America, Europe and Britain’s Place in the World

The world has always been ever changing place and in the modern era, that change ever more fluid and stark. A few years ago, who could have foreseen the events of the Arab Spring or the current situation regarding Edward Snowden (former contractor to the NSA)? As such, all countries including the likes of the UK need to re-evaluate their positions and their perceived place in the world.

          Over the last century if not more, the UK has been stuck between two worlds, well two continents anyway, those being North America, more specially the US, and Europe. Now, I don't think the UK is in a position where it has to pick one over the other. However, it does need to consider the type of relationship it wants with both Europe and the US as well as the wider implications of having such relationships. This blog is based on a talk given by former British Prime Minister Sir John Major regarding this very issue and my opinions are very similar to his on this topic.

America: A Candid Friend

          Without question, Britain's closest bilateral relationship is the one it has with the US. However, with the growing economic strength of Asia, many have started to question the importance and strength of this relationship.

          In recent years, this relationship was closest, politically speaking, under the tenures President Bush and Prime Minister Blair during the Iraq and Afghan wars. However, these wars caused citizens of both countries to distance themselves from the political class in opposition of these wars. This has caused the British government, for political reasons, to take extra care of its future dealings in interventionist wars, especially those involved and led by the US. On the American side of things, President Obama's policy has been to be more of a back seat driver in more recent interventions such as in Libya. Furthermore, due to the economic rise of Asia, the President is pivoting American foreign policy away from Europe and towards the economic power house of China. However, during his tenure as President, Obama has increasingly found that he cannot project American influence effectively and efficiently without the aid of American allies such as the UK and Europe. Granted, he and the US could potentially go it alone without question, but that will become increasingly difficult as China continues to grow. Therefore, it is in the American and global interest for the US not to act unilaterally, but multilaterally wherever possible, whether it's with the Europe, Asia or anyone else.

         Therefore, the question isn't the validity or value of the Anglo-American relationship, but rather, what form should that relationship take? It can be argued that a true friend doesn't simply act as an echo, but as a candid confidant who's willing to question your thinking without ulterior motive. But saying this, they also need to be willing to support your decisions once they've been made unless there is strong reason for doing otherwise. This, in my view, is the role Britain must take in future Anglo-American relations. If this kind of relationship had been present in the early part of the 21st century, we may have seen a different result to the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

          This relationship could also be strengthened by having complementary rather than matching military and diplomatic capabilities. It is unrealistic to think Britain could ever match American military might, so what can Britain bring to the table, how can it compliment America's military power? This is where Britain's diplomatic strength comes into play. British "soft power" comes from its continued membership of institutions such as the European Union, the Commonwealth, NATO and its place as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. This wide array of relationships as well as the rise in Britain's cultural standing in recent years given events such as the 2012 Olympic games have given Britain's global diplomatic and cultural influence a significant boost.

          This complementary, dynamic and candid relationship will strengthen American and British influence for decades to come. The question now is how can this relationship be maintained and strengthened in the years to come?

This question cannot be answered without mentioning the "third wheel" in the Anglo-American relationship and that is Europe, more specially, the European Union. In the first part of 2013, it was announced that negotiations would take place between the EU and US with the aim of creating the world’s largest free trade zone. These negotiations will likely take years to complete, thus, they will unlikely have any immediate impact on EU-US relations. However, once completed, this relationship and therefore, the Anglo-American relationship, will be far stronger and far more mutually beneficial for it. But a pressing issue in the meantime is whether the UK will still be a member of EU once these negotiations have been completed. This leads me onto my next topic, Britain's relationship with the European Union.

Europe: A leader at its Heart

          When asking whether Britain would still be a member of the EU in years to come, I am referring to the proposed referendum on Britain's continued membership of the EU. This policy, if followed through, would be incredibly risky, but if successful, could prove to be very smart.

          When I say "successful", this is coming from the perspective of a pro-European reformist. As such, being "successful" would mean the threat and implementation of a referendum encouraging debate and reform of the EU with an eventual "in" vote from the British public. Such a vote will hopefully settle the question of British membership of the EU, at least for a generation. However, if Britain is to remain within the European Union, what role should it play?

          Rather than being a ringside protester, Britain should play a leading role at the heart of Europe. This includes encouraging reform and providing an alternative to the German centre of gravity. This leads to the question, what would British leadership of the European Union actually mean on a practical basis both for members and for the EU as a whole? Essential, it is my belief that we should have both, a more European Britain as well as a more British Europe. Now when I say we need a more British Europe, it's probably more accurate to say a more Anglo-Saxon Europe, especially in the area of economic and institutional reform.

          To promote growth in the years to come, especially in a time of austerity, Europe needs to become more competitive, less regulated and much more flexible. This, I believe, is where Britain can lead from within Europe's heart and Britain's role is ever more important when the TTIP negotiations are taking place. In regards to institutional reform, Europe needs to become more transparent, more accountable and better understood by its citizens. This institutional reform is with the aim of making the EU more relevant to its citizens and promoting engagement across all member states.

          Now, I won't go into what specific reform is needed here as that is for another day. However, what I will say is that Europe will be better for it if Britain is at the heart of that reform and so will Britain. Being a fully engaged member of the EU will boost Britain's standing and influence on the global stage, boosting inward investment, supporting and boosting Britain's soft power abroad.

Conclusion

          In conclusion, the US needs a candid friend, not an everlasting echo and Europe needs a forward thinking free-marketer at its heart, but what is in Britain's interests? Having a candid relationship with the US with both countries arguing from a common ground for common objectives will strengthen their resolve and boost their influence on the global stage. This soft power with the military capability to back it up as a last resort will benefit both countries for years and perhaps decades to come.

          In regards to Europe, Europe is the largest economy the world has ever seen. Agreed, in the decades to come, growth will come from Asia, but for Britain to distance itself from Europe would be mistake. The benefits of leaving the EU, both financially and regulatory, would be small, but the loss of influence and control severe. As such, Britain should be at the heart of the EU, leading the calls for greater reform, reducing the regulatory burden and increasing democratic accountability. A Britain at the heart of Europe would see its influence magnified, its soft power enhanced and its reach widened.

          I know many will disagree with what I have said and I have no qualms about that. I encourage debate and I encourage opinion, but either way, I hope this blog proved informative and that you've enjoyed reading. Furthermore, the comments I have made in regards to Europe have only touched the surface of all the areas I could cover. But rather than make this blog entry even longer, I'll leave that to another day and have a completely separate blog entry relating European reform and Britain's place therein.

Signing out,

Jason Cates