Become an Independent member to bookmark this article Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Membership today. Join today Already a member? Log in Defence Secretary Wes Streeting accused Iran of “bare-faced cheek” after Tehran branded the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force terrorist organisations. The Iranian action, which also included labelling MI6 a “hostile group” came in response to the British decision to outlaw support for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
Responding to Tehran’s move, Mr Streeting said Iran had a record of state-sponsored terrorism. Defence Secretary Wes Streeting accused Iran of bare-faced cheek after Tehran branded the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force terrorist organisations. Speaking at a press conference in Berlin he said: “The charge levelled at the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force by Iran doesn’t really dignify a response, except to say that I’m minded to take the press clippings and put them up in my downstairs toilet as a trophy.
“More seriously, I think Iran has some bare-faced cheek, given the extent to which they fuel regional instability, the way in which they engage in state-sponsored acts of terrorism. “We’re mindful of the incident at RAF Fairford. “And frankly, in terms of the threats coming from Tehran, we saw in the immediate aftermath of the outbreak of conflict between the United States and Iran just how quickly Iran engaged in strikes against its neighbouring countries who had nothing to do with US combat operations.” open image in gallery Iran has been accused of being behind a security incident at the US base at RAF Fairford (Ben Birchall/PA) ( PA Wire ) He said the UK had maintained diplomatic channels with Iran and was working towards de-escalation in the Middle East.
Left out here: Drops what it reported before
The article quotes Streeting on 'the incident at RAF Fairford' and on Iran striking countries 'who had nothing to do with US combat operations'. It never says that RAF Fairford was the base US bombers used to strike Iran. The Independent itself reported this in October. Without it a reader believes Britain played no part in the strikes on Iran and that Iran's hostility to UK forces has no stated cause.
“We have always tried to point Iran towards the diplomatic alternative that exists, and we’ll continue to do so,” the Defence Secretary said. The foreign ministry in Tehran announced the designations for the RAF, Royal Navy and Secret Intelligence Service on Sunday “in response to the British government’s hostile actions against the Islamic Republic of Iran”. “The British government shall bear responsibility for their consequences,” the foreign ministry said.
The Independent runs a PA report built almost entirely on Defence Secretary Wes Streeting's attacks on Iran, with Iran given two closing sentences. In its own voice it gives the IRGC ban as the sole reason for Iran's designations. It leaves out that Iran's foreign ministry also cited Britain's provision of bases for the US-Israeli war on Iran, and that RAF Fairford was used by US bombers, a fact the outlet reported before.
Leaves out what changes the picture
Serious
“came in response to the British decision to outlaw support for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps”
Why this matters
In its own voice The Independent gives the IRGC ban as the one reason for Iran's designations.
The impression it gives
Iran's move was a simple tit-for-tat over the IRGC ban, with no connection to any British role in military action against Iran.
The context
Iran's foreign ministry statement first cited Britain's involvement in the war on Iran through providing military bases on British territory, and only then the IRGC decision. US bombers used RAF Fairford to strike Iran. The outlet's own earlier reporting said Fairford was used by US bombers.
“I think Iran has some bare-faced cheek, given the extent to which they fuel regional instability, the way in which they engage in state-sponsored acts of terrorism”
Why this matters
The Independent gives Streeting nine sentences of quotes and paraphrase, including this charge of state-sponsored terrorism. Iran's foreign ministry appears only in two short closing lines.
The impression it gives
Streeting's account of Iran as a sponsor of terrorism and regional instability is the main substance of the story.
The context
Iran's stated case, that Britain took part in the war against Iran by providing bases, was available and reported elsewhere, yet it gets no space here.
The article quotes Streeting on 'the incident at RAF Fairford' and on Iran striking countries 'who had nothing to do with US combat operations'. It never says that RAF Fairford was the base US bombers used to strike Iran. The Independent itself reported this in October. Without it a reader believes Britain played no part in the strikes on Iran and that Iran's hostility to UK forces has no stated cause.