Although foreign policy has largely taken a backseat throughout the ongoing Conservative Party leadership campaign, the pledges of the two main candidates remain integral to the United Kingdom’s international standing and its footprint on the global stage.
The frontrunner, Liz Truss, has consistently demonstrated hawkishness on issues as diverse as China and Palestine, whilst her rival Rishi Sunak initially seemed a little more moderate. Both have now largely converged onto the same foreign policy pathway, although there and noteworthy, tangible differences in areas such as the climate and the European Union.
Sunak’s Positions
As more and more polling regarding the leadership election is conducted, the former Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s chances of becoming Prime Minister are looking increasingly slim. With his ministerial background rooted entirely in economics, Sunak has been less authoritative on matters of foreign affairs than his rival but has nonetheless spelled out a doctrine on the subject.
Although much of this, including his stances on climate change and on China, have been made explicit, other areas, including international development aid and human rights in the Gulf, are merely implied from previous policymaking decisions.
Sunak on Northern Ireland
Though not immediately associated with peace and conflict, one of the most significant decisions on international affairs made by the United Kingdom in recent years is its choice to exit the European Union. Whilst principally a socioeconomic process, it nonetheless does have implications for the maintenance of the peace, predominantly in Northern Ireland.
According to cross-community groups including the Alliance Party, the Boris Johnson government’s proposed changes to its already-negotiated Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP) risk breaching the Good Friday Agreement (GFA), one of the most successful examples of a negotiated peace settlement anywhere in the world. Since its signing in 1998, the GFA has largely been successful in ending the sectarian violence which dominated Northern Ireland in the decades prior.
It is therefore reassuring to learn that Sunak, in the privacy of Cabinet meetings, vocally opposed the Government’s planned changes to the NIP. The promotion of peace should begin at home, and, particularly in contrast to the more hard-line Liz Truss, it is genuinely positive to understand that Sunak may be willing to take steps in order to preserve such conditions domestically.
This is, however, one of a very small number of positives which are otherwise drowned out by a general ambivalence to human rights abuses and other concerning matters internationally.
Sunak on Ukraine
Sunak tries to market himself as a people-pleaser, and his stance on the conflict in Ukraine certainly exemplifies this. As Chancellor, it is both true and reassuring that Sunak took a fairly diplomatic approach to conflict resolution, for example by ending the Treasury’s tax cooperation with Russia and Belarus. He also announced up to $50 million USD in aid to Ukraine.
But, contextualised with other foreign policy stances, this approach might not continue should a Sunak government ascend to power. Last year, at the very height of the UK’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, Sunak announced the government’s abandonment of its commitment to spend 0.7% of its GDP on international aid, damaging prospects for humanitarianism both in that country and beyond, including in drought-stricken Yemen.
With the former Chancellor expressing concern about the impact the war is having on the domestic economy, it is worth remembering he has form in pulling aid from struggling civilians just as it is needed most.
The approach taken by the UK government towards Russia has significant implications for its foreign policy elsewhere, particularly in the Middle East. Sunak has pledged commitment to the work that the Johnson government has done in Ukraine, and thus it is logical to expect the maintenance of sanctions. Hence, a new source of oil and gas will need to found in order to re-establish the UKL’s energy security and tackle the soaring cost of bills.
Sunak on Saudi Arabia and The Gulf
Negotiations between Western partners with Iran to reignite the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action have so far been unsuccessful, and so it seems quite unlikely that it will fill this role. Instead, it is more likely to be an existing Western ally like Saudi Arabia or one of the Gulf States which fills the gap in the UK energy market.
Just as U.S. President Joe Biden has recently courted the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman in a fairly transparent attempt to convince him to release more oil, Sunak could be accused of creating conditions favourable to Arab elites. From the Solent to the Humber, Sunak has announced plans to build eight new freeports, which would act as low-tax areas attracting investment from such individuals. His holiday on stamp duty in London, where many multimillion-pound properties and owned by the very same investors, is another such policy.
Through simple economic necessity, therefore, it seems fairly unlikely that a Sunak-led government would stand up to human rights abuses in the region, for example the treatment of LGBT people or political dissidents in Saudi Arabia.
Sunak on Climate Change
The other source unlikely to correct the UK’s energy balance under a Rishi Sunak government is renewables. Although it is true that Sunak has committed to the government’s net zero by 2050 target, he has warned that the goal must be met with caution. First and foremost a right-wing economist, Sunak has warned of the potential impact on making these changes to the domestic economy and has warned against harming it.
Going hand-in-glove with this is a general lack of willpower to take responsibility for climate change as a government. Although he is trying to portray himself as a slightly more pro-environment candidate than Truss in debates, Sunak has been laughably bad on the subject when questioned and has focussed on individual responsibility rather than that of a government. Instead of promoting the international and systemic changes we need to see an escalated climate crisis averted, Sunak has promoted individualistic measures which are already well established in the fabric of the nation, such as recycling.
Sunak on China
These positions have largely been consistent, but fleshed out a little, across the leadership campaign. On the issue of China, however, Sunak has undergone a major rhetorical shift, transforming from something of a pushover to a libertarian hawk almost overnight.
Previously advocating for cooperation, particularly economic, with China, Sunak has now been critical of the perceived threat it poses towards the UK and its allies. To counter this, Sunak has proposed a NATO-style alliance for technology, whereby Western nations could pool best practice as a means to protect themselves from Chinese cyberattacks. In the same vein, he has suggested that key national infrastructure, including the UK’s 5G network, should not be provided by companies with close links to the government of China.
Sunak has also promised to close down China’s Confucius Institutes in the UK, which are nominally institutions aimed to teaching Chinese culture and Mandarin. However, concerns exist about the level of influence the Chinese government has on their output, and their illiberal attitude towards freedom of academia.
Whilst this does point to a more human-rights centric approach to China, Sunak has fallen short of calling the nation’s treatment of its Uighur population in the north-eastern province of Xinjiang a genocide, a stance which sets him behind his rival.
_____________________
Truss on Ukraine
The conflict in Ukraine has been the area of foreign policy most discussed in the debates for the next Conservative Party leader. It has been part of Johnson’s legacy, as he established a positive reputation within Ukraine as being a strong ally who has visited the country several times since the conflict began.
As the current foreign secretary, Truss is trying to ride the coattails of this popular public reception to the government’s actions with regards to Ukraine. In hustings on 3rd August, Truss said “I’m proud that we were the first country to send weapons to Ukraine in Europe. I’m proud that we have put tougher sanctions on Russia than any other country in the world. But we need to do more.”
What this ‘doing more’ looks like is unclear, but it would probably include Britain continuing to send arms to Ukraine, with the possibility that stronger weapons are sent if the situation worsens. Ukrainian forces will likely continue to be trained on British soil and British military advisers could go to Ukraine. Truss has said she would be against British troops directly being involved in the conflict. Truss has been asked how she would broker a peace treaty for the conflict, and she pointed out that a treaty would be between Ukraine and Russia. A mediator would likely be from a control that is seen as neutral, so it is unlikely that Truss would fill this role as the Russians would accuse her of bias. It is possible that a Truss premiership could hurt British-Russo relations for years to come, as there are complaints over her support for people going to fight for Ukraine, which has been called mercenary work by the Russians.
Inflation has been a major issue during the campaign, with arguments over whether their economic plans would cause increases in the rate of inflation. Whoever wins will become Prime Minister in autumn, and have to deal with increased demand for gas as the days get shorter and the nights get colder. Russia has already been accused of ‘turning the taps off’ for Germany, and some German cities have implemented gas saving measures already.
Truss on Energy and Taxation
Whilst it is unlikely we will have a return to the ‘3 day weeks’ of the 1970s, energy is a concern and both candidates have been looking towards alternatives. Liz Truss has favoured doing more to use North Sea oil and has supported less restrictions on fracking. This is all in part of trying to get the UK more energy independent. Truss has said that fighting climate change needs to be done through “unleashing private enterprise” rather than government regulation. Truss has had less to say on renewable energy, and there are concerns that Truss would kick the can down the road, relying on the free market to deal with the climate crisis rather than taking effective action through the government.
Liz Truss has also wanted to make Britain internationally competitive in business, saying that she supports lowering corporation tax. The G7 have worked to have an international minimum for corporation tax. Whilst the corporation tax rate Truss desires will likely still be above the current G7 minimum, it is possible in the future that this is a point of contention between the UK and its allies, as Britain will try and get an advantage over other European economies through a low corporate tax rate.
Truss on Northern Ireland
Truss has tried to position herself as a staunch Brexiteer, despite having previously supported remain during the referendum. Truss has argued that the Northern Ireland Protocol needs to be changed in order to uphold the Good Friday Agreement. The EU continues to be frustrated by the actions of the British government, and there are murmurings from some diplomats on the continent that Truss might be more difficult to negotiate with than Johnson.
Truss on the Middle East Peace Process
Israel continues to be an important country with regards to foreign policy, as Israel struggles with various political crises. Johnson committed ‘unflinching support’ to Israel.
It is likely that under either leader that Britain would continue to support Israel, with a focus on further integration of Israel within the Middle Eastern region through agreements like the Abraham Accord. Truss has worked closely with her Israeli counterpart as well as other important Israeli figures to continue British support for Israel. She also supports designating Hamas as a terrorist organisation. Labour’s struggles with alleged anti-Semitism within its ranks means it is possible that the Conservatives use Israel to put the Labour Party in a tricky position – many Labour supporters are anti-Zionist, but how can this be expressed without crossing into anti-Semitism?
It is notable that the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), a powerful lobby group, have invited Truss to a hustings and not Sunak. Presumably they regard her as their favoured more pro-Israel candidate.
Truss on China
China has increasingly become an area of concern for the Conservative Party. Johnson’s government was critical of China’s actions in Hong Kong, and it is likely that either candidate would carry on with China scepticism. Tom Tugendhat, co-founder of the China Research Group that aims for a more critical approach towards China, recently backed Truss, saying that one of the main reasons for his support was how strongly Truss has spoken out against China and Russia.
Gone are the days of the Cameron/Osborne approach to China, when Osborne declared a ‘golden era’ of British-Chinese relations. It is likely that the Conservatives will be like the Republicans in the USA, with China scepticism being a pillar of their foreign policy platform.
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent visit to Taiwan has brought up questions of Britain’s relationship with Taiwan and how far the Conservative Party’s China scepticism can go before it becomes a danger to the British-Sino relationship. When Truss was questioned on this, she spoke carefully as someone who is still the Foreign Minister. Truss said she wouldn’t visit and would continue to license weapons as part of a ‘continuation of British policy’.
Whilst seeming timid in making a statement on Britain’s attitude towards China and Taiwan, Truss was clear she supported the G7 statement regarding Taiwan. This could indicate a number of aspects of Truss’ foreign policy. It could mean that Britain is accepting its limitations ‘East of Suez’, as well as recognising that Britain is no longer a true ‘global’ power. Britain could follow the USA if the USA changed its attitude towards Taiwan. However, trade with China is still important for the British economy, and Britain has the history of being the first Western country to recognise the PRC as the government of China. Truss would continue to tread the fine line with China, which is becoming more difficult as China imposes itself more and more on the global level.
To Conclude
However, it is unlikely that foreign policy would be a focus for either candidate. Currently, the Conservatives are polling double-digit figures behind the Labour Party. Whilst this could be blamed on the continued presence of Boris Johnson as Prime Minister, it is likely that support for Labour comes from concerns over the cost of living crisis, fuel concerns, and fears over inflation. In other words, the big issue is the economy.
The next PM will likely focus on keeping the economy afloat and chugging along at least until the next election. Amongst Conservatives, there are concerns a faltering economy could mean that Labour regains control of the Red Wall seats again, traditional Labour voting constituencies in the Northern part of England. Working people are likely to feel the effects of a faltering economy more than those who are richer, and are so more likely to be swayed to vote with their wallet.
This helps to explain why Truss, a candidate who has backed fiscal expansive policies, has seen strong support from Conservatives when these policies would normally not hold weight with Conservative MPs. The new Red Wall MPs tend to be more economically left-wing than traditional Southern England Tory MPs, and also fears from Tory MPs from across the country that Labour could win the next election through campaigning on the economy. This gamble to be less fiscally disciplined, at least in the short term, could shore up Tory support, but could also cause the Conservatives to lose their reputation as the party of economic responsibility.
Nevertheless, there has been the recognition that the domestic economy cannot be separated from international affairs. There are questions to what extent will Britain back Ukraine despite the economic pain it might cause. With the Bank of England predicting a recession, as we head towards an economic downturn there might be more voices for a change in foreign policy. Maintenance of the current international order proves to be tricky. A PM whose focus is on steadying the economy will have to navigate the turbulent waters of crises in Ukraine and Taiwan, as well as maintain our relations with traditional allies that have fallen out of favour in recent years such as the USA and Europe.
Both candidates have claimed to have the courage to take radical steps in these difficult times. What these radical steps will look like on the international level are yet to be seen. We will see soon enough, as September creeps closer.
