This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/17/labour-world-stage-britain-europe-globe
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Clear-headed and confident: how Labour should act on the world stage | Clear-headed and confident: how Labour should act on the world stage |
(about 5 hours later) | |
Concepts such as “internationalism” and “ethical foreign policy” don’t easily translate into detailed roadmaps for diplomatic action these days. Global affairs are shifting at such a pace that the only certainty about the coming years is that there will be more unknown unknowns, not fewer. Terrorism, cyberwarfare and big power politics are likely to take on more dramatic forms, and trying to cast foreign policy in terms of left v right may be even more of a challenge than it is today. | Concepts such as “internationalism” and “ethical foreign policy” don’t easily translate into detailed roadmaps for diplomatic action these days. Global affairs are shifting at such a pace that the only certainty about the coming years is that there will be more unknown unknowns, not fewer. Terrorism, cyberwarfare and big power politics are likely to take on more dramatic forms, and trying to cast foreign policy in terms of left v right may be even more of a challenge than it is today. |
In that light, Labour’s key task will be to define a message that is both in tune with the electorate it seeks to win over, and realistic enough to be credible on the international stage. | In that light, Labour’s key task will be to define a message that is both in tune with the electorate it seeks to win over, and realistic enough to be credible on the international stage. |
Finding the right message in that kind of unpredictable world will probably mean having to shake off some of Labour’s hangovers with the Blair years and the Iraq war. This is not to say that the lessons of the past must be forgotten, or minimised. Rather, it means that wallowing in ideological disputes or in knee-jerk reactions against the west as a whole won’t help create the kind of confidence that is needed if Britain still wants to punch above its weight in world affairs – something a large majority of its citizens still wish it to do. | Finding the right message in that kind of unpredictable world will probably mean having to shake off some of Labour’s hangovers with the Blair years and the Iraq war. This is not to say that the lessons of the past must be forgotten, or minimised. Rather, it means that wallowing in ideological disputes or in knee-jerk reactions against the west as a whole won’t help create the kind of confidence that is needed if Britain still wants to punch above its weight in world affairs – something a large majority of its citizens still wish it to do. |
The 2013 vote against strikes in Syria was seen by many as an abrupt, Labour-led British withdrawal | The 2013 vote against strikes in Syria was seen by many as an abrupt, Labour-led British withdrawal |
Foreign policy on its own rarely determines the outcome of an election. But if it is botched or found unconvincing, it can damage a party’s prospects of victory. Labour will by 2020 have had to address three key questions about how it intends to defend Britain’s global standing. First, there is Europe. Second, there is the question of when and how to use force or coercion. Third, Labour should state where, and on what kind of issues, the UK should be devoting diplomatic and other resources to defending its national interests. | Foreign policy on its own rarely determines the outcome of an election. But if it is botched or found unconvincing, it can damage a party’s prospects of victory. Labour will by 2020 have had to address three key questions about how it intends to defend Britain’s global standing. First, there is Europe. Second, there is the question of when and how to use force or coercion. Third, Labour should state where, and on what kind of issues, the UK should be devoting diplomatic and other resources to defending its national interests. |
On all these themes the over-arching dilemma might be summed up this way: the choice is between an inward-looking “little England” syndrome (which the left is not completely immune to), and the vision of a globally engaged UK, harnessing the strengths of like-minded democracies and alliances in trying to secure a rules-based international order. | On all these themes the over-arching dilemma might be summed up this way: the choice is between an inward-looking “little England” syndrome (which the left is not completely immune to), and the vision of a globally engaged UK, harnessing the strengths of like-minded democracies and alliances in trying to secure a rules-based international order. |
By 2020 the UK will have staged a referendum on its participation in the European project. How Labour navigates this episode will be critical. The left has been divided on Europe for decades and remains so, despite the pro-EU assurances sent out by all Labour leaderships since (roughly) the mid-1980s. Europe’s travails are bound to last, and will warrant more clarity and more constructive proposals from Labour – and this will be true even if the “stay in” vote wins in the referendum. | By 2020 the UK will have staged a referendum on its participation in the European project. How Labour navigates this episode will be critical. The left has been divided on Europe for decades and remains so, despite the pro-EU assurances sent out by all Labour leaderships since (roughly) the mid-1980s. Europe’s travails are bound to last, and will warrant more clarity and more constructive proposals from Labour – and this will be true even if the “stay in” vote wins in the referendum. |
Labour would be wise to engage more thoroughly with social-democratic forces on the continent (it barely does so at the moment) if it wants to be seen as a positive contributor to the kind of “reformed” Europe many are calling for. Failing that, the danger would be that a leftwing British Euroscepticism – just like its rightwing counterpart – would feed on the illusion of insular go-it-alone scenarios, or on the kind of radical populism that casts the EU as something so dismal it might just as well be dismantled altogether. | Labour would be wise to engage more thoroughly with social-democratic forces on the continent (it barely does so at the moment) if it wants to be seen as a positive contributor to the kind of “reformed” Europe many are calling for. Failing that, the danger would be that a leftwing British Euroscepticism – just like its rightwing counterpart – would feed on the illusion of insular go-it-alone scenarios, or on the kind of radical populism that casts the EU as something so dismal it might just as well be dismantled altogether. |
Related: Who should Labour speak for now? | John Harris | Related: Who should Labour speak for now? | John Harris |
So far, Labour has stuck with the notion that the UK’s interests, as well as many of the issues the left cares about, from climate change to poverty and human rights, are best served by sticking with the EU, despite its flaws. But Europe is a question that Labour must clarify within its ranks before it even attempts to think globally. My take is that without Europe, Britain would have to seriously cut down on any external ambitions, something which doesn’t quite fit with calls for a “progressive internationalist” agenda. | So far, Labour has stuck with the notion that the UK’s interests, as well as many of the issues the left cares about, from climate change to poverty and human rights, are best served by sticking with the EU, despite its flaws. But Europe is a question that Labour must clarify within its ranks before it even attempts to think globally. My take is that without Europe, Britain would have to seriously cut down on any external ambitions, something which doesn’t quite fit with calls for a “progressive internationalist” agenda. |
The truth is that many global players, from Beijing to Washington, pay attention to the UK not only because it has a permanent seat on the UN security council, but because it has leverage over the largest single market in the world, and can weigh in on what Europe will become, or do. | The truth is that many global players, from Beijing to Washington, pay attention to the UK not only because it has a permanent seat on the UN security council, but because it has leverage over the largest single market in the world, and can weigh in on what Europe will become, or do. |
Labour’s trauma with Tony Blair’s Iraq legacy is well known and unlikely to disappear after the Chilcot report is eventually released. New Labour started by staking out a moral high ground for Britain in the world. Blair’s famous 1999 Chicago speech tried to harness that. It might now be ridiculed in the light of the Iraq war, but it did raise questions that remain pertinent to this day: what should democracies do in the face of genocide, or when a regime resorts to mass crimes against its own people? | Labour’s trauma with Tony Blair’s Iraq legacy is well known and unlikely to disappear after the Chilcot report is eventually released. New Labour started by staking out a moral high ground for Britain in the world. Blair’s famous 1999 Chicago speech tried to harness that. It might now be ridiculed in the light of the Iraq war, but it did raise questions that remain pertinent to this day: what should democracies do in the face of genocide, or when a regime resorts to mass crimes against its own people? |
Under what circumstances should force be used to defend national security when threats are transnational or rooted in faraway lands? Ed Miliband made plain during his campaign that post-conflict planning was essential (as Libya has shown), but dealing with Labour’s historical ambivalence to the use of force remains an unfinished task. | Under what circumstances should force be used to defend national security when threats are transnational or rooted in faraway lands? Ed Miliband made plain during his campaign that post-conflict planning was essential (as Libya has shown), but dealing with Labour’s historical ambivalence to the use of force remains an unfinished task. |
Membership Event: Guardian Live| The next London Mayor? | Membership Event: Guardian Live| The next London Mayor? |
Rightly or wrongly, the 2013 parliamentary vote against strikes in Syria was seen by many, in Europe and across the Atlantic, as nothing less than an abrupt Labour-led British withdrawal from strategic affairs. Anything to do with militarism is generally seen as anathema to the left, but in a wider European context this comes across as a caricature: in the late 1990s Germany’s Greens stood in favour of bombing Slobodan Milosevic’s forces in Kosovo, just like today’s French socialists largely support anti-jihadi operations in the Sahel. | |
After the 1956 Suez debacle, an overwhelming conclusion drawn by the British establishment was that the UK should never again find itself on the wrong side of an argument with Washington. After Blair’s disastrous war in Iraq, some party dynamics within Labour pointed to the notion that US endeavours should systematically be approached with the greatest suspicion. Whether this line of thought prevails will weigh heavily on how Labour handles the remains of the “special relationship”. | After the 1956 Suez debacle, an overwhelming conclusion drawn by the British establishment was that the UK should never again find itself on the wrong side of an argument with Washington. After Blair’s disastrous war in Iraq, some party dynamics within Labour pointed to the notion that US endeavours should systematically be approached with the greatest suspicion. Whether this line of thought prevails will weigh heavily on how Labour handles the remains of the “special relationship”. |
Just as the party will need a clearer stance on Europe, it will have to define whether to promote transatlantic links or to shy away from them. This question has potentially huge consequences. If the UK wants to return to the forefront and lead a medium-sized power on the world stage, Labour must come across as a political force able to recast the country as a confident international actor, not one that hesitates about who it wants to side with and which club it wants to be in, constantly bemoans past mistakes, nurtures nostalgia, or struggles to set itself clear, ambitious goals. |