I’ll just copy and paste a line that I wrote a few weeks ago, ‘perhaps, by the time you read this, Sir Keir will already have resigned’. Does it remind you of anything? Remember the endless rumours of Boris Johnson’s - or even Theresa May’s - early departure from office? It’s all very well, it’s rich meat for the media and cringingly absorbing - but it’s dreadful for the country and masks a much deeper crisis.

Certainly, the Mandelson soap opera will be the catalyst of Sir Keir’s downfall, but not quite yet I suspect. Next week the trial starts of three young men who are alleged to have set fire to a car and a house belonging to Sir Keir. The details could require explanations from the PM, but it’ll be months before we get a verdict. Meanwhile, any new leader of the Labour Party will want the current incumbent to carry the can for the probably disastrous elections in May. So, I reckon he’s secure for the next few weeks.

Meanwhile, we’ll drool and leer at his agony like a Roman crowd watching the spectacle of a gladiator’s death, all the while distracted from an impending disaster expressed by the wrath of Lord Robertson. You’ll recall that he was Labour’s clever, defence secretary and a highly successful General Secretary of NATO who, just before the latest episode of Prince of Darkness Season 2, accused the government of ‘corrosive complacency’.

That complacency, of course, referred to the state of Britain’s defences. The safety of the people must be any government’s first and sacred duty and the fact that Lord Robertson was pointing an enraged finger at his own tribe mustn’t ignore the Tories’ decade and a half of wanton negligence. Worse still, Johnson and Starmer have allowed more rust and decay of our shield in time of war. It’s one thing to say that muscular, well prepared forces will deter, but when that fails and blood flows, incomprehensible decisions by successive governments cease to be neglectful and become treasonous.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer outside 10 Downing Street. PIC: Jordan Pettitt/PA Wire

placeholder image — Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer outside 10 Downing Street. PIC: Jordan Pettitt/PA Wire

Now, some say that the PM’s handling of Lord Mandelson’s security vetting as he took over as our ambassador in Washington was incompetent, mendacious or a combination of both. Perhaps, but I wonder if our leader has used all his lawyerly wiles simply to ignore issues that are uncomfortable and which could lead to very difficult questions? If Nelson used his blind eye to steer his fleet towards glory, Starmer’s tin ear will steer his government into the gutter.

And I have no doubt that Lord Nelson would be as angry about the state of our navy and defences as Lord Robertson is. That rage has been brought into sharper focus by the antics of Downing Street over the last few weeks.

First came the swerving over the deployment of a warship to defend our bases on Cyprus. The government’s indecision reeked: in agonies of caution they feared that clear support for President Trump and Israel would alienate great swathes of their voters.

Then the same reasons caused a dreadful dither about British bases being used by the Americans for operations against Iran. Eventually Sir Keir acquiesced, but with careful, weasel words saying that he would only allow use of our airfields for defensive strikes. Then he ducked and weaved even more saying that Britain would not support the bombing of Iran’s bridges, power stations and other infrastructure. It was shaming.

But the most pitiful example came after the Defence Secretary said that the Royal Navy was now "ready to act" by boarding and detaining ships from Russia's shadow fleet detected in UK waters. The PM bellowed that he would deprive “Putin's war machine of the dirty profits that fund his barbaric campaign".

Yet, when two tankers escorted by one of Moscow’s frigates recently passed through The Channel, beyond sending a naval logistics ship to keep a timorous eye on things, Britain’s threats proved utterly hollow. It doesn’t matter whether we have enough warships: even if we had Sir Keir wouldn’t dare use them.

President Putin’s watching these shenanigans as well as the unexpectedly long time that it’s taking Washington to humble Tehran. He’ll have seen that other, European countries refused to help America and he’ll have read the numerous, Western articles which foretell NATO’s imminent collapse.

Such a disaster may be some way off, but there’s no doubt that Britain has exposed a huge lack of military ability and political resolve to our foes. It has to be asked, then, why the MoD is trumpeting the 120,000 drones that we’re sending to Ukraine? There’s even some suggestion that these weapons have already been used to devastate Russian oil facilities.

Now, I thought that we weren’t directly involved in this misbegotten campaign. I thought that one of the principles of proxy warfare was deniability. Using our weapons and intelligence to attack Moscow’s men on Ukrainian soil might be a chance worth taking, but lobbing them deep into Russia certainly isn’t. That’s a naked act of undeclared war.

Britain can no longer expect to cower under America’s military umbrella and in its absence NATO is as weak and inexperienced as Russia’s emboldened and battle hardened. President Putin understands our vulnerability, but must be confused by the way we, on the one hand, cravenly let his ships pass whilst, on the other, brazenly assault his heartland. Without Uncle Sam’s protection how long can it be before the Russians attack the source of the drones that so bedevil them?

Such a cataclysm would make the Mandelson business look like a stroll in the park.

Patrick Mercer is a former MP for Newark and Army Colonel.