Peter Mandelson, a central figure in British politics for decades and most recently the United Kingdom’s ambassador to the United States, was abruptly fired on September 11, 2025, by Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The dismissal follows a cascade of revelations about Mandelson’s close and supportive relationship with the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a relationship that, according to the British government, was far deeper than previously acknowledged.
The downfall of Mandelson—long considered a shrewd political operator and a key architect of New Labour—unfolded swiftly over the course of a week that saw mounting political pressure, public outrage, and a flurry of damaging disclosures. The immediate trigger: a trove of emails and personal notes that painted a picture of Mandelson not just as a passing acquaintance of Epstein, but as a confidant and advocate during some of Epstein’s darkest legal moments.
According to The Sun, which published a selection of these emails on September 10, 2025, Mandelson wrote to Epstein in 2008 as the disgraced financier faced his first conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor. In a message that shocked many in Westminster, Mandelson encouraged Epstein to “fight for early release” and offered words of deep personal support. “I think the world of you,” Mandelson told Epstein, just before the latter began his 18-month prison sentence. These emails were part of a collection spanning from 2005 to 2010, with Bloomberg reporting that the correspondence included discussions of Epstein’s legal battles and even strategic advice drawn from Sun Tzu’s Art of War.
But the evidence of a close friendship did not stop there. Earlier in September, Democrats on the U.S. House Oversight Committee released a redacted 2003 “birthday album” compiled for Epstein. Among the notes was a handwritten message from Mandelson, referring to Epstein as “my best pal.” The album, which also included a note purportedly from then-President Donald Trump, provided a glimpse into the high-profile social circle that surrounded Epstein during his years of influence.
As the emails and personal notes became public, Mandelson’s explanations shifted from regret to full-throated apology. In a podcast interview published on September 10, 2025, Mandelson said, “I regret very much that I fell for his lies. I fell and accepted assurances that he had given me about his indictment, his original criminal case in Florida, like very many people, I took at face value what he said. With hindsight, with fresh information many years later, we realized that we had been wrong to believe him — he’s a charismatic, criminal liar, we now see — and I regret very much indeed… I felt it like an albatross around my neck since his death.”
Mandelson insisted he was unaware of Epstein’s criminal activities, emphasizing, “During all the time I was an associate of his, I never saw the wrongdoing. I never saw any evidence of criminal activity. I never sought and nor did he offer any introductions to women in the way that he allegedly did for others. Perhaps it’s because I’m a gay man. Perhaps when I knew him all those years ago… When I was associated with him all those years ago, as I did with my then partner and now husband Reinaldo, we never, ever saw any evidence or sign of this activity which has since come to light.”
Despite Mandelson’s expressions of remorse and his claim that he expected his correspondence with Epstein would eventually surface, the damage was done. Foreign Office Minister Stephen Doughty addressed the House of Commons on Thursday, stating, “In light of the additional information in emails written by Peter Mandelson, the prime minister has asked the foreign secretary to withdraw him as ambassador. The emails show that the depth and extent of Peter Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is materially different from that known at the time of his appointment.” Doughty further noted that Mandelson’s suggestion in an email that Epstein’s 2008 conviction was “wrongful and should be challenged” was particularly troubling, especially in light of the suffering of Epstein’s victims.
The political fallout was immediate and fierce. Opposition parties, including the Conservatives and the Scottish National Party, demanded Mandelson’s resignation and called for a broader investigation. Kemi Badenoch, leader of the main opposition Conservative Party, criticized Starmer’s handling of the affair, saying, “Mandelson might have gone but, just as with Angela Rayner, Starmer dithered when he needed to be decisive. He has no backbone and no convictions.” The Liberal Democrats also pressed for a formal inquiry, while public confidence in Starmer’s leadership appeared to waver.
The timing of the scandal could hardly have been worse for Starmer. The prime minister had already been forced to accept the resignation of his deputy, Angela Rayner, over an unrelated tax issue just days earlier. The Mandelson affair erupted as the government prepared for a high-profile state visit by U.S. President Donald Trump, an event already expected to draw protests and controversy. In the wake of Mandelson’s dismissal, James Roscoe, the U.K.’s deputy head of mission in Washington and a veteran diplomat, was named interim ambassador to oversee the visit.
Mandelson’s appointment as ambassador to the U.S. in February 2025, following what the government described as an “extensive” vetting process, had always been something of an anomaly. It is rare for a politician, rather than a career civil servant, to be handed such a prestigious diplomatic role. Mandelson’s trade expertise was seen as a key asset, particularly in persuading the Trump administration not to impose heavy tariffs on British goods—a strategy that appeared to pay off when the two countries struck a limited trade deal in May 2025. But Mandelson’s history of controversy, including two prior resignations from Tony Blair’s government in 1998 and 2001, made him a lightning rod for criticism.
Throughout his career, Mandelson earned a reputation as a master tactician—admired by some, reviled by others, and rarely out of the spotlight for long. His nickname, “Prince of Darkness,” reflects both his political acumen and the air of intrigue that has always surrounded him. Yet in the end, it was not his political maneuvering but the company he kept—and the words he chose in private—that brought his latest chapter to an abrupt and ignominious close.
As the dust settles, the episode serves as a stark reminder of the enduring consequences of personal associations and the limits of political redemption in the age of relentless scrutiny. For Peter Mandelson, the cost of friendship with Jeffrey Epstein has proven steep and final.
