The Tribune

By Peter Young

AS another year comes to an end and people anticipate a new one, it is traditional to look forward with optimism to better times, both for the lives of individuals and in relation to global affairs. But, since there are so many unknowns and variables, uninformed prediction on the world stage is surely best avoided, not least because it can even be damaging. Apart from in-depth studies of particular issues, people can only opine about long-term trends and developments, but they will listen to those in positions of power in government who talk about how they intend to conduct a nation’s relations with the rest of the world.

With this in mind and reflecting on recent international events, how interesting it was to read a speech on December 12 by British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, James Cleverly, setting out his vision for the nation’s foreign policy and diplomacy, with emphasis on Britain’s reaction to rapid international change. In a world developing so quickly, he emphasised the need for the UK not only to take full account of such change but to make long-term commitments spanning decades, since the interests it was protecting and the values it was promoting will outlive any and all political cycles. These values are permanent and should not at their core depend on the politicians of the day or be subject to their whims.

The Foreign Secretary began by explaining the historical context of Britain, as a small island state off the coast of mainland Europe, always being involved with other countries. During its existence as a nation state the world had been dominated by the brutal maxim that the “strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”. Might was always right and power was what counted – and this applied to Britain as much as to other countries. The last century saw aggressive tyrants make the globe their prey. But, following the Second World War, far-sighted leaders built a collection of international rules and institutions designed to make law – not power alone – the arbiter of relations between states. The US and Britain with some 50 other nations created the United Nations whose General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In the same era, what would become the World Trade Organization and the World Bank began to help fund reconstruction and recovery across the world. The rise of international trade and prosperity during the intervening eight decades had been as a direct result of the policies of such institutions – and in its foreign policy Britain had always sought to support these founding principles and institutions.

He went on to say that international order had allowed more and more people to live in peace and increasing prosperity than ever before. But change is always upon us and Britain did not wish to stand in the way of reform. It wanted, for example, to welcome Brazil, India, Japan and Germany as permanent members of the UN Security Council. By contrast, Putin was prepared through Russia’s war in Ukraine to destroy the laws that protect each country so that the clock had been turned back to where might was right and big countries treated their neighbours like prey. He was seeking imperial conquest which was morally abhorrent and contemptuous of today’s values. He should end this war and withdraw his troops without delay.

Mr Cleverly confirmed that the UK benefits beyond measure from rock solid friendships with the US and nations like France, Germany, Canada and Australia as well as so many others. These vital relationships were constructed over generations and are embedded in institutions like NATO and the G7 and represented the greatest source of strength and were the foundation stone of the nation’s democracy and diplomacy. But to sustain this international order it must be supported beyond Europe and North America – it must be extended to Asia, Africa and Latin America who ultimately will decide whether this well established international co-operation will endure. So, with its influence and leverage in the world, Britain needs to build new friendships as the world’s geopolitical centre of gravity is moving south and east. He stressed that it wants to nurture new relationships based on shared interests and common principles and to show that the UK is a reliable partner by seeking to secure the economic development of other countries and to help them build resilience against threats – including from climate change, disease and terrorism – and to help them attract investment and harness the power of new technology.

The Foreign Secretary said specifically that the UK will press on with developing “clear, compelling and consistent offers, tailored to needs and its own strengths, spanning trade, development, defence, cyber security, technology, climate change and environmental protection”. To follow this up, his government will offer reliable sources of infrastructure investment through British Investment Partnerships, UK Export Finance and the G7 Partnership for Global Infrastructure.

In conclusion, he stressed the UK’s commitment to the Indo-Pacific region which included joining the Trans-Pacific free trade agreement and the need to deepen co-operation with India. Most important of all, he said, was to maintain a stable and powerful international order and support sovereignty and territorial integrity so as not to lapse into the old order where the strong prey upon the weak. Britain will therefore build new partnerships for the future in order that all should flourish.

There is no room today to analyse this important speech further. But it was surely an interesting analysis of Britain’s future intention – and, for people here at home, it reinforces the message that Britain is a “Proud Partner with The Bahamas on Security, Diplomacy, Trade and investment”.

Stark reality of economic woes

While it is heartening about the British Foreign Secretary’s upbeat assessment of the nation’s role in the world – as explained elsewhere on this page – what is happening in the country domestically is causing some concern.

At this time of year, commentators like to strike a note of optimism about prospects for the future. But this is difficult at the moment given the UK’s harsh economic times which are made worse, it seems, by the current bitterly cold weather. As in many other countries, there is a cost of living crisis with double digit inflation, high energy costs and increasing interest rates, and the UK economy is slowing almost to a standstill. All this has resulted in the erosion of living standards. Overall, these are said to be testing times in the UK, with a stench of decline that is similar to the 1970s and people feeling that the country has become rudderless. There are now calls for firm leadership with a vision for the future and a determination to work towards it.

Amidst such bleak economic news, how depressing it is to read that in the run-up to Christmas militants in the UK’s trade union movement have decided to maximise the disruption they can inflict on the public by calling for industrial action over the holiday period which would paralyse the rail network. What is more, the Royal College of Nursing is holding its first nationwide strike in its history and ambulance drivers and other National Health Service workers are likely to follow suit. Civil servants also plan to walk out followed by teachers and fire fighters and seasonal postal services may also be affected.

It is the case, of course, that, in the midst of high inflation when the purchasing power of pay packets has been reduced, the role of the unions in protecting the rights and interests of their members remains as important as ever. But more and more people are saying that compassion has given way to confrontation in the unions’ ever-increasing pay demands for many workers who are already well remunerated. It is said that, as union bosses crank up the pressure in support of their pay demands, vital services are thrown into chaos and even lives are now put at risk. Such confrontation undermines effective management and threatens the economy as a whole.

Nonetheless, reportedly there are some positive aspects to the whole gloomy picture as the recession may be less severe than expected and unemployment levels have not soared. Last week, the Bank of England raised interest rates again. But, at 3.5 per cent, they remain below the rate of 5 per cent before the great crash of 2008. It is said that inflation has peaked and may now be dropping.

But, perhaps most importantly, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is reported to be firm on resisting excessive public sector wage rises however deserving the cause. After the upheavals – and what is being termed the political skulduggery – at Westminster over the last few months, the country now needs a calm atmosphere together with a firm hand on the tiller of governance. Sunak seems to have created that during his short time in office. But some Tory MPs are now demanding a return to “proper Conservative values”. Perhaps his greatest challenge in the immediate future is to handle the unions effectively. As they flex their muscles, there are echoes of the infamous “winter of discontent” in Britain in 1978/79 when the country was brought to a halt under a beleaguered Labour government. The lesson from that was the need for firmness in resisting the award of inflation-matching pay increases across the public sector. According to the experts, to do this now would result in tax increases. In such circumstances, it seems that the British public’s sympathy for the trade unions is evaporating.