There is “no assessment to substantiate” Israel’s claim that Iran has long-range missiles capable of reaching London, a UK cabinet minister has said.

Housing Secretary Steve Reed told the BBC there was “no specific assessment that the Iranians are targeting the UK – or even could if they wanted to”, after the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said on Saturday that Tehran had weapons that could reach up to 4,000km (2,485 miles).

It comes after It emerged Iran targeted the joint US-UK military base on the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean, around 3,800km from Iran.

Reed refused to say how close the missiles came to the British overseas territory, saying he could not share “operational details”.

Iran fired two ballistic missiles at Diego Garcia – one of which failed and fell short, while the other was intercepted, Reed said.

The intercepted missile disappeared after a US destroyer fired missiles at it, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the strikes, citing US officials.

After news of the attempted attack emerged, the IDF said on Saturday that it had revealed last year that Tehran had intended to develop missiles capable of reaching Europe, Asia and Africa.

It added: "We have been saying it: The Iranian terrorist regime poses a global threat. Now, with missiles that can reach London, Paris or Berlin.”

Asked whether this was true, Reed insisted that there was “no specific assessment that the Iranians are targeting the UK or even could, if they wanted to”.

“We are perfectly capable of protecting this country and keeping this country safe, whether it’s here at home, or whether it’s our assets and nationals across the region,” he told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg.

Pressed again about the IDF’s comments, he said: “There is no assessment to substantiate what’s being said.”

Even if Iran were able to launch strikes at such a range, the British armed forces would be able to defend the UK, he said.

The longest-range weapon in Iran’s arsenal is thought to have a maximum range of 2,000km, far short of both Diego Garcia and London – even if fired from just inside the nearest Iranian border.

US President Donald Trump claimed days before the US and Israel began their strikes on Iran that it had developed missiles that could “threaten Europe” and was working towards building missiles capable of striking the US.

Iran’s foreign minister said earlier this month that his country had deliberately capped its missiles’ range at 2,000km, as “we don’t want to be felt as a threat by anybody else in the world”.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted on Sunday that Iran had the “capacity to reach deep into Europe”.

Reed’s Conservative counterpart Sir James Cleverly told the programme that Iran was deploying “very, very long-range missiles”, but would not be drawn on whether these were capable of hitting the UK as he was no longer privy to the intelligence reports he had received as foreign secretary.

Dr Sidharth Kaushal, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, said: “Missile range is an elastic thing – in that if you put a lighter warhead on a missile, you can extend its range”.

He said that while it was “probably accurate” that Iran had missiles capable of reaching the UK, it was “not the most pressing threat” because these weapons are inaccurate at long distances and would have to travel through very well-defended airspace to enter UK airspace.

He said: "The big question is: So what? If you can launch a small number of conventionally-armed ballistic missiles over well-defended airspace… and they’re quite inaccurate at very long ranges… what would the Iranians be trying to achieve?”

Sir Richard Shirreff, a retired British Army general and former Nato commander, said Israel’s claims about Iranian capabilities should be taken “seriously, but as seriously as the potential for Russian missiles to come this way as well”.

“But I would also say that of course Israel is going to say this, because it is in Israel’s interest to broaden the war, to bring as many nations in on this war,” he told Broadcasting House on BBC Radio 4.

Call for Parliament vote

The UK government has only allowed British airbases to be used for strikes on sites targeting UK interests and allies in the region.

British forces operating in the Middle East have also shot down multiple Iranian drones since the start of the conflict. On Sunday, the Ministry of Defence said a ground-based unit operating in a “high threat area” had downed a drone overnight.

On Friday, the government expanded targets under this “collective self-defence” justification to include Iranian sites being used to threaten vessels travelling through the Strait of Hormuz – a key shipping route through which a fifth of the world’s oil flows.

Along with RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, the UK has given the US permission to use Diego Garcia to conduct these bombing raids.

The attempted Iranian attack on Diego Garcia came before this latest decision was made, it is understood.

Reed denied the UK was seeking to escalate the war, adding it was “necessary to adapt to the new targets that the Iranians are focusing on”.

Sir James said the government had made a “misstep” by initially denying the US permission to use British bases earlier in the war that had “damaged our credibility in the international sphere”.

“We’re relying on other countries to protect British personnel, British nationals and British interests and that is not the position we should be.”

The Liberal Democrats and Green Party have said the move risks broadening the UK’s involvement in the conflict, and are demanding that Parliament should be given a vote on allowing the US to use British bases for strikes.

Reed rejected these calls, arguing there was “no precedent for a vote in Parliament for defending British people who are under attack”. (BBC)

Update news