European Geostrategy

21:14, 23 September 2009

By James Rogers and Luis Simón

• BRITISH HISTORY IS GLOBAL, NOT EUROPEAN

Is it? So a popular story goes: since expeditions to North America in 1498, the world has been opened up to British power. British soldiers, sailors and traders spread out to conquer the planet; and with them, British influence started to penetrate just about every continent and nation, from Africa and the Americas, to Asia and the Middle East. By the late eighteenth century, Britain had become not only the strongest country in history, but also the first global power. As ‘an empire on which the sun never set’, the British imperium was worldwide, not European.

Yet this familiar story, often venerated across the United Kingdom, rests on a dangerous illusion: that Britain’s global outlook could be separated from its European vocation. As the historian, Brendan Simms, has shown in Three Victories and a Defeat: The Rise and Fall of the First British Empire, 1714-1783, a careful balancing of the European and global fronts was tantamount to a successful British foreign policy and, ultimately, the security of the United Kingdom. It was clever engagement on the European mainland that enabled Britain to walk freely across the globe.

Whenever this globalist illusion led Britain to neglect its European position, its worldwide standing fell into disrepute. That was the case in 1776 when Britain failed to build a friendly European coalition during the American War of Independence. Other Europeans seized their chance to hobble Britain’s pride and sided with the American colonialists. Similarly, when late Victorian strategists pursued their haughty policy of ‘Splendid Isolation’, Britain looked on as the European balance of power went awry. More recently, Neville Chamberlain’s declaration in 1938 that the Czechs were a ‘faraway country’ of ‘whom we know nothing’ led to the growth of an evil empire at Europe’s heart. When war eventually came, Britain was forced to pawn off its imperial silver to raise enough funds for the fight.

Even after World War Two, the globalist illusion continued to haunt Britain. The country initially remained aloof from the project to integrate the European continent. It was only after a period of decline and economic stagnation that London bit the bullet and decided the time had come to begin the re-establishment of the European vocation to its rightful place in British foreign policy.

• THE BRITISH ECONOMY IS ‘GLOBALISED’, NOT ‘EUROPEANISED’

Wrong. In 1950, Britain’s economy was the third largest and most heavily globalised in the world. Much of Britain’s exports went to its dominions and imperial territories overseas. Equally, imports came from America, Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Australasia.

Today, the British economy is more ‘Europeanised’ than it has ever been. Almost sixty percent of Britain’s external trade is with other Member States in the European Union, a percentage that has grown every year since British accession in 1973. Britain is also among those that have benefited the most from free movement of people, having further consolidated itself as Europe’s financial capital and its cultural and social centre.

Last year, London became the home to more Poles than any other city bar Warsaw. It hosts thousands of young Irish, Greeks, Swedish, Spanish, Germans, Italians, French and other Europeans. London’s dynamism and plurality make it a magnet for everything European: as a hub for European fashion and culture, London contributes vastly to the consolidation of a European identity. Like with British foreign policy, the European and global dimensions are mutually constitutive parts of London’s identity. It is this balance that allows London to retain its place as the world’s pre-eminent city.

• BRITAIN IS STRONG ENOUGH TO STAND ON ITS OWN

Hardly. The days of Britain standing tall in the world have long gone. Ever since Britain’s accession to the European Community in 1973, anti-European voices, underpinned by pro-Americanism and the globalist illusion, have called over and over again for full disengagement from the European enterprise. But these forces are mistaken: British secession from the European Union would result in the paradox of denying Britain a say over the government of the single European market, to which the destiny of the British economy is irrevocably entwined. How can that possibly be in the British national interest?

It is not. Rather, in today’s increasingly multipolar environment, where British power is shrinking relative to allies and foreign powers alike, the United Kingdom needs to work in partnership with other Europeans – who, incidentally, face a similar set of problems.

• BRITAIN’S KEY ALLIES ARE OVERSEAS

No longer. It is true that since the end of World War Two, many of Britain’s key alliances have been with countries overseas. After 1945, Britain was broke; the Soviet Union held sway over much of Central and Eastern Europe; and Moscow threatened British interests in Western Europe and southern Asia.

The Anglo-American relationship was cemented by the two countries’ interest in keeping Soviet power in check. Neither Washington nor London could afford to see a further expansion of Soviet influence over the Eurasian landmass. The ‘special relationship’ with the United States soon became a bedrock of British diplomacy and military policy. Britain’s relationships with other English-speaking countries, like Australia, New Zealand and Canada also became important, particularly with the sharing of intelligence.

Yet relations with other European countries have also proven crucial to advancing Britain’s national interest. Long one of Britain’s key alliances, the Anglo-French Entente Cordiale – now known as the Entente Formidable – provided London with enormous help during the Falklands War. Equally, during the post-Cold War era, the Anglo-German ‘enlargement engine’ was critical in pushing for the European Union’s expansion towards the East. Indeed, Britain’s mainland European allies can only become increasingly important as China rises and America’s attention shifts towards the Far East.

In this new world, Britain needs to look more closely at the future of its alliances. This is even more compelling in the light of a resurgent Russia and a possible divergence between British/European and American interests with regard to Moscow. Old dreams of an Anglosphere or a resurrected Commonwealth will simply not fly; the European Union is Britain’s only credible option.

• STAYING CLOSE TO WASHINGTON BOOSTS BRITAIN’S WEIGHT

Does it? For decades, British academics and diplomats have wondered just what Britain gains from supporting Washington. Many Britons were despondent about the way their country was treated by the Americans after the Second World War, especially over pressures to wind up their empire. However, Cold War realities forced them to accept the alliance. Subsequent intelligence and military co-operation has empowered London, giving Britain closer access to the White House than otherwise might have been.

Since 2001, however, many Britons have been increasingly worried about their country’s standing in the world after having been associated so closely with the previous administration’s excesses. Tony Blair’s concept of Britain as a bridge between Europe and America has fallen apart: bridges, after all, get walked over. And with France’s full return to the Atlantic Alliance, the election of President Obama in 2008, and the snubbing of Gordon Brown in March and September, Britain’s place in American policy has once again come under scrutiny. As Michael Heseltine has recently argued, perhaps Britons should finally accept that the ‘special relationship’ is only special on the British side of the Atlantic, and not the American side.

• BRITAIN’S FUTURE IS EUROPEAN

Absolutely! With the coming multipolar world order, Britain has to make a choice. It can stubbornly cling to the relics of the past, or it can ensure a better future by learning to accept the present. The European Union offers future British governments the potential to craft a new position for the British people, not as the global power they once were, but rather as a leading European power. The latest economic and demographic projections suggest that by the middle of the century, the United Kingdom will overtake Germany to become the largest Member State in the European Union. Further, its military strength and diplomatic experience leave Britain in an advantageous position to play a leadership role in the European Union.

Britain has to decide whether it wants to become a small fish in a big sea, or a big fish in a small sea. If it does not re-assess its geopolitical situation and role as the twenty-first century rolls on, it will find itself in a position similar to the former. If, however, it delves deeply into the European enterprise and forms ever-closer relationships with Brussels, Paris, Madrid, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Berlin and Warsaw, it could find itself in a position of untrammelled influence, actively and confidently shaping the European Union into a global power.

The British are part of European civilisation; they have shared in the European experience; and are indelibly entwined in European history. Britain is European: always has been, always will be. As such, Britain’s future prosperity means that it must fully reconnect with its European roots and lead from the front.