Labour Party International Policy Review Submission: Labour Foreign Policy Group April 2021 Contents Foreword ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 4 Shaping and responding to the external environment ...................................................................... 6 Labour’s Approach: Values, Ambitions & Narratives ........................................................................ 9 Delivery and Implementation: Coherence across government ....................................................... 14 Delivery and implementation: Strategic relationships and multilateral alliances ............................. 18 Europe and the EU ........................................................................................................................ 18 United States ................................................................................................................................. 19 China ............................................................................................................................................. 21 The Commonwealth ....................................................................................................................... 22 Multilateral institutions ................................................................................................................... 23 Conclusion: areas for further investigation ..................................................................................... 25 About Labour Foreign Policy Group Labour Foreign Policy Group is a membership organisation for Labour party members with foreign policy, defence, and development expertise. It is our aim to harness that knowledge to support the party in its policy development. Our members are committed to supporting the development of a progressive, coherent and inclusive foreign policy that responds to the challenges and opportunities we now face, for the benefit of the people of Britain and the world. Contributing authors: Rishi Patel, Jessica Toale, Felix Cazalet, Denisa Delic, Toby Dickinson, Phil Entwistle, Geoffrey Harris, Franziska Kohler, Steve Macey, Kafia Omar, Caroline Pinder, Libby Smith, Alistair Somerville, Jordan Street, Ed Turner, Martin Westlake, Charles Wolcott This submission reflects the views of the contributing authors and their specific areas of interest and expertise. We hope this is a starting point for future policy development for the Shadow Cabinet. For further information, please contact Rishi Patel: rishipatel_175@hotmail.com Foreword The Labour Party has an opportunity to articulate a foreign policy vision for the United Kingdom which is progressive, pragmatic and forward-looking. This submission to the International Policy Strategic review, drafted by Labour Foreign Policy Group members, examines the opportunities and risks for the party when setting out that vision. It also signals where further thinking is needed, where LFPG may be able to support that thinking. The world has changed significantly since the last Labour government was in power. There have been shifts in geopolitics and geoeconomics and enhanced technological development. Britain’s influence and priorities have also shifted through its departure from the EU. We are also undergoing a deep period of societal reflection about Britain’s history on the world stage. The government’s Integrated Review, which attempts to address some of these questions, is undermined by serious contradictions. Between its stated aims, its actions at home and abroad, as well as a gap between the presentation of its ambitions against the reality of the situation Britain finds itself in as a middle power with significant global soft power. Labour must examine its own foreign policy approach, setting out a vision that considers these new circumstances and Britain’s changed relationship with its closest allies. It must also be underpinned by a coherent set of values but be flexible to evolving priorities. Labour should be proud of its foreign policy approach and much of its previous record, whilst also recognising where mistakes have been made and a new approach is needed. Labour values of internationalism and cooperation underpin our foreign policy priorities to put people first and focus on human rights, equality and democracy. We recognise that a shared responsibility helps tackle global issues and protects the poor and vulnerable at home and abroad. The last Labour government made the UK a leader on humanitarian and development assistance. We promoted an ‘ethical’ foreign policy making crucial interventions in places like Sierra Leone. We maintain important positions of influence on bodies like the UN Security Council, and we also encouraged other governments to make historic commitments on debt relief and development assistance at government-led summits (G8, 1998, Gleneagles, 2005 and G20, 2009) But Labour has lost the trust from different parts of the British electorate because of specific foreign policy decisions whose legacy we continue to bear: The decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003 without multilateral support. A laissez-faire approach to globalisation, and a lack of foresight of its impact on communities at home. And a hesitance from the previous leadership to immediately call out the strategic threat of Russia following the UK Salisbury chemical weapons attacks. And winning back this trust will be crucial to Labour’s success in securing power at the next general election. Executive Summary Shifts in geopolitics, technology and the natural world pose new challenges for British foreign policymaking. Changes in the strategic dynamics of the UK’s relationships with Russia and China, alongside vacillations in partnerships with Europe and the United States, have created a challenging operating environment for British statecraft. This is coupled with a set of enduring challenges which require long-term solutions, from global health security after the pandemic, advances in cybersecurity and artificial intelligence and their potential use by malicious actors, as well as the evolving geopolitics of energy and climate change. The world is also becoming more dangerous and less democratic. Multilateral institutions in their current form are struggling to cope with these new demands, and it is more incumbent on the UK to take a leadership role in its fora of influence to safeguard national and international safety and prosperity. To respond to these challenges, Labour must have an enduring, positive vision for the UK’s place in this new world order. Our foreign policy must both reflect Labour values and command the support of the British public. It must prioritise safety and security, be self-reflexive, and acknowledge Britain’s colonial past, as well as our status as a middle power operating outside the European Union. We must first re-establish the trust of the international community as a global partner who keeps its word. To ensure the global is sufficiently connected to the local, we must emphasise that nobody is safe until everybody is safe, which is particularly acute in areas of climate change and health resilience. As the party of work, Labour’s foreign policy must prioritise the rights of workers at home and abroad. Labour should campaign for a coherent cross-government foreign policy approach, which requires clarity, transparency and some reorganisation. A joined up foreign policy which brings together diplomacy, development, trade and defence can prevent contradicting policies and strategies. This has been typified in Yemen, where the UK government is both contributing to humanitarian aid efforts and exporting arms to Saudi Arabia. Labour’s opportunity lies in emphasising organisational effectiveness through a clear distinction of roles and responsibilities. This is shown in the linkages between international trade and national security questions, which requite coherence across the various parts of government. Finally, Labour should continue to commit to an independent department for international aid with a 0.7% commitment, which would increase global influence and ensure better value for money. With Europe, we must develop engagement principles based around shared interests, at institutional and member-state level. Britain’s post-Brexit future will continue to be dynamic, and Labour should press the government to be a reliable partner in implementing the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. We must develop positive additional forums for cooperation on shared challenges, whether strategic or finely grained, ranging from sanctions and cross-border crime to development and refugee policy. Whilst mindful of their limits, we should welcome other forums of cooperation such as the E3, particularly on security questions. There are other diplomatic statements the UK could make to emphasise partnership, from ensuring the benefits of the Erasmus programme are retained, to fully recognising the EU ambassador. With the United States, Labour should pursue an approach that combines values-based cooperation wherever possible, with divergence where necessary. Britain’s relationship with the United States is at the core of our Euro-Atlantic security. Labour must assure the United States that we are still its best-placed and best-resourced diplomatic and security partner in Europe. We must continue to act as a bridge to Europe as an ally of first resort. However, where needed, we must remain firm on areas of potential divergence from the U.S. approach, such as on Saudi Arabia. The United States has proven itself to be vulnerable to isolationist and populist forces, and Labour must develop and maintain relationships across the political spectrum, including with progressive activist and civil society groups, with a view to the longer term The rise of China is the most significant long-term trend in global politics and economics. A future Labour government must take a firm line with China, but not a hostile one. Our approach must be proactive, strategic and consistent in its principles and developed in cooperation with allies in Europe, NATO and the UN. The UK can achieve this by pursuing economic opportunities while strengthening our national economic security, taking a principled stance on human rights and working with China in multilateral forums on shared issues. Labour should further seek to better understand China, promote understanding of China among the UK public and combat anti-Chinese racism. Many of the global challenges outlined in this paper require multilateral solutions, and Labour must engage actively and consistently with multilateral institutions with a clear set of principles. The UK maintains a privileged position in the multilateral system but should play an active role in efforts to reform its institutions to ensure they are more accountable. Labour should seek to strengthen the Commonwealth Secretariat with greater transparency, oversight and enhanced capacity. A Commonwealth of equal partners has the potential to play an enhanced role as a global think tank, development implementer and as a network of related institutions. Labour should seek to engage first and foremost through existing blocs, however minilateral grouping could play an important role in our future prosperity and security and should be engaged with where they encourage mutual learning. Shaping and responding to the external environment Questions answered in this section: 1. What are the key threats facing the UK over the next decade? 2. What are some opportunities for the UK over the next decade? 4. What are the key trends in defence, development, trade and broader foreign affairs shaping the global environment? 5. What emerging issues must we prepare for? Trends and Emerging Threats The last decade has witnessed a series of new and evolving threats which have challenged the security of the UK and the wider world. From shifts in global power centres to the breadth of challenges facing states, the world has changed and Labour’s international outlook and policies need to respond accordingly. The most significant challenges facing the UK include: Challenges with UK partners and competitors ▪ The global landscape has transitioned from a unipolar to multi-polar world. China is set to overtake the United States as the world’s biggest economy by the end of this decade and is taking an increasingly assertive military posture to expand influence and exert pressure on other states. It is highly likely that the UK will be confronted with the question about what to do over Chinese aggression towards Taiwan. ▪ Russia remains a hostile actor, behaving in a disruptive manner for over a decade, and directly threatening democracy and the rule of law. It has ramped up aggressive foreign policies from Ukraine to Syria and has used chemical agents on UK soil and launched several cyberattacks against Britain and its allies. It will further seek to extend its influence over European security via its involvement in the NordStream 2 pipeline and activity in the Arctic Sea channels. ▪ The United States has proven itself to be vulnerable to isolationist and populist forces, and while the election of Biden is welcome, there is no guarantee that it marks an end of this particular threat. US credibility and standing has been knocked on the global stage and the US may find it has to take a more cautious approach to external engagements to appease the public at home. ▪ The EU faces a threat of populism and fragmentation. Upcoming elections in France and Germany forbode uncertain results for the UK's two most significant partners. Populism and threat to the rule of law in several Eastern European states means the EU faces significant strategic challenges to which the UK must be alive. Cross-border threats • COVID-19 has had a tremendous impact on the world, and the risk of future health pandemics remains a serious concern. Infectious diseases do not respect borders, therefore tackling them at their source and investing in stronger healthcare systems will be vital to making us all less vulnerable. • Technology is evolving at a fast pace. New advances in science present both great opportunities and future risks, including the ethical use of artificial intelligence, the creation of new nuclear weapons to complex malevolent cyber attacks. • The geopolitics of green energy development will create various risks and opportunities, including the emergence of different alliances and dependencies. The UK should monitor this as it develops. Climate change remains an existential threat that affects all citizens worldwide. • An increase in the occurrence of natural disasters and climate security related risks - spanning from droughts in Sub-Saharan Africa to ice caps melting in the Arctic - have the potential to both exacerbate fragile contexts and affect economic prosperity and security at home, as we have seen with flooding events. Rise of authoritarianism • The decline of democracy and rise in authoritarianism is another emerging global threat. Nearly 75% of the world’s population live in a country that has witnessed a decline in their democracies last year. As a result, there has been an increase in crackdowns on civil liberties, human rights abuses and the ramping up of global disinformation and censorship campaigns to counter and silence criticism – including what we are currently witnessing in Hong Kong and Myanmar. (See special focus below on promoting democracy in emerging economies) Decline of multilateralism and the rule-based order • The state of global cooperation and multilateralism is at a critical crossroads. In the past decade, there has been a degradation of well-established norms, such as China’s efforts to change the definition of what constitutes progress on human rights at the Human Rights Council. • There has also been a deterioration of the international rules-based system from impunity for violations of international law to a lack of accountability structures underpinning international frameworks. This has manifested through P5 vetoes at the UN Security Council to threats of withdrawing finances from UN bodies which have put tremendous strain on effective multilateralism, the cornerstone to addressing global challenges and opportunities. The new face of conflict • The era of inter-state conflict has given way to an era of intra-state conflict, underpinned by ethnic tensions and the use of proxy forces. We see this clearly in Syria, Yemen and even Myanmar. These are further complicated by advances in the use of cyberspace as a means to pursue political and terrorism goals, the secondary impacts of climate change, and a rise of authoritarian states willing to ferment instability for their own ends. Opportunities through alliances Within this challenging international context, alliances matter greatly. UK to play a role in defining the future of existing alliances • The shifting global landscape and great power rivalries have caused the UK’s strategic alliances and partnerships to take stock of their future direction and evolve. NATO is currently reviewing its strategic outlook to ensure it is fit for purpose. The European Union is conducting a similar exercise and the continued use of ad-hoc, and mini-lateral formats focused on specific issues has proliferated. The UK should further be active in discussion about UN reform. Take advantage of mini-lateral formats • There appears to be a proliferation of mini-lateral formats in response to lack of trust in the effectiveness of existing multilateral groupings and to circumvent the barriers put up by bigger powers. The UK has the potential to feed into and take advantage of these groupings on specific issues. They present an opportunity for a middle-sized power such as the UK to amplify its voice on the world stage, and to collaborate with partners on addressing global challenges collectively to suit British strategic interests. They offer an opportunity to cooperate and learn from the smaller established and emerging democracies, particularly in East Asia that are doing well out of pandemic. Engage civil society and academia on responding and preparing for emerging threats • The public debate around the use of remotely piloted air systems offers lessons in what happens when the utility of a (military) technology or capability runs ahead of extant ethical and legal frameworks. Emerging technological capabilities offer huge opportunities. Labour should commit to engaging academia and civil society in developing thinking on the issue – as well as learning from and working with other like-minded countries. The threats and opportunities outlined above are just some of the global landscape that will affect the development of Labour’s foreign policy to 2024 and beyond. Labour’s Approach: Values, Ambitions & Narratives Questions answered in this section: 7. How do we place Labour values at the heart of our foreign policy? 8. What should the ambition of UK international policy be under a Labour government? 10. How should Labour articulate a narrative about Britain’s role in the world across the realms of foreign affairs, defence, development and trade? 11. How can Labour make connections between the global and the local and its domestic reform agenda and its international policy? 12. How can we better represent the interests of all our nations and regions in international policy making? Brexit, the pandemic and ongoing strategic challenges provide the UK has an opportunity to carve out a new global role and consider what sort of nation it wants to be. But Britain’s foreign policy vision has been consistently short-termist. The government’s “Global Britain” policy, articulated through the Integrated Review, is the culmination of decades-long confusion over the vision and unifying set of principles guiding the UK’s international engagements. It lacks long-term thinking, and this can be traced back to a combination of factors that include the loss of a vision for the UK as a middle-sized power. There has been an excessive focus on politically expedient decisions without due regard for long-term interests. A positive vision of the UK in the world and clear strategy, underpinned by a consistent set of values, are essential to shaping and responding effectively to the complex challenges and uncertainties the world faces. They contribute to building stable and lasting partnerships, to negotiating the difficult trade-offs that are inevitably required and to creating a foreign policy that has the buy-in of the British people. This section considers how Labour values can underpin an approach to foreign policy, sets out a framework for what Labour’s foreign policy ambition might be, offers advice on which narratives we can build. Values: Continuity at home and abroad Labour’s foreign policy must be an extension of our values at home: equality, social justice and opportunity for all. We must weave these principles across a foreign policy that joins together diplomacy, defence, development and trade, to demonstrate Britain is an outward-facing, tolerant, compassionate country that respects and promotes democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Labour is at its foundation an internationalist party, seeking justice and equality across the world. This means protecting human rights and the most vulnerable citizens at home and abroad, working with partners as equals toward shared goals, and engaging with and pursuing reforms of multilateral forums. Ambitions: Five underlying pillars A Labour government must translate these values into ambitions for foreign policy leadership. Its aim should be to restore the UK’s reputation for global leadership, whilst acknowledging and responding to the changed global landscape and its own limitations. We propose a five-pillar approach to Labour’s foreign policy ambition: 1. Safety and security - Labour’s priority should be the safety and security of the British people, acknowledging that nobody is safe until everybody is safe. The British public need to be kept informed on how our efforts abroad will keep them safe, healthy and prosperous at home - whether this is through distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine, cooperation to tackle climate change or efforts to reduce violent conflict or prevent atrocities at home and overseas. 2. Solidarity - Labour should place empathy for the vulnerable at the centre of its foreign policy. The plight of those abroad should not be pitted against those at home in need, whether this is those in extreme poverty, frontline workers or those in global supply chains, vulnerable women, people displaced by conflict or those with their human rights under attack. We should seek solutions that benefit all. 3. Trust - Labour should ensure that Britain remains trusted to keep its word on the international stage and embrace partnerships and alliances that allow it to meet its aims. We have seen Conservative willingness to break with both international and national laws and treaties when it suits them, meaning the UK has lost credibility as a global partner in development. Labour will need to restore our reputation and re-establish credibility. 4. Acknowledgement - Labour should acknowledge Britain’s collective past, its present influence and future potential to impact the global stage. This includes Labour’s decisions that have in the past undermined its values and impacted the trust of the British people. This will form the basis for building a new, more inclusive approach to Britain’s future. It must honestly assess the UK’s place in the world. 5. Feminism - Labour should ensure the rights of women and girls are considered in decision- making and policymaking. This should be the basis of an ethical foreign policy fit for the 21st century. Labour’s Britain should be a force for good, through its actions not just its rhetoric, leading by example through our policies at home and engagements abroad. Polling shows that this is what the British people want and deserve. Special focus: 1. Putting women and girls and children’s rights at the heart of foreign policy Women and girls continue to face discrimination and violence in every part of the world, and are most impacted by the crises of war, climate change and the COVID pandemic. The past ten years have been labelled the “deadly decade” for children living in conflict-affected countries, with three times as many child rights violations recorded as there was in the previous decade. These are not just a human rights issues: gender equality and protection of children are critical if the world is to achieve its full human potential. Pursuing an ethical and feminist foreign policy requires the UK to put the rights of women and children at home and abroad at its centre. It also required the UK to recognise the importance of gender equality as required under the International Gender Equality Act 2014 and the rights of children under the UN’s Children and Armed Conflict Agenda by ensuring women and children’s rights are at the heart of all conflict resolution negotiations. The UK must further uphold the UN Agreement to Protect Civilians (Responsibility to Protect), to which the UK was a signatory in 2005, and abide by the Arms Trade Treaty, which was renewed in October 2020 and seeks to establish international standards governing arms transfers. 2. Promoting and strengthening democracy in emerging economies A Labour government should make the promotion, strengthening and acceleration of democracy a core foreign policy goal. Democracy around the world is shrinking. For the first time since 2001, autocracies became the majority in 2020. 68% of the world population now live in autocracies. Nationalist-populist orders dominate several of the countries wielding the greatest military, economic and political influence, including China, Brazil, India, and Turkey. The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly accelerated this rise in authoritarianism, prompting 89 countries to make emergency declarations, while many have imposed measures affecting freedoms of expression (42), assembly (121) and privacy (41). Media freedom, civic space, and freedom of expression are also coming under attack. As these significant deteriorations have occurred, the world has witnessed a simultaneous increase in human rights violations and violence. Nowhere are human rights violated on a wider scale than in conflict settings – and for the ninth time in twelve years, the world grew less peaceful in 2019-2020. In 2019, there were 54 state-based and 67 non-state conflicts – roughly double the number compared to 2010 (31 state and 28 non state). Rising exclusion and repression is leading to political turmoil in which violence against civilians and riots have increased rapidly since 2015. Protests driven by citizens’ demands for a stake in decision-making, equality, rights and human security have intensified all over the world. States – primarily autocratic states - bear heavy responsibility for related violence: in the decade 2010 to 2019, 76 per cent of the conflict deaths recorded by Uppsala resulted from state-based violence. A new UK foreign policy approach to democracy promotion is needed, but it must recognise the failures of the past. The relationship between peace, democracy and human rights is evident, and the world is becoming more violent, less democratic and less respectful of human rights at a macro and micro level. For UK foreign policy this to be meaningful – and for it to be respected around the world – it must come with an acknowledgement that previous democracy promotion efforts have fallen short of what is needed. The Iraq war is a haunting spectre and is just one – albeit the most catastrophic – example of the instrumentalization of democracy promotion. Part of this will be a commitment to a recalibration of engagement with other democracies, but this must be intimately connected with a domestic pledge to get our own democracy in order. Too often, the United Kingdom has been inconsistent with the application of our values and so a foreign policy under a new Labour government, must make a firm commitment to keep democracy central in all decisions. Promoting and supporting democracy will have multiple dimensions: • Commit to working with other allied democracies to acknowledge democratic deficits within our own systems and to improve and strengthen our democratic systems at home. • Invest in alliances with established and emerging democracies, including exploring the role a D10 grouping could play in promoting this learning and strengthening process. • Support civil society groups and peoples movements in autocracies • Redouble efforts at global and multilateral levels to protect civic space, promote human rights, gender equality and workers’ rights and defend media freedom. Narrative: Nobody is safe until everybody is safe To win over the British public, Labour must ensure people feel connected to its foreign policy agenda. It must effectively communicate that in an increasingly interconnected world, we all benefit from a more humane, prosperous and safer world. In line with the ambitions outlined above, our narrative must: • Recognise the challenges the UK face, build on our strengths/past successes but be forward looking • Be positive and patriotic but realistic about our middle power status – and what that means about our ambitions and limitations • Acknowledge strength in cooperation with partners and commitment to working with partners who share our aims and values • Link why what we do overseas is important at home and focuses on shared challenges – including support for human rights, sustainable development goals, workers’ rights, gender equality, climate change, health outcomes and security. This narrative should be supported by efforts to increase public awareness and education on global connectedness and the UK’s foreign policy goals and approaches – including in schools and colleges. The British public have a right to be kept informed of how our defence, diplomacy and aid budgets are being spent - and to appreciate the cost-benefit framework of these activities. Special focus: 1. Connecting the global and the local Supporting less developed countries in their efforts to reduce poverty and inequality can bring direct benefits to Britain, creating new markets and trading opportunities for British businesses, as well as shared skills and talent to research and develop new technologies and advances in medicine and science. Labour should link the UK’s foreign policy goals to direct benefits to the UK public, such as through economic feedback loops or policy decisions. For instance, making Britain a world-leader in tackling climate change means supporting developing countries to leapfrog fossil and move towards cleaner technologies; investing in the UK’s green energy capabilities, skills and jobs; and promoting climate change innovations and adaptations at local level. A decision to promote fair trade for workers overseas should be accompanied with tangible support, like rate relief or tax reductions, for co- operatives and social enterprises that want to promote those good. A further example is in the areas of healthcare. Investing in stronger health systems in the UK and abroad, makes us all less vulnerable to global pandemics. The UK should draw from its historic expertise in global health and security as well as our universities’ reputation for sound science and research. 2. Benefitting all nations and regions of the UK Labour is the party for all of the UK, and all four nations should share equally in the benefits that a global approach brings to the country. Labour should ensure foreign investment and trade links are shared across the UK, ensuring that foreign companies wanting to establish themselves in the UK are encouraged to build and invest in areas of high unemployment. Labour should further commit to working with the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland on a foreign trade and development strategy that will bring jobs and investment to their regions, fund them to establish the necessary skills training and provide other resources that will enable them to take full advantage of emerging opportunities. 3. Engaging with the public and civil society While foreign policy is not a high-ranking concern for most members of the public, an accountable and legitimate foreign policy has to recognise the interests of the British people to allow for a long- term approach that cuts across administrations. Polling to gauge public opinion has seen a spike in popularity (and more caution is needed in interpreting results before jumping into action), but the consultation of and relationship with civil society is equally important and currently under significant threat. Without these voices foreign policy risks becoming even more statist than it is already, missing opportunities to adapt and respond to emerging challenges early on and will like the buy-in it needs to be sustained. In order to engage more effectively with civil society, Labour should: • increase funds to sector NGOs and relevant think tanks • encourage innovation in private sector in climate friendly products / solutions; • encourage understanding between civil society and civil servants about the benefits of consultation in achieving mutually beneficial outcomes, particularly in the UK’s development policy. Delivery and Implementation: Coherence across government Questions being answered: 14. How can Labour take a cross-government approach to international and security policy? 16. How can a Labour Government support other channels of influence – social, economic and cultural? 27. What machinery of Government or Whitehall reorganisation might be necessary to deliver a Labour approach to international and security policy? In order to deliver the ambition, set out in the previous section, Labour will need to ensure significant cross-government coherence to ensure strategies, objectives and tactics are aligned. A joined up foreign policy, bringing together diplomacy, development, trade and defence, that prevents contradicting policies and strategies, is critical to restoring Britain’s credibility and reputation. The consequences of not doing this are evident in the UK’s policies and institutions. Departmental fragmentation is an issue, with key departments’ capacity reduced and excluded from decision- making at No 10 and the Cabinet Office. Dozens of departments are represented overseas, and the creation of DIT and its nine Trade Commissioners added another layer to this complexity. The responsibility for UK aid spending has been increasingly distributed across departments with questionable impact on effectiveness. And we have witnessed contradictory actions in Yemen combining vast amounts of humanitarian aid to the country and arms exports to the Saudi Arabia, compounded by the mixed signals sent by increasing defence spending while cutting aid. Nevertheless, the UK has also had successes, for example it has been admired by partners for its strong cross-departmental work, including the Stabilisation Unit or the Conflict Security and Stability Fund. This is something that should be built upon. A principled and coherent approach requires strong representation from both policy and geographic expertise, something that risks getting lost in the new FCDO structures and is equally inadequately reflected in NSC structures. To combat this fragmentation and build a coherent cross-government approach to foreign policy, Labour should: • Develop a clear vision based on its principles and (adaptable) objectives that underpin coherent cross-government decision-making. This should include ways to measure progress against objectives, to assess transparency and effectiveness of spend by departments, to identify trade-offs and consider long-term implications of proposed actions. • Develop a clear distinction of roles within Whitehall for each department involved in foreign policy. This includes a slimmed down role for Cabinet Office, focusing on its coordinating function with the delegation of policy and delivery responsibility to departments. • Ensure greater transparency, within diplomatic reason, of the interdependencies between different foreign policy elements, e.g. greater transparency of trade negotiations, linking development, environmental and value objectives to economic goals. • Strengthen the function of the National Security Council by ensuring the National Security Advisor and Council is well resourced and supported. Establish a National Security Strategy Sub Committee to ensure the NSC has the capacity not only to react to external developments but also to focus on long-term strategic thinking, • Reconstitute an independent department dedicated to international development (see Box below for more on this) • Recognise the greater importance of economic and trade issues to broader foreign policy objectives. To achieve this, integrate economic agenda into NSC discussions, and merge DIT and the FCO. • Ensure all departments and local governments that play a role in the UK’s overseas engagements are fully aware of the UK’s aims, approaches and partnerships. Special focus areas: 1. Reasserting UK leadership on international development The UK has established global leadership on development. Between 1997 and 2010 Labour tripled Britain’s aid budget, moving towards achieving the 0.7% GNI target to be spent on humanitarian and development assistance by 2013. Labour helped lift 3 million people out of poverty each year, got some 40 million more children into school, and improved water and sanitation for over 1.5 million people. The Conservatives are now reneging on the commitment to the 0.7% target, using the impact of COVID-19 on our economic recovery to cut the UK’s aid budget by £2.9 billion. This will lead to cuts in aid of over 60% to some of the world’s poorest people, including those displaced by conflict in Yemen and Syria. This is short sighted. The pandemic, mass migration from conflict zones, and changes in weather patterns have shown just how interconnected the world is. UK aid must be at the heart of a Labour values-driven foreign policy, aimed at lifting millions out of poverty while simultaneously tackling threats to global security. The core development areas of gender equality, tackling climate change, assisting countries to build strong public health systems and facilitate equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines, will be crucial in building a fairer world in which everyone has equal opportunity to learn, work and thrive, no matter where they live. Labour members and civil society have consistently called for the reinstatement of DFID as an independent department. In some ways this may be seem counterintuitive to calls to increase cross-government coherence. However, done the right way they are mutually supportive aims. Evidence from Australia, Canada and Norway has shown that subsuming aid departments under foreign ministries decreases rather than increases global influence. To regain UK leadership in development and support aims to create greater cross-government coherence, Labour should: • Reinstate the Department for International Development with a Secretary of State to ensure the voice of development is present at the Cabinet and NSC. • Improve transparency on decision-making and spending by continuing to support the role of the international development select committee (IDC) and ICAI as watchdogs on UK aid spending through a reinstated DFID. • Reinstate the 0.7% commitment in line with the 2002 International Development Act and with central accountability in DFID to ensure greatest quality, effectiveness and transparency. Ensure that all departments that spend ODA are subject to the same level of scrutiny and accountability and that any cross-government funds have better governance. • Revive the principles of the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (and subsequent conferences on this) which gave less developed nations and their citizens a stronger voice in how aid programmes and funds should be managed. and meet Grand Bargain commitment to work closely with local and national organisations to build capacities. • Put the Sustainable Development Goals at the heart of our agenda for future aid programmes and emphasise the UK’s responsibility to deliver on these goals at home as well as abroad. • Ensure aid is always “untied” from trade and that developing countries are supported to buy locally or obtain best value products needed as part of aid programmes. • Ensure that conflict prevention is central to any UK aid strategy, given the impact that violent conflict, war and displacement have on development progress. 2. Making the most of UK soft power UK soft power has been one of the UK’s longest standing assets, including its vibrant civil society, its role as a leader in the sciences, the excellence of its educational and sporting institutions, its business and legal environment, its reputation as a development super-power, and its unparalleled cultural influence through the BBC and the British Council. The UK is internationally regarded as an actor with impressive policy-making capacity, a respected voice in the UN, a leading humanitarian actor, supporter of the rules-based international system and a defender of democratic values. These reputational benefits will not suddenly disappear, but we will have to invest and defend them rather than taking them for granted. Promoting the UK’s soft power assets will be important in developing a positive vision for Britain’s place in and contribution to the world. The UK must: • Require the FCDO to take a lead in convening and delivering a ‘soft power’ strategy that benefits from the full range of UK assets strengthen existing initiatives and providing additional resources to: • Support overseas students via the British Council and Commonwealth Secretariat • Ensure the new Turing programme is an effective and a well-funded international student exchange programme, which replicates all the benefits of the Erasmus and Erasmus + schemes. • Extend graduate route work visas to five years • Agree a visa waiver rule for touring musicians and cultural ambassadors • Expand the BBC world service. 3. Taking a cross-government approach to conflict and atrocity prevention Structural or upstream conflict prevention entails building the resilience of society and the state so that they can manage conflicts without recourse to violence. The link between enhanced resilience and conflict prevention needs to include long-term strategic support to state and non-state institutions and civil society organisations that can manage conflict non-violently and promote peace. A fresh coherent Labour strategy on stabilisation, conflict prevention and peacebuilding that focuses on structural drivers of conflict would enable the UK to clearly articulate its peace and stability impact around the world, further build its credibility as a conflict responder and have valuable dividends for other foreign policy/development efforts (i.e. SDG implementation) A UK strategy in this area should factor in: • a focus on resilience to withstand the impacts of climate change, which the UK recognises as a threat multiplier • increased authoritarianism and anger over inequality and exclusion as a growing political force and contributory factor to violent conflict and irregular/forced migration • increased competition for diminishing natural resources (e.g. land, water) and poor natural resource management which may catalyse violent conflict • a multifaceted understanding of the gendered drivers and impacts of violent conflict, including the roles which women and girls play in conflict prevention and peacebuilding. Labour's foreign policy also needs to build upon the legacy of the UK government in working on gender equality and the Women, Peace and Security agenda but go further. It needs to be implemented with women actively engaged in peace, security and stability negotiations, and it should ensure that throughout all approaches to conflict the government is taking into account the impact of violence on women and girls, and actively seeking to address harmful gender norms in all responses. Labour should develop a realistic strategy encompassing support for short-term stabilisation as well as for longer-term conflict prevention must identify, acknowledging and working through the inevitable trade-offs and potential pitfalls. Delivery and implementation: Strategic relationships and multilateral alliances Questions answered: 19. How should Labour approach the UK’s relations with: i) Europe and the EU? ii) The United States? iii) China? 21. What role could or should the Commonwealth play in UK foreign policy? 22. How should we cooperate with other states and organisations through multilateral institutions such as the UN and WTO? 23. How should the UK approach global networks and so-called ‘minilateratism’? 24. How should Labour work with other progressive forces around the world, including sister parties and trades unions on shared priorities? The UK has to invest in stable and lasting partnerships, spanning bilateral and multilateral alliances including a strong relationship with the EU, a robust and future-proof relationship with the US, and a genuine investment in the rules-based international system. The UK’s dealings with other nations and historic relationships must examined and transformed based on shared values, including seeking trade and political affiliations with those multilateral organisations that share our philosophies and values, eg as outlined in the Charter of the Commonwealth, and that will bring the most value to the UK’s economy and defence capabilities. This section considers the UK’s relationship with the EU, United States and China, as well as our role in multilateral institutions and global networks. Europe and the EU The UK-EU relationship is arguably our most important. We believe the UK can have greatest influence, and be at its most positive as a force in the world, if it cooperates closely with the EU and other European countries in foreign policy. We need to recognise our shared interests: security and stability in Europe is security and stability for the UK. While much damage has been caused to the UK’s reputation and relationship by the clumsy approach to negotiations and subsequent threats to break international law, this relationship will develop significantly over the next four years as the details of the Brexit deal evolve and emerge. Labour must remain attuned to these changes as the relationship develops and articulate a set of engagement principles based around shared interests. The Trade and Cooperation Agreement will have to be reviewed by 2024, and the case for a closer relationship with the EU is likely to have become compelling. Labour should press the government to be a reliable partner in implementing the TCA, rather than picking short-term fights for narrow, party- political gain, and should ensure that any divergence is justified by evidence of benefit to the UK, rather than “divergence for its own sake”. We should also press for the concerns of all parts of the UK to have a voice in the government’s approach. The UK has a two-fold interest in security and economic cooperation with Europe: we need secure neighbours and we ourselves stand to benefit. The pandemic has thrown this into sharp relief: if the UK or EU countries were suddenly unable to access PPE from China or Malaysia, because of our proximity and continued close links, both sides would lose out. Key bilateral relationships within the EU will also have suffered because of the government’s approach, and will be ripe for renewal. Objectives should include: • Healing the pain and divisions of recent years; • Focusing on the role of UK residents in EU countries, and EU diaspora in the UK, as a driver of co-operation and friendship; • Bringing out the full potential of cultural and sporting cooperation, with a particular focus on youth exchange and dialogue. Areas for cooperation The UK needs to develop positive forums to discuss shared challenges (whether big-picture strategic or more finely grained) with the EU and its member states and, where appropriate and there is appetite on both sides, agree on common approaches. This points to a deeper, and more institutionalised partnership between the UK and the EU. Some examples of policy areas where such dialogue is of potential value include sanctions, cross- border crime, climate policy, development policy, regional and global peace and stability, refugees and displaced people, disinformation, and cyber-security. The UK should be open to exploring the creation of a European Security Council as a possible concept, as well as extending key bilateral and multilateral links. E3 cooperation with France and Germany is welcome but we should be mindful of the limits, especially for Germany. We may need a format wider for security cooperation than the E3 but one which sits outside EU institutions, since a more diverse EU is unlikely to be able to pool sovereignty within EU institutions much further, and this may represent an opportunity for pragmatic cooperation with the UK. The UK should also consider the gains from a relationship with, or even limited membership of, key EU programmes. The most prominent example here is ERASMUS. The Turing programme, its very partial replacement, will offer a far lower level of benefit to UK and European students. We should recognise that the UK’s international relationships, reputation and standing, and indeed economy have all benefited from hosting students from EU member states, and seek to rebuild such opportunities for the future, as well as offering a wider range of opportunities to students and young people from the UK. Whether through a much-boosted Turing programme or a different arrangement, educational cooperation needs to recognise the potential of life, language and creative skills – all the more important given the nature of today’s economy. As a sign of goodwill and support for our continuing desire to ally with the EU on economic, social, defence and cultural affairs, the UK should provide full ambassadorial status to the EU ambassador. United States Context and Background The UK’s relationship with the United States is at the core of our Euro-Atlantic security. Alongside relations with our nearest neighbours in the European Union, the United States remains the UK’s most important strategic relationship. Whether through close diplomatic and security ties with US government agencies, transatlantic cooperation on transnational issues like climate change, or shared progressive democratic ideals across the Atlantic, the UK’s relationship with the United States is multifaceted and should be at the core of Labour’s international strategy, regardless of who occupies the White House. The UK remains a bridge from the United States to the European Union. But outside the European Union, the UK’s role is no longer as an English-speaking Brussels whisperer for the United States, but as a flexible partner that can work with the United States as both the ally of first resort and as one of only two “full-service” military, development, and diplomatic powers (alongside France) in Europe. The “Indo-Pacific tilt” laid out in the government’s Integrated Review is largely rhetoric, lacking resources and the vision for a constructive British role in the region. Labour should resist the temptation to overstretch to regions of the world where the UK is not a strategic player. A Labour government must convince the United States that it is still first and foremost a committed European power and the best-placed, and best-resourced Euro-Atlantic diplomatic and security partner. What should Labour do? Labour must stay true to internationalist values as the basis for the UK to pursue shared interests with the United States, whether there is a Democratic or Republican in the White House. This will require a long term focus on building relationships both with political elites in Washington – particularly on Capitol Hill as Ireland has done so successfully – and in state capitals. In parallel, it will require skilled public diplomacy to reach the American people more effectively, including progressive activists, trade unions, and other like-minded aspects of civil society. Labour should pursue an approach that combines values-based, smart power cooperation wherever possible with divergence where necessary. Cooperation on a transatlantic initiative to tackle corruption and kleptocracy, for example, could accompany a divergent approach from the United States on Saudi Arabia and arms sales, where the UK must take a more aggressive approach to reining in domestic and international human rights abuses. Specific recommendations • Develop and maintain relationships across the political spectrum in Washington, and with progressive activist and civil society groups that share internationalist values. This will require new resources for the British Embassy in Washington, including to reinstate the position of Congressional Relations Counsellor to build better relationships across the political spectrum in Washington. • Under Labour leadership, the UK should work to address Washington’s concerns about Brexit and Northern Ireland. • In the immediate term, both the PLP backbenches and the shadow cabinet can play a role in improving Labour’s ties with progressive groups in the United States, such as through an exchange program with members and staff from the Congressional Progressive Caucus. • Foster the UK’s trade and investment relationship with the United States to benefit British workers. Cooperation with like-minded progressive groups on a shared transatlantic economic agenda will be key. In areas such as the technology sector, the UK should also seek to influence the U.S. government and Congress to pursue more comprehensive regulation of social media companies that have grown unchecked and have stood by as disinformation spread on their platforms. We should also support efforts to pursue fairer international taxation of Big Tech. China Context and Background The rise of China is the most significant long-term trend in global politics and economics. Since the Chinese Communist Party initiated economic reforms in the late 1970s, China’s economy has grown by an annual average of 9.5%, lifting 800 million people out of poverty. The continuing growth in the Chinese economy is an undeniably important source of global economic growth and actions taken by the UK and others should not provide the opportunity for the CCP to present itself as being threatened. Under Xi Jinping, the Communist Party has become increasingly authoritarian in its rule over China, clamping down on civil society, the internet, the media, academia, and religion. The CCP nevertheless enjoys considerable public support. The most egregious elements of the crackdown can be seen in China’s westernmost region of Xinjiang, where over a million members of Muslim minority groups such as the Uyghur have been subjected to incarceration without trial and sometimes horrific abuse, and in Hong Kong, where the CCP has imposed repressive new legislation. The CCP has also implemented a more hawkish foreign policy, building up its armed forces, militarising its islands in the South China Sea, and threatening Taiwan with invasion. It has developed its alliance with an aggressive Russia. The response of successive conservative governments has been inconsistent, running from Cameron’s ‘Golden Era of UK-China Relations’ to the more hawkish turn, promoted by the China Research Group. The Government policy review continues in the same vein creating confusion both in China and among allies. What should Labour do? A future Labour government must take a firm line with China, but not a hostile one. Our approach to China must be proactive, strategic and consistent in its principles. Labour policy should be designed to promote peace, prosperity, international law and human rights. It will not join in a new cold war or risk military confrontation in Asia. It should develop its policies in cooperation with EU and NATO allies - the UK alone will be vulnerable - and carry them forward within the UN system and with full respect for international law. Recommendations • Better understand the influence of China - Launch a systematic mapping exercise to chart the CCP’s influence and interference operations in the UK. • Pursue economic opportunities with China - but be realistic about the constraints we face in doing so • Protect our national economic security - including strengthening oversight of foreign takeovers that may go against the UK’s national interest and ensuring the UK’s future industrial strategy includes the development of parallel domestic supply chains that can be scaled up should imports from China be disrupted. • Take a principled stance on China’s human rights record - including strengthening the 2015 Modern Slavery Act to introduce penalties for businesses whose supply chains include the use of forced labour from China; banning Chinese companies complicit in human rights abuses from operating in the UK; and extending Magnitsky sanctions to officials responsible for repression in Xinjiang • Work with China in multilateral forums to tackle global challenges such as climate change • Lead by example with a green economic recovery for the UK: roll out a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) and develop benchmarks to hold countries accountable to their carbon reduction pledges. • Provided that concerns around national security and human rights are satisfied, provide an open environment for Chinese investment in the UK. • Promote an open and welcoming environment for private Chinese citizens to enter the UK - for study, tourism, business, immigration and political asylum • Convene task forces (of police, university leaders and civil society groups) to combat both domestic anti-Chinese racism and the harassment of UK-based Chinese citizens by organisations and individuals linked to China’s Party-state. • Promote China literacy amongst the UK population - including by incorporating more China- focussed content into the national curriculum as part of wider decolonisation efforts and increasing government funding for language studies and China-focussed research at British universities and think tanks The LFPG China Working Group is running a series of roundtables over the next three months to develop these themes. The Commonwealth Post-Brexit, all Commonwealth members, excluding Malta, are outside the ‘big blocs’ dominating international trade and commerce (EU, USA, China). This creates a common and aligned interest in combating such blocs at the WTO and in other forums. The UK should view the Commonwealth as an additional vehicle for global influence, not replacement for the EU, and also one in which it is operating with partners of equal stature. The first priority is a much-strengthened Secretariat - with more transparency, oversight, and significantly enhanced capacity including elite civil servants from across the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth has the potential to play a number of distinct but overlapping roles. These include: • Global think-tank ComSec should look to OECD as inspiration for what an organisation containing many individual countries spread across the world can do in terms of influencing agendas and setting standards. ComSec could act as a similar organisation to the OECD, playing a leading role in issues like reforming the international tax system in recent years (see ‘Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ Initiative), or in developing international best practice initiatives like the Extractives Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI); however, this would require a big upgrade in its current capacity. It could also help develop and coordinate a network of policy think tanks in developing countries where such capacity is currently limited. Example areas of key focus could include: Trade and Regulation (standard-setting, especially for new products/services/ industries– an underappreciated area, very important in international trade); International tax and customs (improving international tax system, customs and trade facilitation); Finance and banking growth and regulation. Solutions to climate change including green standard setting could be another area for exploration, given the impact that it has on many of the commonwealth member states. ComSec could provide a faster, more efficient alternative to other international organisations in the space. • Development implementer ComSec should be a principal channel through which UK technical assistance is channelled (this involves substantially upgrading ComSec as mentioned earlier). Other Commonwealth members, both developed and developing, should be welcomed and encouraged to channel technical assistance in this way. Through this approach, there should be an effective mechanism for partnerships and mutual learning between north and south, east and west. • Network of related institutions - The Commonwealth Family In addition to the Secretariat, there are a network of affiliated institutions such as the Commonwealth Games Federation, Commonwealth Education Trust and Commonwealth Parliamentary Association amongst others. These relationships should be fostered and their capacities bolstered through mutual cooperation. Multilateral institutions Many of the global problems outlined in this review require multilateral solutions. The UK must therefore be active in key multilateral institutions and place engagement in these organisations at the heart of its approach to global engagement. The UK maintains a privileged position within the multilateral system - as part of nearly all major blocks, for example the G7, G20, and UN Security Council - yet the current infrastructure of the multilateral system is no longer able to respond effectively to the economic, security and social challenges the world faces. As such the UK should play an active role in efforts to reform global institutional framework and multilateral agencies so they are more effective and accountable for citizens at home and abroad. The UK’s approach to UN and other multilateral institution reform must be based within its broader vision for a progressive foreign policy and underpinned by its values. Labour Foreign Policy Group is working with Lord Collins to determine the role the UK under Labour wants and needs the UN to play in its foreign policy, its behaviour as a member state and its vision and plan for an effective multilateral system. It is crucial to acknowledge that while the UK maintains a privileged position in the multilateral system, it is not a forum to restore British status and influence. Change will be incremental and institutional change will rarely fix political problems stemming from competition between member states. To be effective UK engagement will need to centre on themes and processes in the long-run. The UK should use all its levers to engage at multilateral level, aim for consistency in messaging and work to build cross-regional coalitions, consider compromises and use available incentives. We must also show strong leadership, consistent engagement by the Prime Minister in annual General Assembly meetings and consistent, flexible and transparent funding to the institutions. Labour could consider a Special representative on Global Governance and support efforts to obtain a Civil Society ‘Champion’ at the UN providing a focal point to empower, coordinate and convene civil society. It should support the strengthening of the UN’s work on peace, security and human rights and strive to develop a reputation as an honest broker that takes principled positions and extends its soft power. Finally, the UK should raise awareness with the UK public of the role the UN plays to sustain support for multilateralism working in cooperation with civil society, businesses and others. These principles of engagement apply beyond the UN, and should extend to other multilateral institutions like the OECD, G7 and NATO. The UK should work with these institutions and to condemn human rights abuses, seeking partnership specifically with those nations which share our values. Specifically, the UK should also work with the OECD to strengthen the DAC guidelines, and other multilateral agencies such as the UN and World Bank, to ensure they focus on global poverty alleviation. Special focus: The question of minilateralism The temptation in the current geopolitical climate will be to rely on issue-based mini-lateral arrangements. These are proliferating around issues where engagement in larger blocs is stalling. While these may have a place, they are inherently less stable than robust, long-term relationships, but could play an important role in our future prosperity and security. Labour should first and foremost act within existing blocs to affect change and engage with allies and other partners to avoid further fragmentation of the international system. However, where it appears to be beneficial for furthering action on specific issues, and particularly issues that impact domestic arrangements and seek to encourage mutual learning, they should be considered. An area in which Labour may wish to explore an additional ‘minilateral’’ arrangement is on the promotion and strengthening of democracy at home, as proposed through a new D10 arrangement. Special focus: Shared priorities with sister parties and trades unions Labour should always seek to engage with and learn from sister parties and trades unions. Not only is this fundamental to Labour values, engagements with these parties offer opportunities for mutual reinforcement of aims. Lessons learned can be learned from around the world on how to respond to challenges such as dealing with the rise of authoritarianism and populism, how to deal with misinformation and how to approach ethical subjects like managing the role of AI and other technologies in society and the economy. These partnerships further serve to promote solidarity with workers and vulnerable populations around the world and can foster collaboration to develop national and international solutions. Conclusion: areas for further investigation With three years until the next election Labour has an opportunity to articulate a new approach to the UK’s engagements at home and abroad that draws from Labour values and works for British people as well as those overseas. This paper has set out the key challenges the UK faces both now and over the next decade. It has identified the need to restore the UK’s reputation globally, to acknowledge and come to terms with both our history and status as a middle power and to build a foreign policy for the UK underpinned by values that can effectively deal with challenges we face today. Labour values have much to recommend to an approach to foreign policy. It must deliver safety and security, foster solidarity, build trust and support the vulnerable at home and abroad. This paper has set out a range of recommendations and identified some areas for further investigation. These areas where Labour can distinguish itself from the government include: • A Comprehensive Foreign Policy Strategy - a long-term strategy and policy approach that addresses the lack of coherence of core issues like the SDGs, human rights and atrocity prevention, matched with the resources and investment needed to deliver it. • Soft Power Strategy - a coherent soft power strategy that fully assesses the range of UK soft power assets and their contribution to UK security and economic prosperity and determines how best they can be preserved and promoted. • Whitehall Reorganisation - a reassessment of the structures of government and how they contribute to foreign policy aims and a plan for how best to deliver these. The government’s decision to fold DFID has been short sighted and an examination of the foreign policy architecture of Whitehall is desperately needed to ensure that there is coherence and transparency in our foreing policy resources. • D10 for the Strengthening of Democracy - a distinctly Labour vision for what an alternative minilateral groupings like a D10 would do and whether it could help Labour and the UK build practical partnerships based on values, mutual learning and leading by example • Conflict and Atrocity Prevention Strategy - an integrated cross-government approach to conflict and atrocity prevention, backed by the resources and infrastructure to deliver it to fully address the changed nature of conflict, its impact on the UK and our commitment to ensuring human rights. • Climate policy that links home and overseas – Labour should consider the interlinkages between domestic and international climate action, including how the UK to better use its leadership roles in international fora such as the COP processes.. • Feminist foreign policy – examining how gender equality principles can be integrated across all areas of foreign policymaking and international policy activity. Alongside these areas for development, Labour should strive to work with bilateral and multilateral partners as well as in a systematic manner with sister parties and trades unions.