JD Vance, unveiled last night as Donald Trump’s pick for vice-president, has claimed that Britain is ‘the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon’. Vance made the comments at a National Conservatism Conference in Washington on Thursday. This is what he had to say: ‘I was talking with a friend recently. And we were talking about one of the big dangers in the world, of course, is nuclear proliferation…And I was talking about, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon and we were like, maybe it’s Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts. And then we sort of finally decided maybe it’s actually the UK, since Labour just took over.’
It is not hard to imagine what Rayner would have said about such comments if Labour were still in opposition
It has been suggested that the remarks were made jokingly and not meant as a prediction. Maybe, maybe not. Even so, the actual comments are outrageous and nothing short of blatant prejudice. Surely the government would not allow Vance to get away with promulgating such nonsense? Yet what we heard in response was not quite that.
Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, was quick to say on TV this morning that Vance was wrong about the UK. But, when asked how she felt about his description of Labour, she replied that Vance ‘had said quite a lot of ‘fruity’ things in the past but that she did not ‘recognise that characterisation’ of the UK. She went on:
‘I think political leaders across the world all have different opinions, but we govern in the interests of our countries. The US is a key ally of ours. If the American people decide who their president and vice-president is, the man we will work with them… that’s grown-up politics.’
VP Nominee Vance has some interesting views on the UK: pic.twitter.com/bKkxRsD3mC
— Reformer (@60sJapanfan) July 15, 2024
It is not hard to imagine what Rayner would have said about such comments if Labour were still in opposition and a Tory minister had refused to explicitly condemn Vance. There was also a deafening silence from the usually garrulous David Lammy, the foreign secretary, whose job it is to manage future relations with Washington. He has previously referred to Vance, as ‘my friend’. Lammy praised Vance’s memoir about growing up poor, Hillbilly Elegy (‘These are themes in my own political story,’ Lammy told Politico) and met the Ohio senator in May on a trip to Washington. The foreign secretary has, in the past, been quick to take to social media to condemn prejudice from every quarter. Will he do so now? No one should hold their breath.
Instead it has fallen to the Tories to speak out in plain language against Vance’s ill-informed comments and even defend the Labour party in doing so. Andrew Bowie, the Conservatives’s shadow veterans minister, dismissed the notion that Labour was creating an Islamist country. He told Times Radio:
‘I disagree with the Labour party fundamentally on many issues, but I do not agree with that view, quite frankly. I actually think it’s quite offensive, frankly, to my colleagues in the Labour party.’
Why does all this matter? First, it highlights some of the problems the government will face in managing relations with Washington if Trump does indeed win the election in November. Second, Labour already has problems with Muslim supporters of the party, alienated by its stance on the Israel-Hamas war: it will not escape their attention that the Tories used much more robust language to dismiss Vance’s claims. The government is in a difficult position. It no longer has the luxury of being in opposition and must now engage in ‘grown-up’ politics. Welcome to the real world.
Comments