Rishi Sunak, after his abrupt entry into 10 Downing Street as the new British Prime Minister, was not lucky enough to enjoy a honeymoon period. A plethora of problems on the home front, as well as in the realm of foreign affairs, can plague even the most seasoned prime ministers.
Unlike his two immediate predecessors, Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, who had experience managing diplomatic affairs as foreign secretaries before becoming prime ministers, Sunak comes from an entirely different background and has no direct experience outside of financial markets. in the international scenario of geopolitics.
Therefore, you have advantages and equally disadvantages for this disability on your resume. A key differential advantage, given his record as Chancellor of the Exchequer, might be the likelihood that he will be less ideological and more pragmatic in conducting British foreign policy.
“Robust pragmatism” is the term Sunak used to describe his vision of foreign policy. The atypical circumstances in which he has been propelled to the seat of power have made Sunak vulnerable to much pressure from within the Conservative Party. The lack of direction is quite visible since he took office; Whether it’s the cost of living crisis or rising tensions with China in the Indo-Pacific, he’s struggling to find direction. Some of his critics in the media are even harsher, pointing out that “his only mission is to survive another day in office.”
His inexperience in the foreign policy sphere was openly exposed in the traditional speech he delivered last month at the mayor’s banquet at London’s Guildhall. The annual speech by a British Prime Minister in the heart of the City of London routinely focuses on foreign policy. But Sunak’s speech, mostly embellished with “copy-paste” snippets from his predecessors, was a rather dull exercise that failed to attract appreciation from any quarter at home or abroad.
There was nothing new in it: support for Ukraine, the “threat” from China, Brexit and the security of the Indo-Pacific were the main topics. All the routine stuff you’d expect from any British Prime Minister at this point. However, Sunak devoted noticeably less time and attention to one country in his Guildhall speech: the United States.
There was no incantation of the “special” relationship between the US and the UK, and no mention was made of the duo spearheading Western liberal values and democracy. Australia was mentioned more with reference to the Indo-Pacific balance of power than the US. It is quite unusual for any British Prime Minister to ignore his trusted ally in this way in such an important annual speech outlining the contours of policy british foreign. No apparent reason can be blamed for such a flagrant omission on Sunak’s part, except his naivety.
Sunak is also well aware of his foreign policy naiveté, and is trying to make up for it by being hyperactive and overly aggressive on at least two major foreign policy issues: the Ukraine war and the threat from China. Johnson is revered as a national hero in Ukraine because of his inordinately generous support for the country after the Russian attack.
Chairman Volodymyr Zelenskiy was further stressed when Johnson was forced to leave Downing Street. He was concerned about the continuation of British financial and military aid to the Ukraine after Johnson’s departure. In an effort to get over Boris mania sweeping Ukraine, Sunak is also trying to be more Ukraine-focused than his former boss.
His first official trip abroad was to kyiv to reassure Zelenskiy of Britain’s continued commitment to Ukraine despite the change in leadership. Similarly, on the issue of China’s growing economic and military influence in the global arena, Sunak is also trying to appear as a “super China-hawk” due to continued criticism from his fellow party members against his apparent “softness”. “to China.
But setting the course for British-Chinese policy comes at a very delicate time. Although in his Guildhall speech, Sunak expressed his willingness to engage with China, stating that Britain could not “just ignore China’s importance in world affairs for global economic stability or issues like climate change,” he also spoke about the “sharpest competition” with China.
But he can’t afford to take a softer line on China because of the domestic politics of the Conservative Party, which has become gradually more skeptical of China of late. With the formation of the hardline China Inquiry Group by the Tories as a replica of the European Inquiry Group, which advocated a hard Brexit, Sunak has no choice but to go with the anti-China wave.
His foreign policy speech signaled that the “so-called golden age” in Sino-British relations had ended. He also made it clear that his preference is for “robust pragmatism” and not “big rhetoric.” When Sunak and Truss dueled to win the leadership of the Conservative Party, they engaged in a frenzy of China-bashing competition to show they were a bigger China hawk to lure the Tories.
“For too long, politicians in Britain and across the West have rolled out the red carpet and turned a blind eye to China’s nefarious activities and ambitions. I will change this on the first day as prime minister,” Sunak boasted as he campaigned for the leadership.
Along with China and Russia, Sunak also made it clear that building strong ties in Europe will be his priority.
With mounting challenges at home – turmoil within the Conservative Party, cost-of-living crisis, skyrocketing energy price inflation and supply chain problems – your top priority will no doubt be repairing the weakened economy, tame the financial markets and, most of all, restore public confidence in the Conservative Party.
But he will have to tread carefully in the foreign policy domain, an area where his naiveté on crucial issues is embarrassingly obvious.
Imran Khalid is a freelance international affairs columnist based in Karachi, Pakistan.
