Peter Mandelson's appointment as British ambassador to Washington has been called into question by the former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, Richard Dearlove. In a scathing critique, Dearlove argues that the Foreign Office should have intervened to stop what he describes as a deeply flawed appointment, warning that the political fallout could cost Prime Minister Keir Starmer his job.
Security Vetting Concerns
Dearlove explains that the role of British ambassador in Washington requires a developed vetting certificate (DV), which demands the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and transparency. He notes that Mandelson's appointment was announced before he was vetted, without any qualification that it would be subject to security clearance. The cabinet secretary had alerted the prime minister to this risk, but the appointment proceeded regardless.
Mandelson's Background
Dearlove points to Mandelson's professional history, which includes ministerial resignation scandals, dealings with Russian tycoon Oleg Deripaska, entanglements with Chinese figures, and a known relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. These factors, he argues, should have disqualified Mandelson from consideration for a high-profile DV post from the start.
Political Misjudgment
Dearlove suggests that Prime Minister Starmer, in his enthusiasm to appoint New Labour's 'uber fixer' as his Trump whisperer, failed to account for the inherent risks. The decision to appoint Mandelson was further called into question when vetters recommended against granting the DV, but the new Foreign Office permanent secretary, Olly Robbins, chose not to oppose the appointment, deciding instead that the risk could be managed.
Fallout and Consequences
Dearlove criticizes Robbins for not unloading the problem onto his political masters, noting that this was a misjudgment that could prove career-ending. The political wrecking ball set swinging by these events has demolished the Mandelson edifice, but Dearlove warns that Starmer's house is also tottering on shallow foundations. He concludes that the political fallout is going to be profound and that the prime minister's judgment has been called into question.
