More questions than answers : the Mandelson fallout continues

The news that the British Prime Minister had not been told that Lord Peter Mandelson his nominee for the post of US ambassador to the U.S. had failed initial security vetting triggered a predictable political stir in the UK. The most obvious question raised was: “How did this mess happen?”

How could the news that the nominee to the United Kingdom’s most important ambassadorial post had failed the vetting process not be passed to the Prime Minister?

EUalive’s columnist Dick Roche is a former Irish Minister of State for European Affairs. His columns can be found here.

However, there are other questions: why – given all that is known about Mandelson- did Keir Starmer take a gamble on appointing him to the most high-profile and security-sensitive ambassadorial appointment? Who influenced the decision? Why did the appointment attract so little push-back?

The announcement and the unquestioning reaction

On 20 December 2024 the UK Prime Minister’s office announced the appointment of Lord Mandelson as the next British Ambassador to the United States. Announcing the King ‘s approved of the appointment a press statement from 10 Downing Street claimed Lord Mandelson “will bring extensive foreign and economic policy knowledge, strong business links and experience at the highest levels of government to the role – all of which will be crucial as the UK”.

The Prime Minister in a short personal tribute added “Peter will bring unrivalled experience to the role and take our partnership (with the U.S.) from strength to strength”. Foreign Secretary David Lammy said “It is wonderful to welcome Peter back to the team. He offers a wealth of experience in trade, economic and foreign policy from his years in government and the private sector.”

At the time of his nomination Lord Mandelson had a political career spanning more than four decades. Over that time he had established a reputation for being arrogant, ruthless and divisive. Mandelson delivered few policy achievements and had been forced to resign from political office twice.

In the late 1990’s Peter Mandelson established his reputation for the role he played in reshaping the Labour Party and helping to steer it to a landslide victory in 1997.

A surprising aspect of the announcement of Mandelson’s nomination was the muted response from the UK media. Mandelson attracted endless media commentary over the decades, much of it less than complimentary. The media response to his nomination for the UK’s most important ambassadorial post was curiously uncritical. There were some references to Mandelson’s past ‘difficulties’ but much of the focus was on Mandelson’s political skills, his capacity to ‘schmooze’ his way out of trouble, his the ‘unrivalled’ contacts and on the experience that he could bring to the post. Wishful thinking and political myopia blurred the reality that Mandelson’s political career contained multiple danger signals.

Mandelson’s long and hype-laden road

Peter Mandelson, the grandson of a former Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, was elected to Lambeth Council in 1979. Three years later he stood down after clashes with Party Colleagues. In 1985 he was appointed by Neil Kinnock, then Leader of the Opposition as the Labour Party Director of Communications where he played a key role in ‘rebranding’ the ailing party. In that role he established a reputation as a ruthless operator. Kinnock who later fell out with him described Mandelson as living up to his reputation as “the Prince of Darkness.”

Elected to Parliament in 1992 Mandelson was – on the basis of his success as Director of Communications – expected to be given a senior post in the Opposition. John Smith who succeeded Neil Kinnock as party leader distrusted Mandelson and gave him nothing.

John Smith died suddenly in 1994. Peter Mandelson played a key but divisive role in Tony Blair’s campaign for party leadership. In 1997 Mandelson, paired with Alistair Campbell, helped steer the campaign that saw ‘New Labour’ and Tony Blair sweep into office. The Mandelson – Campbell friendship collapsed in 2001 in what was called at the time ‘one of the most spectacular Westminster fallouts in living memory”.

Following the 1997 election Tony Blair appointed Mandelson as Minister without Portfolio giving him responsibility of the Millenium Dome project – part of the UK’s Millenium celebrations. In July 1998 Blair moved Mandelson to the more consequential post of Secretary of State for Trade.

Mandelson lasted in that post for five months. He was forced to resign over failing to disclose interest free loan from a Parliamentary Colleague, Geoffrey Robinson. Robinson, then serving as Paymaster General, was also forced to resign triggering a dispute between the two former colleagues. In his autobiography that was serialised in the UK tabloid Daily Mail Robinson accused Mandelson of lying about his role in the affair.

In October 1999 Mandelson returned to office as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Mo Mowlam the previous holder of the post had been the subject of what Irish officials described as a “focussed, sustained and sinister” whispering campaign aimed at undermining her position. At the time the Irish Government felt the campaign against Mowlam could damage the peace process in Northern Ireland. Mandelson was widely rumoured as playing a role in that campaign, an accusation he resolutely rejected.

Mandelson’s term as Northern Ireland Secretary was short. In January 2001 he was forced to resign amid allegations of improperly assisting an Indian-born businessman, whose family had donated £1 million to the Millennium Dome project, to acquire a British passport. The enquiry which followed the scandal found that – while there was no evidence of an improper relationship between Mandelson and the family in question – Mandelson had probably made the phone call that was at the heart of the controversy but had later forgotten about it.

During Peter Mandelson’s term in Northern Ireland progress was made on the peace process: little of what was achieved was attributable to Mandelson himself. Mandelson had spats with political leaders from both sides of Northern Ireland’s sectarian divide. When leaving his official residence as Northern Ireland Secretary he is reported to have commented that his dog Bobby was more popular than himself.

Mandelson was re-elected in the June 2001 UK General election. His path back to Cabinet was blocked by senior members of Tony Blair’s team. In July 2004 Blair found a new ‘perch’ for him – on the EU Commission. José Manuel Barroso allocated the EU Trade Commissioner post to Mandelson. The appointment was accompanied by a lot of spin. Forbes magazine speculated that Mandelson if successful as trade Commissioner could in time become President of the EU Commission.

Mandelson’s time in the EU Commission was central to the claims about his “wealth of experience in trade, economic and foreign policy” that accompanied his nomination for the position of UK ambassador to Washington. His term as Trade Commissioner was not the success predicted. He engaged in very public and unnecessary rows with EU member state leaders whom he portrayed as undermining his efforts in trade negotiations. His relationship with President Sarkozy was particularly fraught .

Mandelson’s ‘tin-eared’ attitude to EU farm interests during the Doha round of trade talks was particularly disastrous. His key negotiating tactic – offering to cut average EU agricultural tariffs from 23% to 12% – was greeted by fury. He completely underestimated the power of Europe’s farming lobby.

In a breathtaking example of arrogance, Mandelson chose to enter a head on clash with Irish farming organisations about the impact of opening Europe’s borders to beef imports from South America, less than a month before Ireland’s June 2008 Lisbon Treaty referendum. His crass intervention led to street protests. His name became identified with all that was wrong in Brussels. “Say NO to Mandelson’s Europe” became a potent part of the highly successful campaign that contributed to a ‘NO’ vote in the referendum. President Sarkozy blamed Mandelson in part for the defeat of the Lisbon Treaty in the Irish referendum.

The WTO Doha Round talks broke down on 29 July 2008. A number of sticking points brought about the collapse. At the time Mandelson, who described the breakdown as ‘heartbreaking’ received strong criticism from an number of EU member states for poor tactics in relation to the opening of EU markets in a way which threatened the agriculture sector.

On 3 October 2008 Mandelson formally resigned from the EU Commission a year short of his full term. While Mandelson’s departure from the Commission was not as specular as his other departures, his period in the Commission not without a whiff of scandal. He was accused of accepting lavish hospitality from businessmen whose companies were in line to benefit from EU decisions. Hospitality from Oleg Deripaska, the ‘king of aluminium whose business benefited from two cuts in EU import duties came in for particular scrutiny.

Recently, the EU anti-fraud agency OLAF confirmed it opened an investigation into Mandelson’s actions while he served as EU Trade Commissioner. Details of the investigation have not been released. The news about the OLAF investigation comes on top of reports that the UK’s Metropolitan Police had decided to launch an investigation into suggestions that Peter Mandelson had passed market-sensitive information to Jeffrey Epstein while serving as UK business secretary in 2009.

As Mandelson was leaving the EU Commission, Gordon Brown, who had replaced Tony Blair, announced that he was inviting him to return to political office in the UK. Mandelson was given a life peerage and served in Brown’s administration until May 2011 when the Labour Party was voted out of office.

On his departure from Government Peter Mandelson founded Global Council, a London-based strategic advisory and lobbying firm with a colleague from the Blair years. The consultancy was highly successful in attracting a range of high-end clients, but became a casualty of the publicity that surrounded Mandelson’s downfall. It was forced into administration in February.

Some road to run

Sir Keir Starmer has accepted personal responsibility for the appointment of Mandelson as ambassador to the US. At the same time, he has complained that he was not informed that the Foreign Office had given Mandelson security clearance for the role in January 2025, against the recommendation of officials who carried out the security vetting, a described as “incredible”, “staggering” and “astonishing”.

It is odd that the information was not given to the Prime Minister. It is odder still that a Foreign Office official would go so far to protect a non-conventional appointment to the Washington post.

The inconvenient reality that Prime Minister Starmer faces, however, is that, whatever the issues between Downing Street and the Foreign Office, his decision to put Mandelson forward was a high risk gamble. Mandelson had blotted his copybook so many times over the years that it was always likely he would fail the vetting procedures required for the Washington appointment. Even before the September 2025 release of the first tranche of Epstein documents – which triggered Mandelson’s sacking – the existing knowledge about his relationship with Epstein at the time of his nomination made the decision to put his name forward for the post even more questionable.

Mandelson’s appointment will be discussed again in the UK Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee when Keir Starmer’s former Chief of Staff will be answering questions. With so many questions still unanswered the Mandelson fallout is likely to continue for some time.

Caption: Former UK Ambassador to the US, Peter Mandelson, walks his dog near his home in London, Britain, 27 April 2026. Mandelson was arrested by the Metropolitan Police on suspicion of misconduct in public office on 23 February 2026, with the allegations relating to the disclosure of sensitive information to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The Foreign Affairs Committee continues its inquiry into Mandelson’s appointment, with more former officials expected to give evidence. EPA/TOLGA AKMEN