Write to letters@thetimes.co.uk

Sir, You say Britain should be “stepping up” in this campaign against Iran (leading article, Mar 3). However, you provide an interpretation of its aims that is far clearer than the US administration has managed. President Trump has not troubled to set out a clear strategy: encouraging popular revolt and degrading military capabilities imply very different paths. Binyamin Netanyahu alone has been consistent, advocating the most expansive course. Above all, this war will not be conducted on terms the UK can influence. Absent an attainable objective, British participation would amount to little more than theatre. Parliament should insist on clarity before assent.
Terence Sinclair
Cambridge

Sir, For the first time I totally disagree with one of your editorials, which states that the UK should join the war alongside the Americans. To keep the UK out of this conflict is the bravest, strongest act by Sir Keir Starmer in this parliament. The Iranian regime without doubt is odious but this war is doomed to fail, just like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is not supported by the majority of Americans and will cost billions of dollars and many lives. At least the prime minister has learnt the lessons of history — unlike his counterpart in the White House.
Dr Susan Kempson
Haddington, East Lothian

Sir, The leadership of Iran continues openly to declare its objective: the destruction of Israel. This is accompanied by material support for proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah, the expansion of ballistic missile capabilities and persistent nuclear advancement. What response is expected of Israel? To dismiss explicit threats as rhetoric? To rely on deterrence alone while those threats edge closer to capability? For Jews, history renders such complacency untenable. The Holocaust was not preceded by silence but by declared intent that too many preferred to discount. Prudence, not aggression, dictates that existential warnings be taken seriously.
David Collins
Tel Aviv

Sir, Keir Starmer’s prevarication over supporting the United States and Israel was nothing short of pathetic. No one was asking for a legal opinion on the rights and wrongs of military action, just an announcement that the United Kingdom stood alongside its allies. In leading this country Starmer should act more like a politician and less like a lawyer.
John Belton
Marlow, Bucks

Sir, Lord Hermer and Sir Keir Starmer seem obsessed with “international law”, which has imperilled our relationship with our greatest ally (“Nobody is buying Starmer’s lawyerly cop-out”, Melanie Phillips, Mar 3). They ought to focus on UK law to ban the Al Quds march that attracts people who blatantly demonstrate support for Britain’s enemies.
Dr Danny Pine
London NW3

Sir, Keir Starmer has prevaricated and then issued caveats over the use of US bases in Britain and British territories. By doing so he has undermined the reasoning that the US has no need to annex Greenland. President Trump can seize on the argument that this is precisely why he needs complete control over Greenland as the US use of a military base thereon could be compromised by Denmark. As usual Starmer’s instinct is to miss the wider picture and unintended consequences, which is what has led to his innumerable policy reversals.
Michael Roberts
Sutton Coldfield, W Midlands

Sir, As always Max Hastings brings experience, knowledge and wisdom to the latest war (“Tell us, Trump, how this Iran operation ends”, comment, Mar 2; letters, Mar 3). The answer to the question posed in the headline to his article might in the past have been two simple letters: UN. It is telling and hugely unfortunate that they do not even feature in a serious examination of the present situation.
Ian Ross
Worlebury, Somerset

Asylum reform

Sir, Your leading article (“Hard Results”, Mar 3) is right that results are what will restore public confidence in the asylum system. Too many policies have been driven by tough talk rather than smart action. That said, shortening refugee status from five years to two and a half risks bureaucratic chaos. Granting protection for shorter periods will require repeated reviews of people already recognised as refugees, significantly increasing the caseload for a Home Office that already struggles with the quality of its initial decisions (nearly half of refusals heard at appeal are overturned).

The public want a functioning asylum system that makes fair and fast decisions: one that helps those recognised as refugees to rebuild their lives and contribute to the UK, and allows those with no right to be here to be returned with dignity. Few want to see refugee families who have made a home here, worked and paid taxes here, with children born and educated here, having their lives uprooted again.
Imran Hussain
Refugee Council

MPs’ hefty pay rise

Sir, As you report (news, Mar 3), MPs’ pay is to rise from £94,000 to £110,000, a rise of almost 20 per cent over three years. Given that earning over £100,000 means that MPs will gradually lose their £12,570 tax-free personal allowance and in effect pay a tax rate of 60 per cent on income between £100,000 and £125,140, I wonder how long it will be before the chancellor changes this pay threshold to pacify moaning backbenchers who wish to avoid this unfair tax trap? I suspect not long: self-interest will prove a speedy motivator.
Richard Childs
Uckfield, E Sussex

Sir, You report that MPs’ salaries are to be increased by an inflation-busting amount, partly because of the abuse MPs receive. Does the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, which sets MP’s salaries, really think this pay rise will make us love MPs more? It’s hard to think of a more effective way to make matters worse.
Don Sparks
Shirley, Croydon

Special relationship

Sir, The so-called special relationship between the US and UK never really existed except in the minds of British politicians such as Winston Churchill and, more recently, Boris Johnson (“Special relationship ‘not what it was’, as Trump rebukes PM on Iran”, Mar 3). At the start of the Second World War the US remained neutral until attacked by the Japanese in 1941. It was only because Hitler then decided to declare war on the US that the mythical special relationship materialised. More recently, President Trump has supported Putin against Ukraine, as witnessed in the appalling bullying of President Zelensky at the White House. The sooner we realise that the special relationship is a myth, the better.
Jeffrey Davis
Ret’d head of history, Roedean School; Rotherfield, E Sussex

Rising energy bills

Sir, With the predictable detrimental effects on both the availability and price of oil and gas caused by the US and Israeli attack on Iran, it is time for Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, to focus on energy security (“Energy bills will surge if strikes choke off supply”, Mar 3). Net zero would be nice to have but must now take a back seat. Miliband must reverse his aversion to home-produced oil and gas, whether onshore or offshore. We cannot continue to depend on foreign supply of these or his cherished wind turbines and solar panels.
Ian Ross
London SE25

Sir, Living in the country, miles from the nearest gas supply, I rely on heating oil to keep my house warm. On Sunday I requested a quote for 500 litres of oil and the price was £312. Foolishly, I did not order but checked again on Monday: £452. And we have petrol and electricity price rises to look forward to too.
Robin Hay
Dullingham, Suffolk

Rumpole’s verdict

Sir, As the widow of Sir John Mortimer QC, the Labour Party supporter and creator of Rumpole of the Bailey, I know what he would have thought of the government’s plan to slash trial by jury (letters, Feb 28 & Mar 3): he would have been truly appalled. He would often repeat the old saying: “Trial by jury is the light that shows that the lamp of freedom burns.” He would be even more outraged that it is a Labour government that is proposing to extinguish that light.
Penny Mortimer
Turville Heath, Oxon

Gulf ‘tax exiles’

Sir, I was disappointed to hear British citizens in the UAE described in parliament by my MP, Sir Ed Davey, as “tax exiles”, grouped with celebrities and “washed-up footballers” (political sketch, Mar 3). I am a 55-year-old grandmother. I work in the UAE as a school librarian; my husband works in construction and my (pregnant) daughter is a primary school teacher. We live with our baby grandson and two rescue dogs, and I am undergoing treatment for breast cancer. Before moving abroad we paid UK taxes and we continue to pay voluntary national insurance contributions. We vote and we maintain our home in Surbiton. We will return and be taxpayers again.

We did not move overseas to evade responsibility but for work — like thousands of British teachers, engineers and tradespeople who represent this country with quiet professionalism every day. British citizens abroad are not caricatures, they are families. In moments of crisis, protection from our government should not hinge on a headline-friendly label.
Louisa McGauley
Surbiton, Surrey, and UAE

Hand of advantage

Sir, As the biographer of Winston Churchill, I can confirm that it is a longstanding myth that he was left-handed (“Ultra-competitive left-handers can prove to be a right handful”, news, Mar 3). Photographs of him holding pens, tennis rackets, walking sticks, polo sticks, machine-guns and doing his famous “V” sign all show him as right-handed.
Andrew Roberts
Author, Churchill: Walking with Destiny

Sir, Your report lists 11 famous left-handed people. All are male, and it includes Rafael Nadal, who eats (and plays basketball) right-handed but plays tennis (and football) left-handed.
Deborah Buzan
London NW3

Aesthetic thrill

Sir, “Aesthetic chill” (Mar 2; letters, Mar 3) is more an “aesthetic thrill” for me. It is experienced once in a while at the theatre when every member of the audience is totally gripped and focused on what is happening on stage, and I sense that moment of total silence when one can certainly hear the proverbial pin drop. It is magical, and certainly felt physically.
Simon Evers
Weston Turville, Bucks

Sir, In my case goosebumps are not the only physical reaction to certain pieces of music. For example I invariably burst into tears when listening to the end of Mahler’s Resurrection Symphony — more than a little embarrassing when sitting in a packed concert hall.
Graham Birkett
Nottingham

Sir, My goosebump moment is Dame Janet Baker singing Dido’s Lament.
Christopher Murray
Barford St Michael, Oxon

It’s snowtime!

Sir, On the subject of being a non-skier on a ski holiday (letter, Mar 3), I have a bibulous friend who accompanies us to the Alps and describes herself as an après-ski instructor.
Jeffrey Stark
London SW15

Write to letters@thetimes.co.uk