UK Defence Policy: The ‘New Canada’ and ‘International by Design’

Abstract

The EU referendum of 2016 was a landmark in Britain’s foreign relations. The decision to remain in or exit from the European Union caused a great deal of debate in the United Kingdom about its spending and austerity, economic policy, immigration, and identity. Post-Brexit, the British believed they could continue to influence the globe, being prepared to intervene, militarily if necessary, to uphold international humanitarian law and the ‘rules-based’ system exemplified by institutions such as the UN, Commonwealth, World Trade Organisation, and G9 group. They would do so, according to UK defence reviews, as a member of multiple partnerships. The only situation in which Britain anticipated independent action was in defence of its overseas territories, like the Falklands. Nevertheless, the sense that the Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya interventions of 2001–2014 had not been successful, and even disastrous, pervaded the government and armed forces. There were severe cuts prior to the EU referendum which create uncertainty about UK capability, even though it was one of the few countries to meet the 2% defence spending targets announced at the 2014 NATO summit. This chapter assesses enduring UK national interests, its strategy, its capability and its continuing challenges. It evaluates the unfulfilled expectations about UK defence and the requirements of the near future, including those of counter-terrorism, domestic dissatisfaction with the Iraq legacy, information warfare and cyber threats. It concludes with a look ahead and posits that the UK’s defence relationship with Europe might resemble that of Canada, rather than any other scenario.