Labour’s foreign policy will be realistic about us as a nation, not nostalgic about what we used to be
Every time you look at social media, a new international crisis is unfolding. Drones from Iran or one of its proxies hurtling towards Israel. Another Israeli strike kills civilians in Gaza. A Ukrainian city faces a fresh wave of attacks from Putin’s war machine. The revelation of another cyber attack from a hostile state on UK soil. Another threat of a land grab in my ancestral home of Guyana. Another coup in the Sahel. A new flood, wildfire or hurricane – the latest manifestation of the climate emergency that is too often treated as an afterthought.
The world order – which once appeared governed, at least to a large extent, by the rules we helped set up with our allies after the second world war – is now defined by a new form of geopolitical competition. Between the United States and China, over microchips, military might and trade. Between countries defined by the CIA director, William Burns, as the “hedging middle” setting their own agendas in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Between friends and rivals alike over the green transition – on which the future of humanity depends. ,
Within this messy and multipolar world, Britain is still reeling from 14 years of Conservative government. Our economy is held back by recession. Our army has fewer soldiers than at any time since Napoleon. Public services are on their knees. Our international relations have been undermined by the reckless and gaffe-prone diplomacy of Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak and their damaging indifference to the rule of law.
We should not be pessimists. Britain still has great strengths and enormous potential. With the right leadership, we can and will navigate this new era. We remain a permanent member of the UN security council. We have the sixth largest economy in the world. Our universities, legal sectors, creatives and businesses continue to be world leaders. Our diplomats are admired by our friends as well as our rivals. But, in this newly dangerous and divided era, Britain needs a refreshed approach to foreign policy.
Labour’s approach to reconnect Britain, for our security and prosperity at home, will be built on progressive realism. It starts by taking the best from two of Labour’s great former foreign secretaries: the realism of Ernest Bevin, who, as part of Clement Attlee’s postwar Labour government helped create Nato and Britain’s place within it, alongside the independent nuclear deterrent; and the progressivism of Robin Cook, whose “ethical dimension” brought climate action and human rights into the diplomatic mainstream.
Progressive realism says we must use realist means to pursue progressive ends. Instead of using realism for transactional purposes and the accumulation of power, we want to use it in the service of progressive goals: countering climate change, defending democracy, advancing economic growth and tackling inequality – abroad as well as at home. It is the pursuit of ideals without delusions about what is achievable, and comes with the recognition that the UK’s interests must be defended for us to be a force for good.
So, what is progressive realism in practice? It means recognising that the UK’s success depends on hard-headed realism about our own nation and the continent’s security, not a nostalgic misremembering of what we used to be. It means recognising that supporting Ukraine is not only a moral imperative, but a strategic necessity, and that Russia under Putin is a long-term, generational threat that requires a long-term, generational response. This is why Labour is proposing a new geopolitical partnership with the EU, from our position outside the single market and the customs union. Our proposal for a new UK-EU security pact will be designed to increase our economic, climate and national security. And it is why, as Keir Starmer committed last week, we will raise defence spending to 2.5% as soon as resources allow and make an absolute, generational commitment to the nuclear deterrent.
In the face of conflict in the Middle East, in the short term, we urgently need an immediate ceasefire complied with by both sides, the immediate return of all the hostages cruelly held by Hamas terrorists, and for Israel to lift the unacceptable restrictions on aid flows to enable a massive surge of supplies into Gaza. But in the medium term, progressive realism means seeking the same things for Ukraine, Israel and Palestine: for each to be a sovereign, secure, internationally recognised state, at peace with its neighbours. This is why the next Labour government will be committed to working with international partners to recognise Palestine as a state, as a contribution to securing a negotiated two-state solution.
Progressive realism means recognising that the climate emergency is the defining challenge of the next century, which requires diplomatic innovations, such as Labour’s proposed clean power alliance, to counter it, but also that it represents a unique opportunity to drive jobs, growth and innovation backed by a real industrial strategy.
Progressive realism is not only defined by the policies we espouse, but by the approach we will take to diplomacy. We must shake the hands of those we need for peace. Progressives must not be uncompromising about working with our partners in the Gulf. We must recognise that partnerships with the so-called global south work better than lectures and that hypocrisy – be that about sharing Covid vaccines or obeying international law – is corrosive to foreign policy. We should not fail to recognise that the US will remain the UK’s most essential ally, whoever occupies the White House. Pursuing ideals will be futile, without first guaranteeing our own security. It relies on knowing that progressive policy without realism is empty idealism, just as realism without a sense of progress can become cynical and tactical. It is rooted in the optimism that when progressives act realistically and practically, they can change the world.
• David Lammy is the shadow foreign secretary
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.