How Labour’s foreign policy is more than just a re-set of diplomatic relations with Europe

Jude Petrie, Intern
22/10/2024

As the conflict in the Middle East threatens to spill over into regional war, and Russian forces make creeping advances in Eastern Ukraine, it is clear that the situation abroad is arguably at its most turbulent and volatile in a generation.

Whilst one could be forgiven for thinking domestic issues should be the Government’s priority, in an interdependent world, foreign relations will not simply compete for attention with domestic issues, but instead form part of Labour’s strategy to make the United Kingdom (UK) a safer and more prosperous place. It is this understanding that informs the Government’s approach to foreign policy and security, with a re-set of relations with Europe and a renewed focus on the continent being its principal tenet.

The strain on diplomatic relations with Europe during the Brexit period means the current Labour government sees renewed engagement as essential to meeting the security challenges of the day and fostering closer trade and economic ties, whilst remaining outside the EU single market. The government is keen to be seen as fixing the ‘mess’ of the previous administration, but its actions are structured by the position the UK finds itself in after Brexit and the altering of relations this has caused.

Foreign Secretary David Lammy’s understanding of the blurred division between domestic and foreign politics is evident in the proposed Security and Cooperation Agreement with the EU. The title conceals a more complex wrapping together of trade relations alongside institutionalised security cooperation, which could include, according to UK Ambassador to Germany Miguel Berger, “a youth mobility scheme … the Erasmus program, youth exchanges [and] the question of visa costs”. This marks a departure from previous governments, who were still concerned about “overstructuralisation” - the overly formal, overarching structures that Britain could find itself entangled in.

The feasibility of the new approach however, is not without questioning. One doubt is the extent to which UK and EU reproachment can take place without the UK having to emulate the legislation and regulations adopted by EU countries. This would entail a loss of sovereignty whilst the UK would be unable to influence and shape decisions due to its position as a third party. Whilst benefits would exist from closer trade collaboration, sceptics would argue that by attempting to weld security and trade together, the Labour government may sleepwalk into a situation where it finds itself subject to EU legislation – this time with far less economic gain.

On the other hand, proponents of the strategy, including Lammy, see packaging security and trade together as a necessity. The procurement of weapons and defence manufacturing is an obvious example. The supply of weaponry to Ukraine requires a large increase in production to keep pace with Russia’s wartime economy. A broadened security pact therefore reflects the reality of the “defence industry’s ability to synergise with science and technology research, impact on local development, and create a spillover effect to other industries”, serving to strengthen defence cooperation and generate a long-term economic boost to the British economy.

The degree of success the current government will have in adopting such an approach is still undetermined. Tony Blair’s attempt to “get into the engine room” of the EU through security fell short of its goals given primacy of the Franco-German economic relationship and the dominance of NATO as the main security architecture on the continent. However, turning to historical precedent may be unhelpful in speculating on the success of Labour’s current approach given the wholly distinct set of circumstances under which it is taking place.

A more enduring consequence, however, could be the expansion of the term “security” as it pertains to foreign relations. A widened understanding, and application, of security is no novelty: terms such as “climate security” address the risk of climate change to the integrity and functioning of nations states and are also used rhetorically to highlight the war-like urgency of such threats.

Though lacking in such striking imagery, the government’s attempt to integrate security with trade and economic collaboration has potential to re-shape understandings of the term. Whether integrating security and economic relationships becomes integral to the formulation of security policy, or is confined to a product of Britain’s unique political position and economic situation, remains to be seen. This will in part depend on the amount of success enjoyed by the Labour government in adopting this approach.