Starmer has a tougher world to contend with than Blair

Labour's top team has been cultivating relations with allies, but times are more uncertain than when the party was last in power, says Kim Sengupta - and our military is diminished

- Kim Sengupta

When Tony Blair won the 1997 election for Labour with a landslide Commons majority of 179 seats, the world was largely at peace. New vistas in international relations had opened up following the end of the Cold War, pointing the way to a stable international order: there was talk of Russia joining Nato, the PM went to St Petersburg, and Vladimir Putin chose Britain for his first official visit to the West.

Blair, who had been a leftist in his youth and had taken part in CND marches, proved in office to be a great believer in the use of armed force. He sent British troops to war five times in six years, more than any previous prime minister. Most of these wars of liberal intervention – in East Timor, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan part one – were outwardly successful; but then came the Iraq conflict, the fallout from which still shrouds his legacy.

Keir Starmer, with a Commons majority of 174, brings Labour back to power at a perilous time, with bloody conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, China threatening to invade Taiwan, and constant cyberattacks being carried out by Russia, Iran and North Korea.

Labour’s campaign repeatedly emphasised its commitment to national security. Starmer pledged to keep Trident as part of a “nuclear deterrent triple lock”; to place Nato at the centre of military strategy; to continue to provide Ukraine with armed support; and to boost defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP once the economy allows. Labour says this shows how far the party has moved on from the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, who opposed maintaining Trident and was frequently critical of Nato.