Epstein Saga Hits Starmer Hard, But He Should Not Resign – OpEd

By Mohamed Chebaro

One could easily ask: Why the fuss about the Epstein files and the calls for UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to resign for his appointment of the colorful politician Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to the US, despite his clear links to the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein?

Is it a storm in a teacup stirred up by the opposition parties, mainly the Conservatives and Reform UK? Or is it a clear failure by Starmer and his team, who prided themselves on running for office on tight parameters surrounding integrity in politics? Or has it been stirred by the left wing of the Labour Party? Or is it an excuse for attempting to depose Starmer for his poor performance as prime minister, 18 months since he took office. He has been accused of treading too carefully and not being radical enough on many complex files and in his efforts to reboot the broken Britain he inherited.

The saga of late US sex offender Epstein, who is accused of the sex trafficking of underage girls to a wide-ranging elite, has been delivering tornado-like storms, upending politics in various parts of the world — and Britain is no exception. The choice of Mandelson to be ambassador to the US, while knowing that he was a friend of the convicted sex abuser, was an error of judgment and two of Starmer’s closest aides this week stepped aside for advising the PM to appoint him.

Everyone in Britain knows what a controversial politician Mandelson has been, but what is causing the fury is what has been seeping out of the Epstein files, particularly Mandelson’s sharing of sensitive government files with him in 2009. Similar accusations have been leveled at Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former prince and brother of King Charles, who is alleged to have shared with Epstein official British trade documents in 2010, leaking information ​from his then-official role as a UK government envoy.

The actions of both Mountbatten-Windsor and Mandelson are being investigated by the police and maybe it should remain a matter for them to investigate, including shedding light on Epstein’s dealings and who he might have reported to.

I find it ironic that some people — including Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar — are calling for Starmer to resign when the issue goes beyond him and his appointment of a political personality known for his ties to Epstein. It extends to some influential political circles that made Mandelson an ideal pick to represent the UK in Washington, specifically because he was a veteran operative, familiar with the machinery and contacts deemed important to represent the UK and smooth its interests during the era of Donald Trump and all its controversies and uncertainties.

If anything, Starmer’s appointment of Mandelson should be seen as one that helped shield the country from Trump’s tariffs and his arbitrary decisions. Yes, Mandelson might have had a tarnished reputation and been a controversial politician — and the revelations about him that have just come out are damning — but that does not warrant the ousting of Starmer. Many other issues could lead to Starmer’s ouster, especially his government’s lack of direction, but not his political integrity, even if there was a failure in this case.

What is even more bizarre is the fact that the Epstein files have suddenly become a political football and a means to settle scores, when they should be about looking more deeply at politics and the normalization of the seedy playgrounds of the rich and powerful, from politics to finance.

The collusion of money and politics is as old as the state and society. And with it comes exploitation and abuse for the entertainment of the entitled. And it is not strange for executives to yearn to join influential clubs similar to Epstein’s. Those elitist gatherings, with their many shady activities, have been the envy of everyone in politics, finance and influential circles of any sort. Not everyone who frequented them was a pervert or sex offender, but for sure those events were a means to advance political and financial power, as the Epstein files have revealed.

Transparency International has warned that the world stands at the beginning of a new and dangerous era, in which big money dominates in a way that corrodes politics. Though the anticorruption institution focused on the US in its warning, one could not fail to see that bankers and politicians became too friendly in the 1990s and after the financial crisis of 2008. Though those powerful players were humbled, the setback was only short-lived, as politicians everywhere have become more and more at the mercy of corporations and tech giants, with these entrepreneurs’ front-row attendance at Trump’s inauguration standing witness to this if anyone was in any doubt.

The Epstein saga must educate us that the world’s richest and most powerful people will always bend the rules. But what is at stake is even greater, as the public is slowly losing all trust in politicians and institutions. As a result, the social contract between the rulers and the ruled is changing, with implications for states and societies alike.

I am not sure removing Starmer would boost Britain’s interests or clean up its politics. A better conversation would be to find avenues to prevent collusion between politicians and bankers, while finding the means to prevent more Epstein sagas in the future. A clearer line needs to be drawn between public service and the private sector, with its many limitless and unscrupulous temptations.

• Mohamed Chebaro is a British-Lebanese journalist with more than 25 years’ experience covering war, terrorism, defense, current affairs and diplomacy.