Has the UK Resigned as a World Power?

[Commodore]

In this OpEd, Fareed Zakaria points out that the UK seems to be transforming itself into a much more inward looking nation and is showing less and less interest in matters of international import. He cites their shrinking military, balking at maintaining their NATO obligations, and their reluctance to take a strong stance on international issues as evidence that the UK has given up its 300-year-old position as a leading world power.

Zakaria then goes on to state his opinion that a world without the guiding voice of reason that the UK has generally been is a world in which the ideas of international free flowing of information, people, goods, and the promotion of the rule of law will be in jeopardy of collapsing.

Here are a few excerpts of his OpEd:

On Monday, the Right Honorable David Cameron, prime minister of Great Britain, gave his first major speech after being reelected to his high office — once held by Pitt, Gladstone, Disraeli, Lloyd George, Churchill and Thatcher. Confronting a world of challenges — including Greece’s possible exit from the euro, a massive migration crisis on Europe’s shores, Ukraine’s perilous state, Russia’s continued intransigence, the advance of the Islamic State and the continuing chaos in the Middle East — Cameron chose to talk about . . . a plan to ensure that hospitals in the United Kingdom will be better staffed on weekends.

Okay, that’s a bit unfair. Leaders everywhere, including in the United States, understand that “all politics is local.” But spending a few days recently in Britain, I was struck by just how parochial it has become. After an extraordinary 300-year run, Britain has essentially resigned as a global power.

NATO members are supposed to maintain defense spending at 2 percent of their gross domestic product. Britain is hovering around that mark and has refused to commit to maintaining budgets at that level. (It should be said that most other European countries are worse, which means that the United States accounts for more than 70 percent of NATO’s military spending.) The same is true of other elements of Britain’s global influence. In Cameron’s first term, the Foreign Office budget was cut by more than a quarter, and further trims are likely. The BBC World Service, perhaps the most influential arm of the country’s global public diplomacy, has shuttered five of its foreign-language broadcasts, and the organization’s entire budget has been slashed, with more cuts to come.

The country is suspicious of a robust foreign policy of any kind — including serious sanctions against Russia, getting tough in trade talks with China, the use of force in the Middle East and an engaged relationship with the rest of Europe. During the recent election, as The Post reported, foreign policy barely surfaced.

Why does this matter? Because on almost all global issues, Britain has a voice that is intelligent, engaged and forward-looking. It wants to strengthen and uphold today’s international system — one based on the free flow of ideas, goods and services around the world, one that promotes individual rights and the rule of law

So, do you agree with Fareed Zakaria? If so, do you think the UK's dimished influence is a good thing for the world? Bad? Somewhere in between? I'd love to hear from our British posters on this one.

 

[Borachio]

Bah! The UK hasn't resigned as a world power at all. But it should.

It's instead an enthusiastic member of NATO that is all too eager to participate in the US's foreign adventures, for no very good reason.

BAE systems, and its associates, is also heavily influential in matters military and industrial.

We very frequently hear the military bleating about underfunding. But that's just a tactic, imo, to make sure their funding is regularly increased.

And Trident is staggeringly expensive for no very good reason.

It would be better to devote all military funding towards the NHS, instead, and let Britain assume its rightful place as World Universal Health Provider. Complete with a mostly foreign-sourced workforce. Soft power is the way to go.

 

[Commodore]

Bah! The UK hasn't resigned as a world power at all. But it should.

It's instead an enthusiastic member of NATO that is all too eager to participate in the US's foreign adventures, for no very good reason.

BAE systems, and its associates, is also heavily influential in matters military and industrial.

We very frequently hear the military bleating about underfunding. But that's just a tactic, imo, to make sure their funding is regularly increased.

And Trident is staggeringly expensive for no very good reason.

It would be better to devote all military funding towards the NHS and let Britain assume its rightful place as World Universal Health Provider.

Well Zakaria does point out that the UK's military spending has been decreased by 9 percent and they have undergone a reduction in force to the tune of 20 to 30 percent.

The UK also had to be pretty much dragged kicking and screaming into the fight against ISIS. So maybe their days of tagging along on US military adventures are coming to an end.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Which isn't necesarily a bad thing

 

[Borachio]

I simply don't know where he gets his figures from.



http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_2006_2018UKb_30t

The army manpower might appear to have declined, but there's been a major shift towards the territorials which is probably skewing it all.

 

[Commodore]

Which isn't necesarily a bad thing

Of course. I'm just pointing out that Mr. Zakaria might have a point when he says the UK is becoming less and less interested in international matters.

I simply don't know where he gets his figures from.



http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_2006_2018UKb_30t

Apparently he got them from here: https://www.iiss.org/en/militarybalanceblog/blogsections/2015-090c/march-02a5/prospect-for-uk-armed-forces-in-2015-c51b

That's the link he provided in his OpEd.

 

[gay_Aleks]

It could be merely a tactic employed by Cameron - people care more about things concerning their lives directly, like healthcare, rather than distant business. Emphatising more on the former rather than on the latter will possibly net them more votes.

 

[Borachio]

http://www.iiss.org/en/persons/ben-s-barry

Ben Barry left the British Army in October 2010. A graduate of Sandhurst, the Army Staff College, the joint Higher Command and Staff Course and the Royal College of Defence Studies, An infantry officer, he has commanded troops at every rank from Lieutenant to Brigadier and in every British infantry role apart from parachute. Regimental experience includes three Northern Ireland tours, two in intelligence appointments, Cold War soldiering in Germany and Berlin, and duties in France, Portugal, Canada and Hong Kong. He wrote “A Cold War; Frontline Operations in Bosnia” describing his battalion’s operational tour under both UN and NATO flags. He subsequently commanded a NATO brigade in Bosnia. He has instructed at the Rifle Depot, the School of Infantry and Shrivenham and has led Defence Diplomacy work in NATO countries, Central Asia and the Middle East. Staff appointments have mainly been in the MOD, including the commitments staff, Director General Staff, Director Force Development; responsible for assessing future capabilities across the UK forces, and finally as Head of MOD Streamlining; designing and then implementing reduction and rationalisation of the MOD. His final appointment was leading the British Army’s analysis of the lessons of the Iraq campaign.

Yeah. I can see this is a totally unbiased commentator on military spending. (Not.)

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Resigned? I thought they got fired.

 

[schlaufuchs]

The real question is when will they become a potential potential world power?

 

[Borachio]

Dunno. Is the answer next Tuesday?

Personally, I can't wait.

 

[Commodore]

Resigned? I thought they got fired.

They are still on the Board of Directors, they just got fired from the Chairman position.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I guess they've finally realised that the Empire's dead and there's no point of trying to somehow reconcile that.

 

[Borachio]

I think "they" finally realized the end of world power status after WW1. And the final end of empire shortly after WW2.

 

[gay_Aleks]

There was a brief period during the Cold War when the Brits tried to regain parts of their old glory, most notably the Suez Canal business.

 

[daft]

Does Britain need to continue on with Monarchist tradition?. How expensive is it for their economy on annual basis to keep this "show" going?

 

[Wrymouth3]

You didn't need to go any further than "Fareed Zakaria" to know that the man plagiarizes 80% of everything he does. It's bad, but what is even worse is that he plagiarizes things to support his already shallow and non-creative mainstream thinking.

 

[daft]

That's what I mean. Get rid of the Royal "sideshow" and spend that poundage on your economy (and military). After a few decades Brits would be getting back into serious world power discussion after that, well, maybe.

 

[Borachio]

Britain: 400 years of unintentionally buggering up the world. How much longer will the nightmare continue?

 

[bhavv]

TBH I think the world would have been a much better place if the British Empire hadn't collapsed.

Oddly with British politics, the government wants to help save the whole world and give billions in aid money, but oh noes, if a sick / disabled person in the UK wants to claim benefits, they're the scum of the world!

Charity is supposed to start at home, but instead for the UK, charity only belongs overseas.