On August 21 last year, UK military chiefs targeted two UK citizens for assassination. The unmanned drone was deployed against Reyaad Khan, a 21-year-old man from Cardiff, and 26-year-old Ruhul Amin. Both men had been fighting alongside Isil in Syria when the prime minister, David Cameron, authorised the attack.

Reporting to the Commons after the event, Cameron described the men as representing a “clear and present danger”, the security services having informed him that they were planning attacks on commemorative events in the UK, one of which was to be attended by the Queen.

Less than a week before being announced as the Labour Party’s new leader, Jeremy Corbyn responded: “I have questioned the legal basis for the use of drones. Urgent consideration now needs to be given to the appropriate process by which attacks such as this one are sanctioned, on what evidence and on what basis of law.”

Perhaps, given his comments made in an interview with Middle East Eye in the last few days, Mr Corbyn believes that drone attacks, as well as operations by UK special forces, should be subject to a vote in parliament. He cites the unhappy example of America’s increasing involvement in Vietnam in the early 1960s through the deployment of “military advisers” without the explicit authorisation of Congress. UK special forces tend, even today, to be deployed by a government using the prime minister’s prerogative powers; that is, without the requirement for parliamentary approval.