British Foreign Policy Post-Brexit: Pursuing a New Role for 'Global Britain'?

These papers not only summarise debates in the academic literature, international media and by global think tanks but also examine the empirical evidence and chronicle the key decisions taken by the UK since formally leaving the EU. The analyses also consider organisational changes in foreign policy-making arising from the creation of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

Via case studies spanning the globe, the papers assess the extent to which the claim of ‘Global Britain’ is justified, versus the risk of isolation. They paint a complex picture, in which pro-active engagement in some cases parallels significant limitations in others. The outcome is an invaluable instrument for understanding the current and future direction of British foreign policy post-Brexit.

The papers were written by MSc students at 杏吧论坛 and were all reviewed by 杏吧论坛 academic staff. They were presented in a public workshop in the framework of the 杏吧论坛 Master's course IR411 Foreign Policy Analysis and further refined in the light of comments received. They are published here to further the understanding of British foreign policy based on a broad variety of sources with chronologies and bibliographies in each paper.

British Foreign Policy Post-Brexit Papers:

British Foreign Policy After Brexit: Media Analysis

An analysis of over 70 editorials on post-Brexit British foreign policy, published in leading newspapers and magazines from 21 countries and in seven languages, allows us to identify three recurring themes which have shaped the media conversation since 1 January 2020. First, the clear consensus among the sources considered is that the world has changed drastically since the referendum in 2016, and not in the UK’s favour. The rise of great power competition, protectionism, and unilateralism is unlikely to promote the rise of an independent, “swashbuckling” Global Britain. Second, a considerable number of the sources analysed take issue with what they identify as a neo-imperialist strain in post-Brexit British foreign policy, which they argue is misplaced due to the UK’s increasingly limited ability to project power globally. Finally, a third, more optimistic theme present in a number of the sources highlights the possibilities now open to the UK, should it avail itself of its newfound independence. Although this paper makes no pretensions of comprehensiveness, it sheds some light on the arguments, assumptions, and ideas which have driven the media narrative of post-Brexit British foreign policy over the past year

Read the paper here.

British Foreign Policy Post-Brexit: Global Actor or Isolated Former Power? A Review of the Academic Literature

The withdrawal of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU) has led to what many scholars have identified as a foreign policy ‘identity-crisis’, with the debate centred around what role the UK will play in the post-Brexit world. While there is considerable evidence that British policymakers are looking to construct a foreign policy based on the premise of ‘Global Britain’, the most realistic scenario outlined in the academic literature is one in which the UK becomes more isolated post-Brexit. To avoid such an outcome, some scholars propose that the UK must instead become a pragmatic and helpful problem-solver, coordinating with its European neighbours in matters related to security, whilst ensuring continuity rather than rupture when it comes to trade and foreign aid policy. This role, this paper concludes, provides the most feasible alternative to the prospect of isolation.

Read the paper here.

How has the ‘Global Britain’ idea shaped the United Kingdom’s Hong Kong policy after Brexit in 2020?

This essay asks how the idea of ‘Global Britain’ has shaped the UK’s policy towards Hong Kong after Brexit in 2020 and what effect the ‘Global Britain’ policies have had on Britain’s relations with the EU and US? The central argument of the essay is that the idea of ‘Global Britain’ has provided a guide for the UK’s policies towards Hong Kong in 2020. In doing so, the government has increased clarity about its foreign policy goals and implemented measures consistent with the ‘Global Britain’ ideas, namely promoting the UK as a foreign policy actor independent of the EU, strengthening a positive historical image of the UK and advancing its international image as a ‘force for good’. The UK’s Hong Kong policy could be seen as effective as in particular the decision to grant a pathway to British citizenship for people from Hong Kong with British National Oversea status has helped the government to reach its own goals. In terms of Britain’s interests in maintaining the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ approach, however, the promotion of the ‘Global Britain’ Hong Kong policy logically excluded more effective policy options which could have influenced Chinese behaviour in Hong Kong. The UK’s Hong Kong policy has had the effect, that the EU and the UK have diverged on their positions on China as the UK has adopted a more critical China position in 2020, which aligned the UK closer with the US position on China. This might result in the UK acting in a way that pursues US interests instead of establishing a truly independent Britain. Beyond the UK’s Hong Kong policy, this paper has shown that ideas can significantly shape foreign policy by changing policymakers’ preferences and providing guides for government action.

Read the paper here.

How has the United Kingdom’s foreign policy towards the Republic of Ireland developed since Brexit?

UK foreign policy towards the Republic of Ireland is defined by three interrelated and historically embedded dynamics, which Brexit has brought into sharper relief. The first is that UK foreign policy towards the Republic is spread internally across a complex network of political institutions and it is subject to an unusual degree of external actor pressure and scrutiny. The second dynamic driving UK foreign policy towards the Republic is the necessity for close and cooperative relations to manage the peace process in Northern Ireland. The third dynamic driving UK foreign policy is the need to protect the close economic integration between the two countries and to cooperate on organised crime. The UK’s exit from the European Union risks disrupting the equilibrium between these dynamics that has precariously existed since the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. The UK’s post-Brexit aspirations for ‘Global Britain’ requires its focus far beyond Ireland. However, the complexity and the sheer multitude of interests involved in the UK-Republic relationship means this could easily destroy such aspirations. Therefore, managing this equilibrium will be central to the UK-Republic relationship and the wider ambitions of UK foreign policy in the coming years.

Read the paper here.

Post-Brexit British Foreign Policy: More European than Ever? A Review of Think-Tank Contributions to the Debate

Brexit has given the UK the ability to diverge from EU rules and practices including in the domain of foreign policy. What London will want to and will be able to do with such newly found freedom at the international level, however, remains unclear. Collecting the evidence from 70+ think tanks across the political spectrum in the UK and beyond, this paper argues that the ‘Global Britain’ ambition will not be global either in scope or in its geographical engagement. The cases of trade, multilateral organizations, and security and defense demonstrate the attempts of the post-Brexit British Foreign policy to diverge in format from EU practices without profound deviation from the EU’s objectives. To the contrary, think tanks emphasize the human capital and resources that London will dedicate to building a relation with the EU as an external partner, making ‘Global’ Britain more European than ever before.

Read the paper here.

Post-Brexit British Foreign Policy Toward Belarus: Global Actor or Irrelevant Power?

Over the last few years, a budding relationship between the UK and Belarus has been slowly developing. 2020, an eventful year for both states, has however appeared to put this on hold. With the UK officially leaving the European Union and Belarus facing political troubles and turbulence after its most recent presidential elections, it seems there is no better time to assess the UK’s foreign policy on the matter. This paper claims that the UK are acting on two strategies in Belarus: reinforcing soft power through the championing of human rights and balancing Russia for security purposes. This is reflected in the three areas where UK foreign policy has been most proactive: human rights and freedom of press, military cooperation and economic cooperation. Each area will be analysed in terms of whether or/and how it has diverged from the EU and if there are signs of a ‘Global Britain’ emerging. The paper will argue that if the UK does not properly manage the two strategies, they may come to inhibit one another, similar to what the EU has experienced (Bosse, 2009). So far, the UK has scaled back bilateral cooperation with Belarus and taken a cautious approach, not straying too far off the EU. The paper concludes that the UK foreign policy appears to have ambitions for playing the role of ‘Global Britain’; however, due to the tensions of interests in relation to Belarus, despite there being potential in branching out and cooperating with transatlantic states, bold moves may be difficult.

Read the paper here.

Post-Brexit British Foreign Policy Towards India: Moving Towards Fulfilling ‘Global Britain’ Aspirations

In a post-Brexit world characterised by the UK’s ‘Global Britain’ aspirations, a strong UK-India economic relationship is becoming a British foreign policy priority. It is in this context that several developments in recent years, from the JETCO meeting of 2019 to the February 2021 visit of International Trade Secretary Elizabeth Truss, have all worked towards the goal of achieving a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and strengthening the UK’s economic relationship with India. As it traces these developments, this paper argues that the strategic and geopolitical priorities of the UK and India play a significant role in determining the future trajectory of this economic relationship. This stems from the fact that, for India, its geopolitical and strategic interests are the central priority. Therefore, the UK’s stance on China and the Indo-Pacific, for example, have the potential to act as roadblocks to British foreign policy priorities. These factors, combined with others such as Indian concerns towards visa policies, protests outside the Indian High Commission in London, and the colonial legacy, are thus important considerations as the two countries move towards a stronger economic relationship. Similarly, India’s complicated business environment has been seen as a restricting factor by the UK. While all of this could potentially pose challenges for post-Brexit British foreign policy goals, the paper argues that recent UK moves, such as its shifting tilt towards the Indo-Pacific, its growing focus on the strategic relationship and collaboration in areas such as healthcare and global governance, seem to be working to alter the current situation. These steps seem to be pushing the UK-India relationship in the right direction, in line with the UK’s ‘Global Britain’ aspirations.

Read the paper here.

Post-Brexit British foreign policy towards Russia: a test for ‘Global Britain’

This paper will assess the emerging trends in the bilateral relationship between the United Kingdom and Russia after 31st January 2020, the first post-Brexit year. The study will focus on three key dossiers, namely: the cyber threat, sanctions with a case study on the poisoning of Alexei Navalny and trade with a focus on the presence of Russian capital in Britain. During the analysis emerging convergence – or divergences- with established EU positions will be a key element assessing the bilateral relationship, as well as London’s references to a ‘global Britain’. The analysis seems to suggest that Britain, losing its place as a ‘pragmatic European’, sees in countering Russia a key step in the path to its global aspirations. But if in some areas the UK made significant progresses and seem capable of standing alone, in others its future relationship with European allies will remain central.

Read the paper here.

Post-Brexit British Foreign Policy Toward the Israel-Palestine Conflict

This research paper seeks to understand British foreign policy toward the Israel-Palestine conflict in the post-Brexit era. Through analysing Britain’s relationship with Israel and the Palestinians, respectively, the paper finds that Brexit has generated three important new factors—a tilt toward American leadership, legislative autonomy, and increased UK-Israel trade relations—that have impacted, and are likely to continue to impact, British foreign policy-making toward the conflict in the post-Brexit epoch. These forces, it is argued, increase the likelihood of policy differences arising between Britain and the European Union on Israel-Palestine to a greater extent than was possible prior to Brexit.

Read the paper here.

Shifting the post-Brexit alliances? Britain’s China policy between American fervour, European ambiguity, and global British ambition (Magnus Obermann, Double MSc International Affairs 杏吧论坛-PKU)

This paper provides an overview of the main trends and events in British foreign policy towards China from 31 January 2020 to mid-February 2021. The guiding question is how the bilateral relations between the United Kingdom and the People’s Republic of China developed after the UK left the EU.

Shifting the post-Brexit alliances? Britain’s China policy between American fervour, European ambiguity, and global British ambition

This paper provides an overview of the main trends and events in British foreign policy towards China from 31 January 2020 to mid-February 2021. The guiding question is how the bilateral relations between the United Kingdom (UK) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) developed after the UK left the EU. The paper seeks to explore to what extent Britain’s China policy post-Brexit supports the narrative of a “Global Britain” – a self-proclaimed international human rights champion and supporter of global free trade. In analysing English media coverage and UK government announcements, including the 2021 “Integrated Review”, the paper suggests that the three main concerns of British China policy in 2020 were Huawei, Hong Kong, and human rights. These three topics are not self-contained; in fact, the survey shows that they are, to a large degree, mutually reinforcing. Nevertheless, a chronologically and topically structured approach serves to conceptualize the political thicket of UK-PRC relations, pinpointing areas in which Britain’s China strategy differs from the policy of the EU. The paper concludes that “post-Brexit” is the least important attribute of the current China policy of the UK. Instead, the UK-China relationship continues to be characterized by pre-Brexit frictions, the gravity of which is exacerbated by the increasing geostrategic rivalry between Beijing and Washington – “Global Britain’s” indispensable geopolitical and technological ally in the post-Brexit world.

Read the paper here.

The role of the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) on post-Brexit UK Foreign Policy

With the Integrated Review mapping out the UK governments’ foreign policy objectives, this paper explores the role that the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) will play in this post-Brexit strategy. The announcement of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and the Department for International Development (DFID) merger signalled a new approach to UK foreign policy. This paper argues that the FCDO will not be the sole arbiter or architect of UK foreign policy. Instead, the focus will be on coordinating with other Whitehall departments on foreign policy issues. By examining the FCDO’s creation, governance, structure and funding, this paper will discern the role that the FCDO is expected to play in enacting the governments so-called “Global Britain” agenda and in particular, what form the relationship between the FCDO and European member states will take.

Read the paper here.