15 Dec Making Sense of “Patient Diplomacy”
The measured language of pragmatism rang round the Foreign Office on Monday, as James Cleverly made his maiden speech as Foreign Secretary. Gone were mentions of Liz Truss’ “network of liberty” and Boris Johnson’s “Global Britain”, replaced instead with a vision for “patient diplomacy”, focused on defending the liberal world order and promoting a refreshed multilateralism.
At its heart, this is a vision of diplomacy which recognises the value of longer-term strategic engagement with a wider range of partners, in contrast to an approach which, outside of a few key relationships, has historically often been criticised as intermittent and transactional. Cleverly celebrated the UK’s traditional alliances but urged diplomatic investment in around 20 middle-level, emerging economies. With the geopolitical centre of gravity moving away from Western hegemony, Cleverly is looking to build stronger mutually-beneficial relationships with actual and potential allies across Asia, Africa and Latin America.
His words offer no major departure from the thematic priorities of his immediate predecessors – the Indo-Pacific tilt and support for Ukraine remain top of the agenda, and the ambition to engage with developing countries reflects the G7’s commitment to compete with China’s diplomatic and economic outreach. Indeed, his vision of taking a broader view of where alliances can be found recalls former Foreign Secretary William Hague’s decision in the early 2010s to visit a number of countries that no Foreign Secretary had visited for decades, and to establish a number of new embassies around the world. At the same time, Cleverly’s rhetoric certainly appears more conciliatory than his immediate predecessors.
But what do his words mean in practice?
A Look to the East and South
Cleverly outlined that the UK will make “investments of faith” in nations that he sees as representing an increasing share of the world economy in future decades.
He expressly highlighted the UK’s long-term commitment to the Indo-Pacific, signalling a ramped-up deployment of diplomatic and trade promotion resources across a number of countries in the region, including some which have been relatively neglected in recent years.
High on his list will be relations with India, recognising India’s security role in the region in the face of a rising China, and following on from the recently-agreed 2030 Roadmap for India-UK Future Relations. The Sunak administration will first and foremost be looking to consolidate the bilateral relationship through concluding a trade agreement. There is similarly a focus on Japan, with new opportunities for cooperation emerging as the growing threat from China has weighed heavily on Japan’s traditional security posture. Notably, the UK, Japan and Italy announced a joint Global Combat Air Programme in the last few days, and the UK and Japan are expected to sign a Reciprocal Access agreement on military cooperation this month.
Looking elsewhere, Cleverly highlighted an increased focus on South Africa and its Just Energy Transition Investment Plan. He noted that his “patient diplomacy” has a strong focus on economic development and resilience, and we can certainly expect South Africa to take a priority place for support, considering the spur of recent bilateral projects, including the UK-South Africa Infrastructure Partnership. The UK has committed to supporting South African youth to build technical and entrepreneurial skills in the largest growth sectors, including green technology and electric vehicle manufacture. With Cleverly’s reference to the potential of the young populations of Brazil, Indonesia and India, it is likely that similar offers of support and opportunities for cooperation may be in the pipeline.
Undoubtedly, part of the Foreign Secretary’s motivation for “patient diplomacy” is to enable the UK to present a more attractive offer to emerging and developing economies than those on offer from Beijing and Moscow. While only mentioning China in passing, Cleverly’s words make a subtle recognition and defence of an international order that is being threatened by strategic rivals and, through his emphasis on the rule of law, free trade and national sovereignty, it is clear that he hopes to present the UK as committed to act as a defence against Beijing’s assertiveness across the developing world. With this speech coming just a few weeks after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak re-affirmed that the “golden era” of UK-China relations was over, this appears as a further sign that the UK is taking a pragmatic but hardening stance against its strategic rival, through strategic diplomacy aimed at the East and South.
Human Rights Records Take a Backseat?
Some may see in Cleverly’s speech an implicit recognition that human rights performance is less likely to be emphasised as a precondition for creating the long-term relationships that the UK is seeking to build. His shift away from Truss’ desire for a “network of liberty” and onto a focus on allies’ adherence to the international order, free trade rules and territorial sovereignty, could indicate that countries’ democratic values and human rights records will take a backseat to these priorities. This was seen by some in Cleverly’s recent defence of the UK-Saudi Arabia relationship, in which he recognised the differences regarding human rights standards, but insisted an ongoing bilateral partnership was a priority.
Time will tell how far “patient diplomacy” throws up real as opposed to theoretical policy conflicts, though arguably there was an unresolved tension in Truss’ preferred approach between the desire to promote free trade with the widest possible number of partners, and support for broader concepts of freedom, democracy and human rights.
Identifying the UK’s Comparative Advantages
Cleverly’s speech also provided updated clarity on the UK’s considered strengths, as well as the areas in which we might see a boost of investment under Sunak. Of the fields that target countries’ interests would span, Cleverly identified UK muscle as lying in the fields of trade, investment, development, defence, technology, climate change and environmental protection. We may therefore expect to see some initiatives in these areas with an emphasis on the international dimension, in order to develop a “clear, compelling and consistent” enough UK offer to attract future allies. If so, it will be easy to present these as a logical extension of the rationale of the Integrated Review, with its emphasis, for example, on the UK as a “science superpower”.
Trade and investment are predictably emphasised strongly. Cleverly outlined that the Government will be embedding the use of free trade deals and Mutual Recognition Agreements into this diplomatic agenda, and we can expect to see priority given to deals with Mexico and states in the Gulf Region, as well as India, with whom negotiations are already underway.
Climate change and development both received a mention, arguably contributing to a consciously balanced foreign policy, not least in the context of Sunak’s ambivalence around attending COP27, as well as Development Minister Andrew Mitchell’s comments last week that the UK has lost its reputation as a “development superpower”.
While this list of considered strengths, and its potential to translate into actionable priorities, presents no major departure from the themes laid out in the Integrated Review, it gives an indication of what we can expect to see in the anticipated update to the Review in the new year. While European security is expected to dominate and energy security is likely to have a higher immediate priority than climate change, there is little fundamental change to the real-world direction of UK foreign policy.
ODA to Remain Reduced
Finally, Cleverly fended off questions as to whether Britain’s recent cut in its aid budget from 0.7% of GNI to 0.5% – and further restrictions given the bulk of aid spending is currently being used to house refugees – would undermine his objective to offer incentives to middle-income, developing countries. He argued that influence will be delivered through presenting a strong offer of recognised UK strengths and skills. While critics will argue that development should be at the heart of the pursuit of “pragmatic” partnerships with countries likely to be more influential over the next 30 years, the Foreign Secretary made no reference to the aid budget or its reinstatement.
