𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

LONDON — Keir Starmer is facing what could be the most precarious moment of his time as Britain’s prime minister, as the global scandal surrounding Jeffrey Epstein envelops his government.

Weakened by record-low approval ratings, policy U-turns and cost-of-living pressures, and with support bleeding to far-right challengers, Starmer’s leadership was already under heavy strain, but analysts say the latest revelations could further undermine his authority and raise serious questions about his judgment.

Peter Mandelson, a longtime political grandee, is facing a police investigation over his ties to the late Epstein, including allegations he shared sensitive information with the convicted sex offender while serving as a Cabinet minister nearly two decades ago.

Starmer said last week that he knew about Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein when he nominated him as ambassador to the United States in December 2024, but that Mandelson had “lied repeatedly” about the extent of his past contact with the disgraced financier.

Starmer apologized to victims for “believing Mandelson’s lies” and said the former minister had “betrayed our country” in his dealings with Epstein.

Police searched Mandelson’s two homes on Friday. The searches were “related to an ongoing investigation into misconduct in public office offences,” a Metropolitan Police statement said. No arrests were made, and in line with British policing convention, Mandelson was not named in the statement.

The scandal has turned up the pressure on Starmer as the controversy unsettles his party and threatens to shatter his already fragile promise of a steady, scandal-free government. A little over 18 months since his Labour government won a landslide victory, analysts say Starmer is now fighting for his political future.

“It seems yet another example of Starmer’s lack of political judgment and poor decision-making,” Peter Dorey, a professor of politics at Cardiff University, told NBC News. “His most serious yet.”

Conservative opposition leader Kemi Badenoch has called Starmer’s position “untenable,” while the centrist Liberal Democrats have called for a confidence vote to test the support of Starmer’s Labour lawmakers, some of whom have questioned whether he can remain in office.

A small number of Labour MPs, largely existing critics of Starmer, have called on him to go. Neil Duncan-Jordan told the BBC on Friday that a “reset” requires “changing who’s in charge,” while Rachael Maskell told the broadcaster it was “inevitable” he would have to quit.

Mandelson was dismissed as the U.K.’s ambassador to the United States in September after revelations about his friendship with Epstein emerged. Last Sunday, he stepped down from the party after the latest release of files by the U.S. Department of Justice.

But documents continue to reveal the full extent of Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein, showing a man who lobbied his own government while alerting Epstein to key upcoming decisions.

“Trying hard to amend,” Mandelson, then serving as the business secretary, wrote to Epstein in December 2009 about a planned tax on bankers’ bonuses, according to the released documents. “Treasury digging in but I am on [the] case.”

He also appears to have leaked an internal economics briefing about assets the government believed it could sell. Mandelson forwarded it to Epstein with the added line: “Interesting note that’s gone to the PM.”

Mandelson has previously denied knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and denied any wrongdoing connected to him. In a statement last week he repeated an apology “to the women and girls whose voices should have been heard long before now.” His representatives did not respond to a request for further comment.

Starmer has promised to release files relating to Mandelson’s appointment as U.S. ambassador, which he says will prove Mandelson lied about the full extent of his friendship with Epstein when he was being vetted for the role.

But critics say Starmer’s decision to push on with Mandelson’s appointment, with even partial knowledge about his relationship with Epstein, raises serious questions about his decision-making.

“Either Starmer failed to have Mandelson fully ‘vetted’ before appointing him, or Starmer knew of Mandelson’s former association with Epstein, but appointed him anyway,” said Dorey. “Either would constitute a serious error of judgment by Starmer.”

The saga has proved particularly bruising given Starmer’s promise of steady, scandal-free government after numerous corruption scandals dogged the previous Conservative government.

The prime minister “was chosen by his party and by voters because he supposedly personified probity and competence,” said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London. “After this, he can’t even claim those qualities.”

Mandelson was a controversial figure before his appointment as ambassador, having twice resigned from government during the last Labour administration over breaches of the ministerial code and accusations of financial misconduct.

Despite that, Mandelson was chosen for the U.K.’s most high-profile diplomatic role following Donald Trump’s election in part because of “his background and his relationships with very rich people,” Jamie Gaskarth, a professor of foreign policy and international relations at the Open University, told NBC News.

“It paid off initially with the friendly relations between Starmer and President Trump,” he added, “but in the long term, those kind of character issues have come back to haunt him.”

Olivia O’Sullivan, the U.K. director in the World Programme at Chatham House, a London-based think tank, echoed Gaskarth’s comments, noting that Starmer’s government had appointed somebody “they thought could handle that universe” in Mandelson.

“That has ended up kind of backfiring, really, in their faces,” she added.

Despite the bruising scandal, Starmer is unlikely to be toppled immediately, according to experts, with his main potential successors all facing difficulties that may hinder a leadership challenge.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting is facing scrutiny over his own past ties to Mandelson, while Starmer’s former deputy Angela Rayner is still the subject of an investigation into her tax affairs. Manchester’s popular Labour Mayor Andy Burnham was recently denied the opportunity to run for Parliament, making it impossible for him to challenge Starmer.

“A lot of the obvious replacements for Starmer find themselves in quite tricky positions,” said Andrew Barclay, a politics lecturer at the University of Sheffield. This contributes to a “false sense of security” for the prime minister, he added.

With local elections looming in May, where Labour is widely expected to perform poorly, Starmer’s possible rivals may not be keen to trigger an immediate leadership contest.

“There are several kinds of structural things that are keeping him in place right now,” added Barclay, “but whether that will save his premiership in the long term, I am incredibly doubtful.”

Dorey at Cardiff University agreed, saying “a lack of better alternatives” would keep him safe for now.

“Starmer is likely to remain as Labour leader and prime minister for the foreseeable future — but with his political authority and credibility seriously weakened,” he said.