very clear.
In our messaging all this and our coordination all this, and our willingness to take action such as sanctioning.
Which you've already done and as I said, there's been no change to the situation. An action you could take is recognizing a Palestinian state, and President macrom is leading on a conference at the UN next week on that very subject.
Well, we got long standing policy as a Labor party is labor government that recognition should be part of a process, and so that's our approach. Precisely what's going to happen in the conference next week, I think is unclear. And obviously now the immediate issue the Israeli attack overnight, and so there are a lot of moving parts at the moment.
But the principle, the principle we've always held is that the only long term solution in relation to Palestine in the Middle East is a two state solution, and although it seems further off now than perhaps it's seen for some time, we have to be clear that is the only path through that recognition the right part of the process has always been our long standing policy.
So why would this not be the moment because the action you've taken so far has not resulted in a change on the ground, and in the West Bank there's an expansion of settlements, and there are Palestinians being expelled from their homes, and there are the extremist actions of Israeli settlers. Britain has a historic responsibility, doesn't it, And recognizing of Palestinian state was in your manifesto. Do you want to be the British Prime Minister who delivers that.
Well, we do have a special responsibility.
You're absolutely right about that and I'm clear and our manifesto was clear about our position on recognition. But it must be the appropriate part of the process that will alleviate the situation, which it doesn't exist.
At the moment. There is no peace process.
Well, that's why it must be part of the process.
Obviously, as you would expect, we are talking to ally like minded countries about this very issue, but it must be in accord with the manifesto, part of a process that leads to a.
Two state solution.
It's the outcome that matters in this hugely given the intolerable situation.
Can you see the.
Moment where you might, in fact, well, can you see the moment where you might have to do things independently of any process, because there isn't one. And indeed, the Israeli government is saying openly that it's trying to prevent the expand the establishment of a Paralestinian state through settlement expansion.
Well, that's why we're talking to international partners about what can be done, what should be done, what's the appropriate path, and we'll continue to do that.
I strongly believe that we are.
Better, more effective when we're acting with allies with others at the same time. That's why we took the approach we did on sanctions, and it's the same mindset that I bring to this.
Speaking of sanctions, let's turn to Russia. And you've worked very very hard on to to help the US administration see Ukraine slightly differently, to push them further towards a greater action on Russian and you'll be seeing President Trump at the G seven summit.
Do you understand what he is trying to do on Russia.
I am clear in my own mind that President Trump wants to bring that an end to the conflict.
I have no doubt about.
That, and we are moving closer. I hope to some sort of ceasefire, some sort of deal Ukraine. President Zelenski has been absolutely clear that he wants that unconditional cease fire. Putin, in my ivy, was dragging his heels, which is why I think it is important for us, together with others, to say it will be consequences if Russia doesn't come forward to an unconditional cease fire.
And it seemed that you had it, did seem that you had you you thought you had persuaded President Trump on that when you went to Kiev, when you and the other European leaders called him, you said, working with President Trump, we're going to ramp up sanctions, and then not thing came of it. President Trump talked tough for a while about Vladimir Putin and then stopped. So is he going to pressure mister Putin?
Well, there are discussions going on the whole time, and we're working with the Ukrainians, working with the US, as you would expect with a trusted ally in this the path to piece is rarely straightforward in any conflict. But I do believe that that is what President Trump wants. That is absolutely what the Ukrainians want peace. This is a conflict of war that's been waged on them by the aggressor, which is Russia, and so we are doing
everything we can to bring about that outcome. But as I say, the path from conflict to piece is rarely straightforward. But I'm absolutely determined that the UK will play a leading part, and I'm very pleased that the UK has seemed to be able to play that leading part in.
Resolving the conflict.
And I remind myself always that not only is this about the sovereignty of Ukraine, which of course it is, but it is also about our values in Europe, and it's also about the direct impact it has back here at home in the United Kingdom, because whether it's energy or the cost of living, familist communities, individuals in the UK have been impacted by what's happening in Ukraine, and therefore we need to redouble our efforts to bring about a lasting piece on a temporary piece, a lasting piece.
Are you saying that you do believe that President Trump will bring in sanctions on Russia, new sanctions, the kind of measure that might pressure put In to come to the negotiating table.
He said on a number of occasions that's what he will do, and we're obviously closely aligning and talking to him.
He also said he did in the war in twenty four hours.
Well, as I said, the if you look at any conflict historically, the past to piece has never been straightforward. But the determination is there, the intent is there, and I do believe we're making progress, but it must be a lasting piece.
You have led on this idea of the Coalition of the Willing and a reassurance force for postwar Ukraine. Have you got a commitment from the US that it would provide air cover for that future force to deter Russia from attacking Ukraine in the future.
Well, President Trump has clearly said he'll have our back, and I've always been clear that there must be a US element to this. But on the other hand, I do think that Europe needs to step up in its own right, in its own collective security and self defense.
And that's why, along with President macarn we have led, as it were, on the coalition of the willing, which is to go, if you like it, at the pace of those that want to go furthest rather than at the pace of those who are the most cautious, and to start some of the planning that is going to be needed. Then the further we get into the planning of what's actually going we needed in the air, in the sea, and possibly on land, the more convinced I am this is the military planning that that is planning
needs to go on now. It's planning that can't go on after the event, so that we're ready for whatever happened. Obviously, there's a lot of moving parts. There's a lot of questions that aren't answered yet, but the military planning is getting to quite an advanced stage.
Now.
Having your back, as President Trump has said, is not the same as saying I will provide US air cover. Bloomberg's been told that the US is refusing to commit to air cover for a post warforce.
Well, I'm not going to get into the private discussions that we are having, but what I would say is this that there are no two countries that act as closely together on defense, security and on intelligence sharing as the US and the UK, and that aspect of our relationship is a strong today as it's ever been, and my commitment to it is their President Trump's commitment to it is there. We've discussed it between ourselves, so that is an unshakable link between our two countries.
It does make it difficult, though, doesn't it for you to and would you be prepared to put us to put British troops on the ground as part of a post war force in Ukraine if there wasn't US air cover to protect them?
Well, I've always said there needs to be US protection. I have said we would be willing to put our troops on the ground, but there has to be that US backstock if you like.
So if it's not there, what happens to the worst or force.
We are discussing this, but I have no reason to believe that the US and the UK wouldn't act together as we'd done historically for many many years, as we are doing every single day of the week. Our teams are in constant touch with each other. As I say, we must never lose sight of the fact that the US and the UK are as close as any two countries on defense security and the intelligence that we share with each other.
There's another live bilateral issue, which is the state of your trade agreement and the hope that you will implement it in the timeframe you yourself set was two weeks, which would take us to next Wednesday. So will it be implemented in that timeframe.
We're in the final stages of implementing now. I'm very pleased that we reach that agreement. It was a huge relief to car manufacturing those working in the sector, particularly JILR workers that I went to see before we started the negotiations, and I went to see immediately after negotiations, and so this is measured in jobs protected, jobs created by this deal. We are at the implementation stage, but we're at the end of that process, and I hope that we can complete.
It pretty soon.
Now is that the same as within the two weeks by next Wednesday?
Oh, I'm hoping that we will complete it pretty soon. I mean, it's important that we do. But we're making good progress. There's nothing ex affected in the implementation and so we haven't got any hiccups or obstacles.
Why isn't it done yet?
Because there are both sides agreed, what they would do in order to implement and so we're working through what we the UK have to do, what the US is going to do so we can implement it.
That was as we envisaged not.
Long after the G seven sumit. You'll have the NATO summit coming up, and there there is a very specific new ask, which is that the US administration says is NATO itself says is to spend five percent of GDP on defense, understood to be by the year twenty thirty two, three and a half percent on core defense spending.
Will you be committing to that?
Well, let me go through what we've already committed to, which is obviously two point five percent of GDP being spent on defense by twenty twenty seven twenty eight. I think that's earlier than most people thought we would commit to, and that's the biggest sustain increase in defense spending since the Cold War. With an ambition then to go to three percent in the next Parliament set that all out alongside our Strategic Defense Review. I'd sept the proposition. I've
advanced the proposition about the importance of NATO. Our Strategic Defense Review is very much NATO first, and that all European.
Countries need to step up.
There's been a sort of criticism that Europe hasn't carried its fair share of the burden.
I think that's right.
So I've said to European allies we need to do more on spend on capability and cooperation. Obviously, the precise wording that will be agreed that NATO is still a matter of some negotiation. Well, what I'm really clear about is that NATO has been the cornerstone of our defense
for eighty plus years. It is the most important successful military alliance that's ever been and I think it's important for that summit in just over a week's time to be a real show of unity and to show our responsibility not just to reflect on the last eighty years of NATO, but to play our part in ensuring that we continue peace in Europe.
And that's all NATO, and that's the broad picture. But there is now this very specific loss and your current commitment, as your current ambition, is for three percent of GDP spent on defense by the year twenty thirty four in the next parliament. So could it be your ambition by the time of this summit to raise that to three and a half percent, because if you don't, you can't really claim to be the leading European nation in NATO.
Well, I had Mark Rotter, the Sexuary General of NATO, here in this room on Monday to discuss how together we would go into this summit. And there's still discussions going on as to price precisely what the wording of what the.
Commitment will be.
But I mean, he was very clear to me that he welcomed our uplift to two point five percent. It was very pleased that we had done that. It was very pleased with a strategic defense, It's all good.
It's just a long way from what he and the US says everyone's going.
To agree to this within weeks. Forget week, We're going to be a very difficult summit.
To NATO, not just in our troops but also our nuclear commitment to NATO. We're the only country that commits our nuclear capability to NATO. And so I think he would recognize NATO recognizes that the UK makes a huge
contribution to NATO. And I am absolutely determined that that summit in just over a week will be a huge success and an opportunity to show the strength together that we have as NATO allies, but also to send a very clear message to our adversaries, which is equally important in what is a more unstable world and I think we've seen for many, many years.
Finally, let's return to the UK and the plans that you've just set out for national renewal for a new phase of your government. There are some concerns that the growth picture is not necessarily going to with the forecast going to support your spending plans. And there is a group of people that Bloomberg have looked into company filings and they've seen that thousands of company directors have left the country, relocating out of the UK in the last year.
Is this a group of people that you can really afford to use? Don't you need to have those people here to look at the opportunities for investment?
Might you consider an investor visa?
Well, let me put this in the context because obviously, and I won't go over this at great detail, but we inherited a complete mess at the election. Almost everything was broken, the economy, public services, you name it. We had to take difficult but right decisions in the budget, and that, if you like, was year one of this labor government, which was clear up the mess, take the
difficult but necessary decisions. We're now very clearly moving into sort of phase two, which is what the spending Review ushers in, which is being clear what's the benefit from this, what's the yield?
Where are you putting your money?
And I'm really proud that we're rolling out a program of real labor values in terms of investment, whether that's things like say as well.
So might investors be part of it? It's just like, is it something you're considering.
I want more investors to come into the country. I want top talent to come into the country. But I would just push back a little because we've had record investment into the UK since the last election. We've just had London Tech Week where we had some of the most forward leading investment investors and tech companies absolutely singing the praises of the UK and why now is the right time to invest in them.
Is also lost about a quarter of a million jobs since since the autumn, so it's not all as rosy as we actually.
I mean five hundred thousand more people in work than at the date of the last election, and the.
Actual since since you raise taxes in the in the autumn. This is the Bloomberg analysis that a quarter of a million jobs have been lost.
If he looked at the number of people in work, it is five hundred thousand more than it was. If you look at the commitment and spending Defense Strategic Review, there's thirty thousand jobs in nuclear submarines size well that we announced earlier this week, there's ten thousand jobs. And my job is to make sure that good and well paid, secure jobs are there and to attract that investment and
for international investment. I do think this is a really important point and Bloomberg will understand this almost better than anyone. Those global investors have a choice as to which country they put their money in. They chose not to put their money into the UK for many years before the election. Now we've had record inward investment. That is because they've got confidence in what we're doing. They're putting their money in, and that to me speaks volume.
Final thought, is President Trump coming in September for his state visit.
Oh, he'll be coming in obviously, the Palace will all organize the dates.
But President Trump will be coming for his state visit and in the autumn, and that is really good well, the Palace will do it.
But it is here.
Well I hope so yes, But as I say, i'll leave it, I want to take over the job of the Palace. It's their job to set out exactly the dates of the invitation. But I'm really pleased that we will be able to showcase the close relationship we have between the UK and the US. That's historically a close relationship, and this will be a historic second visit for President Trump and we're all looking forward to welcoming him here.
Prime Minister, thank you very much.
Thank you.