Who is Jonathan Powell, Keir Starmer’s new national security adviser?

After some months of speculation, the prime minister has appointed Jonathan Powell, veteran adviser to Tony Blair, as his national security adviser. Powell, formerly a professional diplomat, spent more than a decade as Blair’s chief of staff, both in opposition and in government. Famously, he was the British government’s chief negotiator in the talks that led up to the historic Good Friday Agreement, and deserves a good deal of the credit for that.

He was intimately involved in much of what New Labour did, and, since he left full-time official duties, has worked in consultancy and conflict resolution. Keir Starmer welcomed him because “he is uniquely qualified to advise the government on tackling the challenges ahead and [to] engage with counterparts across the globe to protect and advance UK interests”.

It is said that, before she left her role at Starmer’s side, Sue Gray advised him to bring more people with governmental experience into his inner circle... In his new role, Powell will certainly fill that brief.

The role was created in 2010 by David Cameron, ironically enough as a result of the way in which intelligence matters had been handled before the 2003 allied invasion of Iraq – events that Powell had been involved with in his time with Blair.

The role is, indeed, to “advise” the prime minister and cabinet on the various security risks to the UK, at home and abroad; and to make recommendations as appropriate to the PM. In that capacity, Powell will attend the National Security Council, which coordinates intelligence and activities across Whitehall, including the intelligence agencies, Foreign Office, Ministry of Defence and so on.

The national security adviser will also, therefore, be involved in overseeing international intelligence sharing through alliances such as the “Five Eyes” network with America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In the present context, Powell will thus be closely concerned with the defence review, domestic extremism, and the new Border Security Command in its role combating irregular migration – “smashing the gangs”.

In short: Powell will warn Starmer about what’s kicking off, and what can be done about it.

Yes. Powell will be a special adviser, just as he was under Blair, but an unusually senior and powerful one.

He won’t have to, and the present ambassador, Dame Karen Pierce – who is universally lauded, and does get on with Trump – will continue in place for a while longer. Powell himself reportedly didn’t fancy the role of ambassador in Washington as it was too “public-facing”. That said, Powell might end up as a kind of global personal envoy for Starmer, something that might conflict with David Lammy’s role as foreign secretary (though Powell would be the last to generate friction).

His old No 10 colleague Alastair Campbell said on X/Twitter: “Jonathan is one of the most impressive, dedicated, hardworking and clever public service professionals I have ever worked with. It shows [Keir Starmer] is serious about the scale of foreign policy challenge ... He is also a total grown up who will take no part or interest in the personality and power games that sometimes get played in government circles. Amid all the bad news around at the moment this is good news indeed.”

They actually resent his role in the Northern Ireland peace process, seeing it as surrender to the IRA, and view his more recent work in settling the dispute with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands military base as a similar betrayal of Britain.

Dominic Cummings, a different breed of special adviser, was sarcastically scathing: “All credit to Starmer, finally an appointment that makes sense – if the goal is *give away British territory because your human rights lawyer mates say ‘there’s no alternative’*, then makes sense to hire the expert on surrendering to the IRA ... *The system is working as intended* – and the logical thing for the system to do is put Powell in as NSA, institutionalise *surrender to international lawyers* & bring clarity across the deep state.”

Blair’s decisions in relation to the Iraq war and the material in the “dodgy dossier” remain controversial. Powell actually queried the dossier, pre-publication, pointing out that it contained “nothing to demonstrate a threat, let alone an imminent threat from Saddam”.

Last year, Powell also wrote an article in which he advocated dealing with terrorists as part of a British drive to resolve long-running conflicts. He doesn’t name any specific groups, but they might include the likes of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban, and maybe even Isis: “We don’t have to try to be Switzerland or Norway, but we do have real-world experience in resolving our own conflicts, such as in Northern Ireland, as well as trying to prevent them elsewhere.

“We could unilaterally adopt a more relaxed attitude to engaging with non-state armed groups (which others call terrorists) and bring warring sides together here in the UK without having to worry about visas or clearing their travel plans with other states. And we could play a role in resolving those conflicts where the US is not focused, including in Libya, Syria, Somalia, Israel-Palestine and, above all, the tragedy of the Sahel from Mali to Niger.”