A nation that once ruled half the world is now struggling to rule itself. A country that produced leaders, such as Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher, today finds itself engulfed in a deeply damaging leadership crisis. The impression one gets is that the political class has failed its people, institutions are losing public trust, and the country appears to be drifting.
In this dark and anarchic political climate, the United Kingdom is being led by a prime minister whose most recent approval ratings suggest that just about 18% of Britons view him favourably, while roughly 75% view him unfavourably. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his governing Labour Party would possibly lose if a general election were held today. This, after returning to power with a decisive majority in June 2024. To be honest, Britain's Labour Party today appears leaderless. And the world is watching.
For months, Starmer's leadership has appeared brittle, weakened by U-turns, defined by risk aversion and a growing disconnect between Downing Street and Labour's parliamentary ranks.
Mandelson, A Monumental Mistake
The immediate trigger, however, is the fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein-linked revelations involving Peter Mandelson, the prime minister's controversial pick as Britain's ambassador to the United States. The disgraced figure of Mandelson must be haunting Keir Starmer, as the release of emails detailing the depth of Mandelson's association with the convicted sex offender has sent shockwaves through Westminster. The prime minister's chief adviser has already resigned. A growing number of governing Labour MPs are openly calling for Starmer himself to step down. Others are waiting -- calculating, plotting, watching -- ready to strike at what they believe is the right moment.
The prime minister may have survived, at least for now but his authority stands eroded. Yes, he still wears the crown, but like Shakespeare's Macbeth, the title hangs loose, the emperor has no clothes and Westminster can no longer pretend otherwise.
Defiance Rings Hollow
Despite the upheaval in the party, Keir Starmer has so far been defiant. Speaking at a community centre (in Hertfordshire) this week, he declared he would "never walk away from the country that I love." He cast himself as a fighter for those "held back by a system that doesn't work," invoked his working-class roots, and insisted he would lead Labour into the next general election. The rhetoric was familiar. Resolute words delivered against an increasingly fragile political reality.
Even as Starmer spoke, senior figures in his own party were unconvinced. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar publicly called for his resignation, citing "too many mistakes" in Downing Street. Others stayed silent, a silence that spoke just as loudly. For now, Starmer has survived.
Unsurprisingly, opposition figures have seized the moment. Conservative leaders have bluntly declared that Labour has "lost confidence in Keir Starmer" and that his departure is now a question of "when, not if". Coming from a party still recovering from its own implosions, the charge carries an uncomfortable weight. Starmer's deeper problem is not the opposition's attack, but his own party's exhaustion. Labour is restless but unprepared. Angry, but not organised.
That helps explain why an outright rebellion has yet to materialise. There is no obvious successor waiting in the wings. Alternative names are circulating. Angela Rayner, Rachel Reeves, Wes Streeting. But each comes with baggage or insufficient support. The party's predicament mirrors Britain's wider mood: tired of drift, fearful of chaos, and paralysed by the absence of convincing alternatives.
Watch Out For Shabana Mahmood
It is in this vacuum that Shabana Mahmood's name has entered the conversation. Mahmood, the current home minister (Home Secretary), is a steady, institutional figure rather than a charismatic disruptor. Born in Birmingham with family roots in PoK, she was educated at Oxford and trained as a barrister. Since entering Parliament in 2010, she has built a reputation as a competent administrator, avoiding factional theatrics in favour of delivery and discipline.
For Indian audiences, the significance is obvious. If Shabana Mahmood were to become prime minister, it would mark another historic moment after Rishi Sunak - a British Muslim woman of South Asian origin leading the UK. The uncomfortable question will be: how will the India-UK relations pan out under her? Her India policy might almost certainly be driven less by identity and more by British strategic interests. India today is central to the UK's post-Brexit trade ambitions and technology and defence partnerships. Any British prime minister would be constrained - and incentivised - to maintain stable ties with New Delhi.
That said, doesn't perception matter in diplomacy? Shabana Mahmood's background would inevitably draw scrutiny in India, particularly given sensitivities around Kashmir. India, on its part, will have to deal with her. The Indian government is unlikely to expect bias, but it would watch early signals closely: her engagement with Indian leadership and continuity on treating Kashmir as a bilateral India-Pakistan issue. Will Mahmood keep personal identity separate from state policy?
The Kashmir angle
Also, there is a domestic British dimension that India will watch carefully. Shabana Mahmood's rise would place a politician with deep roots in Britain's Muslim and South Asian communities at the centre of power at a time when Labour is struggling to balance its electoral coalitions. Within the party, voices sympathetic to Kashmir and human rights in India have grown louder in recent years. As prime minister, Mahmood would be under pressure to manage these internal dynamics while preventing them from spilling into foreign policy. How firmly she draws that line would be closely studied in New Delhi.
Survival Sans Authority
For now, Keir Starmer has bought time, but heads sans party loyalty. His authority rests on temporary endorsements and managed optics, not genuine confidence. That he did so is being framed by his allies as a political recovery. In truth, it was a rescue operation. The turning point came when Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy posted a carefully worded message on X, urging respect for Starmer's "massive mandate". That post triggered a coordinated action of cabinet endorsements, the product of an emergency "war room" operation inside Number 10. It is being widely reported that ministers were phoned, nudged and, in some cases, handed suggested language to express their loyalty.
This was not organic support. It was crisis management. Starmer's inner circle confronted wavering MPs with blunt questions: Who replaces him? What is the plan? How would a coup improve Labour's electoral prospects? In a party traumatised by years of internal warfare, these questions worked - temporarily. But that should not be mistaken for stability. Even cabinet ministers now admit privately that their support is conditional. Many are reserving judgment until the May elections, which will test Labour's standing across councils and devolved administrations. More immediately, the Gorton and Denton by-election looms as a critical fault line. Labour faces pressure from the Greens on its left and Reform UK on its right. A poor showing there could reopen the leadership question within days, not weeks.
In the meantime, the additional documents yet to be released on Mandelson may yet bring further embarrassment and Starmer's eventual downfall. Britain's Labour Party has avoided a collapse, but it has not solved its leadership problem. In an uncertain world, with wars raging, economies slowing and democracies under strain, Britain finds itself governed by a party unsure of its own direction and a leader who can barely find time to govern.
(Syed Zubair Ahmed is a London-based senior Indian journalist with three decades of experience with the Western media)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
