Mandelson
Became Britain’s Ambassador to U.S. Despite Failing Security Vetting
Britain’s
foreign office overruled vetting officials in granting Peter Mandelson, a
friend of Jeffrey Epstein, the highest level of security clearance, the
government said.
Michael
D. Shear
By
Michael D. Shear
Reporting
from London
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/16/world/europe/peter-mandelson-epstein-starmer-security.html
April 16,
2026
British
vetting officials recommended against granting top level security clearances to
Peter Mandelson before he became ambassador to the United States last year, but
were overruled by Britain’s foreign office, 10 Downing Street said on Thursday.
In a
statement, the office of Britain’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, said that
neither the prime minister nor any government minister knew until this week
that the foreign office had given Mr. Mandelson “developed vetting” — the
highest level of security clearance in Britain — against the advice of the
formal security vetting team.
Mr.
Mandelson was fired last September from his post as Britain’s top diplomat in
America after leaked emails revealed Mr. Mandelson’s deep and enduring
friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender.
A series
of revelations about Mr. Mandelson have rocked Mr. Starmer’s government for
months, with political opponents and allies saying that the prime minister
exercised poor judgment in choosing him in the first place. The scandal has
contributed to Mr. Starmer’s record low approval ratings.
The news
about the security vetting was first reported by The Guardian. It instantly
renewed political attacks against Mr. Starmer just weeks before his Labour
Party is expected to suffer significant losses in local elections next month.
The prime
minister previously told lawmakers that “full due process” was followed in Mr.
Mandelson’s case. He added then that it was clear the process was not rigorous
enough and said the current process of vetting prospective appointees had been
strengthened.
Kemi
Badenoch, the leader of the opposition Conservative Party, accused Mr. Starmer
of misleading Parliament in his previous statements, and demanded his
resignation.
“In these
dangerous times, Britain cannot afford to have a Prime Minister who the country
doesn’t trust,” she wrote on social media. “Starmer has betrayed our national
security. He should go.”
Ed Davey,
the leader of the Liberal Democrat Party, said that “if Keir Starmer has misled
Parliament and lied to the British people, he has to go.”
The
Guardian reported that officials at U.K. Security Vetting made the initial
recommendation to deny Mr. Mandelson the top level of security clearance in
late January 2025.
Mr.
Starmer had publicly announced his intention to make Mr. Mandelson the
ambassador the previous month. The paper said that put pressure on the foreign
office, which overruled the vetting officials.
The
statement by Mr. Starmer’s office on Thursday pointed the blame squarely at the
foreign office, which is staffed largely by career civil servants and led by a
senior government minister. The Guardian story did not say who inside the
foreign office made the decision to overrule the vetting office recommendation.
David
Lammy, who currently serves as justice minister and deputy prime minister, was
the foreign secretary when the decision on Mr. Mandelson’s clearances was made.
By saying
that no government minister was aware of the situation, the statement appeared
to suggest that Mr. Lammy did not know about the decision made by the
department he led.
“Once the
prime minister was informed he immediately instructed officials to establish
the facts about why the Developed Vetting was granted, in order to enact plans
to update the House of Commons,” the statement said.
Mr.
Mandelson was arrested in February and then released over accusations that he
had passed on confidential government information to Mr. Epstein in the late
2000s. He remains under investigation but has not been charged with a crime and
has denied any criminal wrongdoing.
The new
questions about Mr. Mandelson’s security clearance will put intense pressure on
the prime minister to swiftly address the issue in front of members of
Parliament. In February, lawmakers voted to require that Mr. Starmer’s
government hand over all documents related to Mr. Mandelson’s appointment.
The first
tranche of those documents, released in March, revealed that Mr. Starmer had
been warned by political advisers that making Mr. Mandelson his ambassador
carried “general reputational risk” because of Mr. Mandelson’s ties to Mr.
Epstein.
Michael
D. Shear is the chief U.K. correspondent for The New York Times, covering
British politics and culture and diplomacy around the world.


Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário