Patrick Costello warns of continuity Starmer while indicating global conflicts impact economic goals
Foreign policy is clearly not the first priority of the Burnham government. The new PM did not refer to it in his acceptance speeches and in the early weeks, the only acknowledgement that the world outside the UK existed came in the form of a mea culpa on Palestine. This was not backed up by any, even token, measures that would have signalled a real change of direction, such as removing the terrorist designation for Palestine Action or taking trade measures against Israel.
The low priority was also shown in the way that the post of foreign minister was used as a consolation prize for Ed Miliband. Miliband’s first pronouncements suggested that he wanted to act as a “super-climate change/ development” minister, using his newfound access to foreign ministers and to the World Bank governing board as a platform to further the agenda he has been pursuing since he was first a minister in 2008. The first government pronouncements on Iran came not from him, but from the new defence minister, Wes Streeting, who maintained continuity with Starmer’s policy on allowing the US to continue to use UK bases for defensive operations in the Persian Gulf. Miliband will have to be careful to ensure that Streeting does not park his tanks on the foreign ministry’s lawn. Continuity Starmer was also on show with the quick dashes to Washington by both ministers to develop their relationships with Rubio and Hegseth respectively.
It is to be hoped that these early signals do not become the embedded approach of the new government and that the PM will quickly realise that his ability to achieve good growth in every postcode depends as much on foreign as on domestic policy. The autumn budget will be shaped in no small part by whether the Straits of Hormuz are open. Economic prospects throughout the country will rise or fall depending on what kind of deal is reached in the Summit with the EU, now tentatively scheduled for early next year. Most of the foreign policy choices for the country will also have to face the same Makerfield test as the domestic ones.
So, what should those choices look like? First and foremost, anything that can be done should be done to repair the damage wreaked on the UK economy (now estimated as a loss of 6-8% of GDP) by Brexit. The UK has made itself a necessary player in building European security as the US has become an unreliable partner. Some are now calculating that this security contribution could be cashed in with the EU in exchange for improved trading access. If this proves over-optimistic, it is high time to reconsider the Starmer red lines.
Second, the closer the new government is able to come to the EU the safer it will be in continuing the trend, begun under Starmer, of distancing itself from the Trump regime, moving towards the kind of position that Mark Carney has taken in Canada, namely robustly defending UK interests from US bullying. Some of Burnham’s key priorities, such as devolution and public procurement, depend on being able to resist the kind of US pressure that has led to, for example, the lucrative NHS contract for Palantir. If the UK was inside the Customs Union, then, just like Sanchez in Spain, Burnham would be able to shrug off any threats of increased US tariffs on the UK, safe in the knowledge that the UK was covered by the EU’s common tariff.
Third, the UK has an opportunity to be a strong voice for the alliance of middle powers that Carney was advocating at this year’s Munich Security Conference, working together with not only the EU and Canada, but the middle powers of the Global South such as Brazil, South Africa and Indonesia. The common agenda would be to sustain the rules-based international system in the face of US unreliability, the Russian security threat and emerging Chinese hegemony. Such an alliance could protect global public goods such as the climate, secure global access to the rare earth minerals vital to the new economy as well as assuring protection from unreliable neighbours.
In this context, there were also two small signs of hope from the initial activities of the new Foreign Secretary. The first was a short visit to France and Spain resulting in two joint foreign ministers’ statements emphasising the need for greater cooperation on climate change in the face of the recent forest fires. Perhaps this is a first sign of greater political cooperation with relatively like-minded EU Member States of a kind that was lacking in the Starmer government. Secondly, the very first trip that Miliband made as foreign minister was not to Washington or to Europe but to South-East Asia, where he made an address to the UK-ASEAN ministerial forum. Beyond the diplomatic niceties, he emphasised the mutual interests in protection of international law, in de-escalating the conflict with Iran and in securing a just and lasting peace in Palestine. Maybe, then, there are some small reasons for some optimism of the will.