Ex-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn launches new UK political party
In announcement, Corbyn and Sultana called for a “mass redistribution of wealth and power,” said they would “keep demanding an end to all arms sales to Israel”
Updated 24 July 2025
AFP
LONDON: Former leftist Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn announced Thursday he was forming a new political party alongside another ex-member of Britain’s ruling party, as the UK’s political landscape continues to splinter.
Corbyn, who lost two elections as Labour leader in 2017 and 2019, and fellow independent MP Zarah Sultana referred to the new left-wing outfit as “Your Party,” but later said its name still had to be decided.
“It’s time for a new kind of political party. One that is rooted in our communities, trade unions and social movements,” they said in a joint statement.
In their announcement, they called for a “mass redistribution of wealth and power” and said they would “keep demanding an end to all arms sales to Israel.”
They also committed to a “free and independent Palestine.”
Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has pulled Labour to the center since succeeding Corbyn as leader, faces growing calls within his party to recognize a Palestinian state.
Corbyn, 76, stepped down as Labour leader after overseeing its worst result in decades, when it was trounced in the 2019 general election by the Conservatives, then led by Boris Johnson.
Labour under Starmer suspended him in 2020 after he refused to fully accept the findings of a rights watchdog’s probe into claims that anti-Semitism had become rampant within Labour’s ranks under his leadership.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission ruled the party had broken equality law when Corbyn was in charge.
Corbyn said anti-Semitism had been “dramatically overstated for political reasons.”
Last year Corbyn announced he would stand as an independent in the July 2024 general election after Labour failed to put him forward as a candidate.
He was expelled from the party but still went on to win comfortably his Islington North seat in London, which he has represented for more than 40 years.
Sultana, an MP since 2019, was suspended by Labour last year after she and several other members of parliament voted to scrap a controversial cap on child benefits.
While it remains to be seen whether the new movement will take off, its formation appears to confirm a trend in British politics toward a multi-party system.
British politics has long been dominated by Labour and the Conservatives, but three other parties are challenging that order.
The center-left Liberal Democrats won 72 seats in the 650-seat parliament in July 2024, while Nigel Farage’s anti-immigrant Reform UK party won about 14 percent of the vote.
It picked up five seats, an unprecedented breakthrough for a hard-right party in Britain.
Farage’s Euroskeptics swept dozens of council and mayoral seats in local elections in May and are leading national opinion polls, although the next general election is not expected until 2029.
While Reform are picking up support on the right, Labour is also losing votes to the Greens on the left.
Starmer, a former chief state prosecutor who is seen as too right-wing for some left-wingers in his party, recently suspended four lawmakers who rebelled over his attempts at reforming welfare.
They currently sit as independents and Westminster watchers will be keeping a close eye on whether they are tempted to join Corbyn’s new party.
“I do think there is space for a left-wing populist party in the UK with a charismatic leader that could pose an enormous threat to Labour and the other parties, but it’s going to take a lot to convince me that Jeremy Corbyn can be it,” Chris Hopkins, political research director at polling firm Savanta, told AFP.
US House of Representatives passes war powers resolution backing Trump’s attacks on Iran
It’s the second vote in as many days, after the Senate defeated a similar measure
Republicans largely back Trump, and most Democrats oppose the war
Updated 2 min 30 sec ago
AP
WASHINGTON: The House narrowly rejected a war powers resolution Thursday to halt President Donald Trump’s attacks on Iran, an early sign of unease in Congress over the rapidly widening conflict that is reordering US priorities at home and abroad. It’s the second vote in as many days, after the Senate defeated a similar measure. Lawmakers are confronting the sudden reality of representing wary Americans in wartime and all that entails — with lives lost, dollars spent and alliances tested by a president’s unilateral decision to go to war with Iran. While the tally in the House, 212-219, was expected to be tight, the outcome provided a clarifying snapshot of political support for, and opposition to, the US-Israel military operation and Trump’s rationale for bypassing Congress, which alone has the power to declare war. At the Capitol, the conflict has quickly carried echoes of the long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and many Sept. 11-era veterans now serve in Congress. “Donald Trump is not a king, and if he believes the war with Iran is in our national interest, then he must come to Congress and make the case,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. House Speaker Mike Johnson warned that it would be “dangerous” to limit the president’s authority while the US military is already in conflict. “We are not at war,” said Johnson, R-Louisiana, a close ally of Trump, contradicting others. He said the operation is limited in scope and duration, and the “mission is nearly accomplished.” Republicans largely back Trump, and most Democrats oppose the war Trump’s Republican Party, which narrowly controls the House and Senate, largely sees the conflict with Iran not as the start of a new war, but the end of a government that has long menaced the West. The operation has killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which some view as an opportunity for regime change, though others warn of a chaotic power vacuum. Republican Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, publicly thanked Trump for taking action against Iran, saying the president is using his own constitutional authority to defend the US against the “imminent threat” the country posed. Mast, an Army veteran who worked as a bomb disposal expert in Afghanistan, said the war powers resolution was effectively asking “that the president do nothing.” For Democrats, Trump’s attack on Iran, influenced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is a war of choice that is testing the balance of powers in the Constitution. “The framers weren’t fooling around,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., arguing that the Constitution is clear that only Congress can decide matters of war. “It’s up to us.” Crossover coalitions emerged among those in Congress. Two Republicans joined most Democrats in voting for the war powers resolution, while four Democrats joined Republicans to reject it. The war powers resolution, if signed into law, would have immediately halted Trump’s ability to conduct the war unless Congress approved the military action. The president would likely veto it. Trump officials provide shifting rationale for war Trump has scrambled to win support for the nearly week-old conflict as Americans of all political persuasions take stock. Administration officials spent hours behind closed doors on Capitol Hill this week trying to reassure lawmakers that they have the situation under control. Six US military members were killed over the weekend in a drone strike in Kuwait, and Trump has said more Americans could die. Thousands of Americans abroad have scrambled for flights, many lighting up phone lines at congressional offices as they sought help trying to flee the Middle East. Trump said Thursday he must be involved in choosing Iran’s new leader. Yet Johnson, R-Louisiana, said this week that America has enough problems at home and is not about to be in the “nation-building business.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the war could extend eight weeks, twice as long as the president first estimated. Trump has left open the possibility of sending US troops into what has largely been a bombing campaign. More than 1,230 people in Iran have died. The administration said the goal is to destroy Iran’s ballistic missiles that it believes are shielding its nuclear program. It has also said Israel was ready to act, and American bases would face retaliation if the US did not strike Iran first. The US said Wednesday it torpedoed an Iranian warship near Sri Lanka. “This administration can’t even give us a straight answer of as to why we launched this preemptive war,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, the Republican from Kentucky, an outlier in his party. Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who had teamed up to force the release the Jeffrey Epstein files, also pushed the war powers resolution to the floor, past objections from Johnson’s GOP leadership. Republican Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio, a former Army Ranger, also voted for it. Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, Greg Landsman of Ohio and Juan Vargas of California voted against. “Congress must stand with the president to finally close, once and for all, this dark chapter of history,” said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas. Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Arizona, said that as the daughter of Iranian immigrants who fled their homeland, she opposes the regime but is concerned that a democratic transition for the people of Iran never seems to a priority for Trump or the officials who briefed Congress. “War carries profound and deadly consequences for our troops, for the American people and for the entire world,” she said. “It’s the most serious decision that a nation can make.” Other Democrats have proposed an alternative resolution that would allow the president to continue the war for 30 days before he must seek congressional approval. The House also approved a separate measure affirming that Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism. Senators sit in their desks for solemn vote In the Senate, Republican leaders have successfully, though narrowly, defeated a series of war powers resolutions pertaining to several other conflicts during Trump’s second term. This one, however, was different. Underscoring the gravity Wednesday, Democratic senators sat at their desks as the voting got underway. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that every senator will pick a side. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East?” he asked. Or with Trump and Hegseth “as they bumble us headfirst into another war?” Sen. John Barrasso, second in Senate Republican leadership, said, “Democrats would rather obstruct Donald Trump than obliterate Iran’s national nuclear program.” The legislation failed on a 47-53 tally mostly along party lines, with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, in favor and Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, against.
