Foreign policy

Abstract

This chapter will focus on one of the most pragmatic areas of British politics - foreign policy. This is generally, in practice, an ideology free zone where pragmatism rules. Only occasionally are tricky notions of conscience and ethics introduced into foreign policy, such as when Robin Cook made his rather well-received but largely ignored call for an ‘ethical dimension to foreign policy’ (Guardian, 1997). Cameron (2008b) argued that: ‘the conduct of international affairs must always be tempered by realism. But these great international challenges of the 21st century are moral questions, not just questions of realpolitik’. The need to ensure continuity in policy and demonstrate unity to both our international friends and enemies alike means that, unlike other policy areas where the parties often adopt strong opposing positions, foreign policy tends to be dominated by continuity and nuance. Often, the main difference in the foreign policy aims and objectives of the three main parties is in terms of their rhetoric. There are, however, exceptions to this rule with the conflict in Iraq being perhaps the most notorious recent example. Whilst both the Conservative and Labour parties supported the invasion of Iraq, in order to defend Britain (largely due to Blair’s 45 minute claim and the allegedly ‘sexed up’ dodgy dossier), the Liberal Democrats opposed it vehemently. While the Lib Dems could make great political capital out of their opposition to the war, it is likely that their status as the third party allowed them greater scope to be idealistic in their foreign policymaking; far more than could be afforded to either of the two other parties.