Embarrassing ourselves on the world stage

Sam Bidwell has a useful CAPX piece on British foreign policy and what has been revealed by the Chagos Islands debacle.

What’s the point of Britain’s foreign policy?

• With the Chagos Islands circus, Britain is embarrassing itself on the world stage
• As the 21st century progresses, the raw realities of international relations are being laid bare
• A reputation for integrity and respectability can quickly morph into a reputation for gullibility and credulity

Amidst discussions about Treasury bonds, corruption scandals and grooming gangs, it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that Britain isn’t just in poor shape domestically – it’s also embarrassing itself on the world stage.

Keir Starmer’s planned Chagos Islands handover was put on ice this week, with incoming US President Donald Trump set to be given an opportunity to veto the plans. After weeks spent trying to expedite the process, by offering increasingly elaborate cash handouts, it seems that Starmer may be stumped by Trump. For all of his ‘America First’ rhetoric, it’s hard to imagine President Trump consenting to a deal which would leave a key US military base at the mercy of a Chinese ally.

The whole piece is well worth reading, particularly the two paragraphs below, which highlight Keir Starmer’s acute and damaging limitations as both UK Prime Minister and as an international statesman. It is already embarrassingly clear that he lacks the pragmatic competence to succeed in either role.

Like everything else that he does, Starmer’s Chagos surrender is motivated by a sincere belief in the value of rules and processes. For the former human rights lawyer, the world really is governed by a coherent corpus of international law. Without these rules, the globe would surely descend into chaos, and so their maintenance is of the utmost importance. In the context of the Chagos Islands, that means abiding by the UN’s 2021 ruling about the ultimate sovereignty of the archipelago…

Rather than using this as an opportunity to reflect on whether or not those rules ever really mattered in the first place, Starmer’s answer is to double down. If the international rules-based order is collapsing, then Britain must become louder and prouder about its advocacy of that system. Unfortunately, there is little value in being the only player left abiding by the rules. A reputation for integrity and respectability can quickly morph into a reputation for gullibility and credulity.

As an additional point, I don’t agree with the sentence – “Like everything else that he does, Starmer’s Chagos surrender is motivated by a sincere belief in the value of rules and processes.”