UK headlines in the last week have been almost entirely dominated by one incident and the ripples- or, more appropriately, the tsunami- it caused from across the Atlantic. The latest release of ‘Epstein files’, the late New York financier and convicted prolific sex offender, saw the provision by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) of more than three million documents, emails, photographs and the like, indicting a vast array of prominent figures in elite domains. Though, what has had the greatest impact is the indictment of many of the most recognisable figures of US and UK politics. This is not entirely news– many such figures, including the POTUS, Microsoft tycoon Bill Gates, former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary Clinton, among the most infamous names, were named in a release of the documents back in September 2025 – but what has been especially revelatory in the international reaction to the scandal is the recent indictment of former British Ambassador to the U.S., (previously) Lord Peter Mandelson.

Mandelson was dismissed from the position by Sir Keir Starmer in late 2025, after a September release of such ‘files’ revealed the ambassador’s long-standing friendship with Epstein through email correspondence and photographs at Epstein’s New York home. Cementing his transition from ignominy to complete exile in the UK is the revelation that he shared UK government information to Epstein in the wake of the 2008 financial crash. The documents released by the DoJ evidence ‘three separate payments of $25,000’ to Mandelson from ‘Epstein’s JP Morgan accounts’, as well as a plethora that show Mandelson providing advanced notice of information regarding bankers’ bonuses and a 500 billion Euro bailout to save the failing currency in 2010. All of the above occurred after Epstein’s 2008 conviction of soliciting prostitution from a minor, as well as during Mandelson’s tenure under the prime ministership of Gordon Brown (2007-2010), whom he was given peerage by in 2008, and the title of First Secretary of State by in 2009. Thus, evidencing the prime diplomatic positions Mandelson has enjoyed over the last decade. Mandelson has been publicly condemned both by Brown and Starmer, who express regret for the appointments and privileges they gave to Mandelson in their respective governments; with Brown commenting that ‘the leaks of sensitive information’, not only being a breach of policy and of trust, ‘were going to someone we now know was the ringmaster of a cabal of abusers and enablers sickens [him]’.

There is no doubt, then, that Mandelson has been made an absolute example of recently. With public denunciations, dismissals, and the opening of a Metropolitan Police criminal investigation, his treatment has proved markedly contrary to the key US players evidenced in the file release. Where Mandelson has been effectively excommunicated and his reputation scorched, Gates, Musk, and Trump especially, seem to have emerged not unscathed, but not blazed and beaten. Starmer’s position as Prime Minister has had its foundations seismically shaken, and as of this week, it seems he is precariously holding on to the capsizing ship of his Labour party. But why is it that the consequences provided for the guilty in the UK aren’t being reflected across the pond? 

The sinister continued denial and relative lack of harm dealt out to the case’s main players in the US is shocking, comparatively. President Trump has ploughed on with his government: prioritising anti-immigration raids and crackdowns, most notably in Texas and Minnesota in recent months; remaining hellbent on annexing Greenland; and taking to X to condemn the performance of Puerto-Rican singer Bad Bunny (evidently his free time has not been too impeded). The dichotomy present here- between the players of the UK and the US- is staggering, but it especially raises the notion of scapegoating. The heavy redactions that obscure many of the files suggest that Mandelson cannot be the only prominent British politician, public figure, or similar involved in the trafficking, the sexual offences, and the whole host of other horrors the documents encompass- that is, of course, aside from the English royal family, around whom discourse is still fairly nebulous. The removal of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s royal title means little when he was reportedly featured 2,000 times in the files, and is unlikely to receive criminal consequences for his involvement with Epstein. But even if the latter man’s consequences are marginal, why are the affiliated men of the US not receiving any consequence at all? 

The UK’s (somewhat ironic) status in recent history as a ‘younger sibling’ to the global superpower of the US is strongly reinforced in this situation: the ever more powerful and influential politicians of the US, and those who orbit the seemingly invulnerable Trump, have retained their positions, allowing the UK government to take the fall for them. Let’s hope the involvement of the Clintons with the current Congress investigation is actually fruitful- or will Mandelson once again be their scapegoat?

Image by Andrew Skudder via Flickr