What might British foreign policy look like under Labour?https://en.majalla.com/node/293921/politics/what-might-british-foreign-policy-look-under-labour
What might British foreign policy look like under Labour?
Historically Labour governments have tended to be conservative, therefore, it is highly unlikely that a Labour government will initiate radical changes overseas.
AFP
Britain's main opposition Labour Party leader Keir Starmer (R) meets with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky at Speaker's House in the Palace of Westminster, in London, on February 8, 2023.
What might British foreign policy look like under Labour?
Rishi Sunak is finished. At least, that’s what the latest opinion polls suggest. The British prime minister is languishing 18 points behind Labour, while his Conservative party seems to be imploding as deep splits over the fate of Sunak’s predecessor, Boris Johnson, get wider by the day.
While a general election may be as far off as January 2025, it increasingly looks like the opposition leader, Sir Keir Starmer, will be Britain’s next prime minister, barring a miraculous turnaround by the incumbent.
As such, foreign governments will inevitably begin to explore what Britain under Labour might look like and how it will impact London’s behaviour abroad. Will a Starmer government oversee a major shift in British foreign policy, or is there likely to be more continuity than change?
Leader of the Labour Party Keir Starmer during a news conference at the Labour Party headquarters in central London, March 21, 2023
No foreign policy revolution
While the future cannot be seen, it is highly unlikely that a Labour government will initiate radical changes overseas. Historically Labour governments have tended to be conservative (with a small ‘C’) rather than revolutionary when it comes to foreign policy.
They have shown a desire to deepen and reinforce Britain’s existing alliances, particularly with the United States. Clement Atlee, Labour Prime Minister from 1945-51, helped found Nato, while Tony Blair (Prime Minister from 1997-2007) was famously determined to retain the ‘Special Relationship’ with Washington, to the extent of offering George W Bush unconditional support for his invasion of Iraq.
Even Harold Wilson (Prime Minister from 1964-70 and 1974-76), who had arguably the most tempestuous relationship with a US president after he refused Lyndon Johnson’s request to send British troops to Vietnam, articulated his belief in the alliance and still rhetorically supported America’s war effort.
There is a radical foreign policy tradition within the Labour Party that has called for transformational policies such as nuclear disarmament, leaving Nato, and taking a more critical stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict. But leaders that have pushed these positions, such as Michael Foot and Jeremy Corbyn, have been soundly beaten at the polls.
There is a radical foreign policy tradition within the Labour Party that has called for transformational policies such as nuclear disarmament, leaving Nato, and taking a more critical stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict. But leaders that have pushed these positions, such as Michael Foot and Jeremy Corbyn, have been soundly beaten at the polls.
Starmer, who has moved the party back towards the political centre after taking over from the left-wing Corbyn, appears to represent the more conventional tradition of Atlee, Wilson and Blair and will likely emulate the conservative strands of their foreign policies.
Key focus on domestic politics
Starmer's focus will also almost certainly be on domestic affairs after coming to power. Elections are rarely won or lost on international affairs rather than domestic issues and a new Labour government will likely come to power with a mandate to fix internal problems rather than shifting foreign policy.
They will inherit a long list of issues to tackle after over a decade of Conservative rule. The economy is the worst performing in the G7, with a cost-of-living crisis squeezing wages, inflating prices, and provoking widespread industrial action.
UK Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer (L) is welcomed by British Chambers of Commerce Director General Shevaun Haviland to give a speech at the British Chambers of Commerce Annual Global Conference, at the QEII Centre.
Many public services are struggling, with record waiting lists in the National Health Service and underfunded schools. Public faith in politics is at a low after Johnson's poor record during the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent allegations of lying and sleaze.
If they want to be re-elected again after five years, Labour will have to make progress on these multiple domestic fronts as soon as possible and, as such, they may lack the bandwidth to dedicate much time to any foreign policies, radical or not.
Labour will have to make progress on these multiple domestic fronts as soon as possible and, as such, they may lack the bandwidth to dedicate much time to any foreign policies, radical or not.
A more outward-looking Britain
Though it will be lower down the priority list and will not likely be radical, Labour's foreign policy can still expect to be different to the Conservatives in some respects. Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy has already indicated a change in style will be forthcoming.
Speaking in Singapore in early June, Lammy condemned the Conservative government's 'little England,' mentality when it came to foreign policy: being largely insular and focusing on nationalist issues like Brexit and curbing illegal migration. Under Labour, Lammy argued, Britain would instead be more, "outward looking and open."
Britain's Labour Party leader Keir Starmer speaks during the Prime Minister's Questions at the House of Commons in London, Britain, June 14, 2023.
However, while Lammy may talk up a desire to be more globally focused and open than the Conservatives, this is 2023, not 1997 and London has reduced international traction in today's multipolar world. As such, its interests and priorities abroad will be limited.
At the top of the agenda will be Europe, arguably the area of greatest divergence with the Conservatives. Despite campaigning for Britain to remain in the 2016 referendum and being a severe critic of the government's Brexit policy thereafter, Starmer insists he will not seek to rejoin the EU, its single market, or its customs union as Prime Minister.
However, Lammy insists the UK under Labour would drop the hostility towards Brussels that has characterised Conservative rhetoric since 2016 and seek closer cooperation in security, trade, and foreign policy. As Lammy told the Chatham House think tank, the Conservatives', "ideological leadership and reckless choices have left Britain increasingly disconnected from its closest allies."
Labour would drop the hostility towards Brussels that has characterised Conservative rhetoric since 2016 and seek closer cooperation in security, trade, and foreign policy.
However, while Brussels will certainly welcome warmer ties with London, there may be reticence to re-open the old Brexit negotiations. Lammy hopes to gain Britain access to certain parts of Europe's single market without re-joining it, or at least get improved terms.
But this was one of the red lines that Brussels refused to cross when negotiating London's original divorce terms. Even with the best will in the world, Labour may find it gains little beyond superficial changes. They may have more success in the security and foreign policy fields, which have fewer rigid rules.
America, Russia, and China
Two relationships that are unlikely to change, in contrast, are Britain's ties to the US and Russia. Labour has long prioritised close ties to the US and, despite generally being more pro-EU than the Conservatives, has a long tradition of Atlanticism.
Indeed, Lammy himself studied and worked in the US and, provided he becomes Foreign Secretary after a Labour victory (which is likely but not guaranteed), this will inform his engagement with Washington.
Already he has noted that the Democrats, who are ideologically closer to Labour than the Republicans, may not occupy the White House in early 2025 when Starmer is expected to come to power, and that the new government must prepare accordingly.
But like Blair before him, Lammy insists that ideological differences of the leaders will not lessen the centrality of US relations to British foreign policy. The "relationship goes beyond whoever is in No 10 or the White House," he has said.
Britain's main opposition Labour Party Foreign Secretary David Lammy (L), Britain's main opposition Labour Party leader Keir Starmer (C) listening to Zelensky speak.
Equally, a Labour government would likely continue the Conservatives' hostility to Russia and support for Ukraine. There has been the near complete consensus from all political parties on Johnson's, and now Sunak's, Ukraine policy, with sanctions on Russia and weapons for Ukraine approved enthusiastically by most of the opposition benches.
A Labour government would likely continue the Conservatives' hostility to Russia and support for Ukraine. There has been the near complete consensus from all political parties on Johnson's, and now Sunak's, Ukraine policy, with sanctions on Russia and weapons for Ukraine approved enthusiastically by most of the opposition benches.
Alongside an ideological opposition to Putin's 'imperialism', which Lammy has commented on in the past, Starmer has strategically sought to boost his security credentials as a means of winning over voters that were turned off by Corbyn's more pacifist streak.
It, therefore, seems highly unlikely that a Labour government will end its support for Kyiv should the war still be underway.
There may be some shifts regarding China, however. Much will depend on global attitudes towards China when Starmer enters Downing Street, but so far Labour seems to be treading a careful path on Beijing.
In Singapore, Lammy noted that the Conservatives have been "massively," inconsistent on China, first embracing Chinese investment and hailing a 'golden era' of relations under David Cameron then calling China, "the biggest threat to global security," under Sunak.
Lammy has called for a more nuanced position, raising the possibility of cooperation with China on global issues such as climate change, while still criticising Beijing for its human rights abuses. Of course, should a crisis erupt over Taiwan or other critical fault lines between China and Britain's Western allies, notably the US, Labour may find it hard to remain so cautious and nuanced.
Another way that Labour is seeking to distinguish itself from the Conservatives is on global threats like climate change and Artificial Intelligence (AI). Lammy has argued that Sunak and his predecessors have been "sclerotic" on climate change, lacking the kind of national strategy and vast investments seen in the US and EU in recent years.
Similarly, Keir Starmer has warned of the profound impact that AI could have, echoing comments from former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair that Britain is "poorly prepared" to deal with the rising challenge it presents.
Britain's opposition Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer gets on the stage to speak at a London Tech Week event in London, Britain, on 13 June 2023. Sir Starmer talked about the Labour Party's plans for artificial intelligence (AI).
Labour has insisted that such global challenges require international, multi-lateral responses and that they will try to put Britain at the centre of the global conversation.
Another change being advocated is increasing Britain's soft power. Under Boris Johnson the UK rolled back from a commitment to keep international aid contributions at 0.7% of GDP, cutting it to 0.5% and Labour has said they will restore this, but only if economically possible.
Lammy has insisted that Labour would support other soft power tools like the BBC World Service and the British Council – both of which faced cuts under the Conservatives. However, as with restoring aid to 0.7% of GDP, economic realities might hit these ambitions.
Domestic priorities are expected to hoover up the vast majority of the government's limited resources in the next few years, and Starmer has already warned of 'really tough' challenges for budgets due to the economic slump. Any foreign policy ambitions may be conditioned by their modest financial costs.
Lesser priorities
Some areas of global politics are receiving comparatively little attention from Labour at present, suggesting they have fallen down the priority list.
The Middle East has been at the heart of Labour policy debates for the last two decades, first over Blair's invasion of Iraq and its aftermath, and then over allegations of anti-Semitism stemming from Jeremy Corbyn's hostility to Israel.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer shakes hands with President of Israel Isaac Herzog (C) and wife Michal (R) as they arrive at Westminster Abbey in central London on May 6, 2023, ahead of the coronations of Britain's King Charles III.
Today both issues receive much less discussion in Labour circles. This is partly down to Starmer's efforts to move his party on but also down to the limited global attention the Middle East receives compared to the past.
The antisemitism issue is especially sensitive for Starmer and was deeply damaging to the party and might make Labour incredibly cautious on the Israel-Palestine conflict when in power for fear of reviving internal fissures.
Of course, the region might generate new crises that require immediate responses, but Labour will probably try to avoid wading into the region's geopolitics if it can.
The same is true of other regions of the world. Europe, Russia, China and global challenges like climate change and AI are more than enough to keep a Labour government occupied, especially one that wants (and must) focus on domestic politics first and foremost.
With limited bandwidth and less global power than in the past, it seems unlikely that Labour will seek out new parts of the world to exert influence in the way that Tony Blair once did – for good or ill.
New crises may erupt, forcing Starmer to engage in regions and issues that cannot currently be forecast, but don't expect radical shifts in British foreign policy under a Labour government. The style will shift, but the substance will likely see more continuity than change.
