The British Foreign Policy under Tony Blair - Essay Example

Farzeela Academia Research Nov-7th- 2005 British Foreign Policy under Tony Blair Regarding British Foreign Policy, Prime Minister Tony Blair stated: “By virtue of our geography, our history and the strengths of our people, Britain is a global player” The British Foreign Office has defined the priorities for British Foreign Policy over the next 5-10 years as: A world safer from global terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. Protection of the UK from illegal immigration, drug trafficking and other international crime. An international system based on the rule of law, which is better able to resolve disputes and prevent conflicts. An effective EU in a secure neighborhood. Promotion of the UK economic interests in an open and expanding global economy. Sustainable development, underpinned by democracy, good governance and human rights. The security of UK and global energy supplies. The security and good governance of the UK’s Overseas Territories. Most of the British Government departments are involved in EU-wide activities like justice and home affairs, agriculture, trade policy and competition policies. (http://www.britainusa.com/sections/index_nt1.asp?i=41012&d=10) British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been very controversial in defining his own foreign policy views based upon the pillars of International rule of law in handling the transatlantic relations with the European Union. It is under the supervision of Tony Blair that for the past 50 years the British Foreign Policy has always chosen to keep itself somewhere in between Europe and America and still Britain wants to shun from the situation where it has to choose regarding a transatlantic alliance between these two countries. (Peter Mandelson) The constituents of the United Kingdom after the events of September 11, who have openly expressed their strong resentment toward extended British participation in the U.S. intervention in Iraq, were stunned but later the events of 7/7 London bombings escorted Britain to think from a different point of view. The goal of the United Kingdom, and of Blair, has been to act as a bridge between the United States and Europe, fostering dialogue between the two power blocs in the hopes of preserving the Atlantic alliance that has survived for 60 years. (Janelle Osmann) As Blair is in a desperate need to prove himself as a world leader and establish himself as a peacemaker, he wants U.S instead of taking the matters emotionally, he must concentrate on the matter of pushing for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Blair hopes that his support in Iraq will make America to think several times before making an attempt and to think seriously on expedition of a lasting peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. Thus, by coordinating American efforts with E.U interests, Blair is aiming to narrow the trans-Atlantic lacuna and thrust himself back into the good graces of international diplomats. (Janelle Osmann) Blair, being conscious in maintaining the balance between transatlantic alliance and EU possesses the view that conflict is created on the basis of a misunderstanding. At times he has declared that the class struggle was over and that the formation of the Labor Party through a break with the Liberals was a mistake. But the conflict of interests between the US and Europe cannot be overcome so easily. Blair recognizes that the Europeans, however tentatively, are seeking to challenge US domination through the EU project. At one point, he asks “Europe is to become 25 nations, one Europe for the first time since Charlemagne, but will it be as a union of nation states or as a centralized superstate? (Chris Marsden) Relations with the European Union (Recent Developments) The EU Constitutional Treaty The Constitutional Treaty sets out to address the new European and global challenges set out in the 2001 declaration. With reference to the new demands related to the enlargement of the Union to 25 member States, the Treaty includes: A reduction in the size of the European Commission. A simpler voting system. An end to the six-month rotating Presidency, with replacement by a full time President of the council and team Presidencies. Better arrangements for involving national Parliaments in EU legislation. A greater flexibility through ‘enhanced co-operation’, to allow groups of Member States to co-operate more intensively whilst others go at their own pace. The Treaty has been approved by Austria, Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain. The French and Dutch people voted against ratification of the Treaty on 29 May and 1 June respectively. For the Treaty to come into force, all Member States must ratify it. In the UK, this requires approval by both Parliament and the people through a referendum. The European Union Bill was introduced on 24 May to give effect to the UK’s commitment to ratify the Treaty by referendum. The Foreign Secretary announced on 6 June that until the consequences of France and the Netherlands being unable to ratify the Treaty were clarified, the Government would not set a date for Second Reading of the bill. The UK, represented by the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister Tony Blair, participated fully in the series of meetings during the IGC to negotiate the new Treaty. (http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1007029392727) British Foreign Policy towards the Middle East The initiative which caused Britain to visit Israel and Palestinian Authority is intended to provide international aid and assistance in terms of moral values in order to improve the Palestinian Authority economical structures and is part of Britain’s wider and very active engagement with strategic issues in the Middle East. This activism is not merely a legacy of Imperialism, nor just a function of Tony Blair’s lust for foreign affairs; rather it reflects a long-term committed British pledge towards the welfare of the international arena. Britain shares broadly the same interests as other Western countries regarding the Middle East like maintaining the flow of oil, combating fundamental forces and preventing them from threatening regional stability. Like other Western countries, Britain is a strong antagonist of violence with a lethal combination of terrorism. Britain also has extensive commercial interests in the region, though arms sales, which were very important in the past, are likely to become much less important in the future. Within British policy there are two long-standing orientations as to how to advance these interests that can be termed as ‘Strategic’ and ‘Diplomatic’ as Britain has to utilize both of them. (Jonathon Rynhold) In the long run, however, there is a contradiction within British policy that cannot be sustained. After all, what is the use of a bridge when the two great political forces in the world today are pulling apart? Whereas until now the US has been happy for Britain play the part of its voice in Europe, a safe pair of hands committed to the free market and NATO and a restraining hand on German and French global ambitions, it may in future demand of Blair, “Which side are you on?” Should that happen, Blair’s alliance with Washington may make him a political exile within Europe and could close the door on his strategic aim of taking a more central place within the EU by finally adopting the euro? (Chris Marsedon) In the wake of the 2003 Iraq War, there has been an enormous amount of criticism directed at British policy, mainly by those opposed to the war that advocate Britain adopting a more wholehearted European orientation though in the wake of the 7/7 terrorist attacks on London, criticism has become more muted. (Jonathon Rynhold) The right wing message of “live and let live” saying to the rest of Europe “you integrate if you want to but leave us to be ourselves” would marginalize Britain’s position in Europe and ultimately lead to a huge loss of British power and influence in the world. Rightly, Tony Blair totally rejects this path. He realizes that an integrated Europe of which we were not part would be a powerful player on the world scene.  America would have to deal with that continental power regardless of any emotional sympathy for the United Kingdom.  Such an outcome would mean the final downgrading of Britain to the second division of nations. This is unnecessary and avoidable and must not be allowed to happen as Britain is playing a vital role in trying its best to make both the ends meet! (Peter Mandelson) Work Cited Chris Marsedon, (2002) Blair defends support for Bush on Iraq war. World Socialist Web Site Accessed from Janelle Osmann, (2005) The Bush-Blair Alliance and the 2005 British Election. Accessed from Jonathon Rynhold, (Nov 7, 2005). British Policy towards the Middle East. Accessed from Peter Mandelson, Transatlantic Relations. Policy Network.Net Accessed from The EU Constitutional Treaty, Accessed from Read More