LONDON – Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his pro-Brexit allies have long promised that once Britain is freed from the European Union, it could play a bold new role on the world stage, one they called global Britain. For a few days this week, it seemed like they were really keeping that promise.
When China imposed a new security law on Hong Kong, Johnson not only condemned the Chinese government, but also opened the doors of Britain to nearly three million residents of the former British colony who were eligible to reside in Britain. It was strong support, some even brave, from a long-standing colonial government against the oppression of a rising superpower.
But in the end, it was also a sign of Britain’s short stature: the Chinese threatened retaliation, while Johnson’s ministers admitted they could do nothing if China refused to allow these people to leave Hong Kong.
“We are a medium-sized power that needs to work with others to ensure what we want around the world,” said Chris Patten, who served as the last British governor of Hong Kong. Exiting the European Union, he said, had deprived Britain of its most natural partner “in trying to deal with these global problems.”
The clash with China exposed deeper contradictions in Johnson’s post-Brexit vision: Britain wants to globalize at a time when globalization is on the retreat. It has drifted away from the world’s largest trading bloc when the world is more divided than ever into competing regions. And you’re trying to carve out a role abroad just as the coronavirus pandemic has paralyzed your home economy.
Mr. Johnson’s model is no longer Winston Churchill, the proud symbol of Britain’s imperial reach, but Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal stood up for American society after the Great Depression.
With millions of Britons facing unemployment and a gigantic rebuilding project at home, the Johnson government barely has the bandwidth to re-establish Britain as an energetic player on the global stage. Its ministers no longer invoke the phrase Singapore-on-Thames, which once described the kind of nimble, lightly regulated, free-trade power they imagined emerging from Brexit.
Furthermore, the geopolitical landscape has changed significantly since the Brexit referendum, and even more rapidly since the pandemic spread across the world. With rivalry and antagonism between China and the West on the rise, Britain as a free agent will be uncomfortably caught in the middle, constantly forced to choose sides in a post-pandemic world.
“One consequence of a post-globalization world is that people will start to think defensively about the blocks,” said Mark Malloch Brown, former United Nations under-secretary-general. “Britain is adrift without a block. That is going to be a challenge, and a prime example of this is Hong Kong. “
British diplomats showed ability to align the United States, Canada and Australia to sign a severe letter to the Chinese government about the new law. But in defending the rights of those holding British passports abroad, Britain is alone. Neither the European Union, so recently abandoned by Britain, nor the United States, largely indifferent to human rights under President Trump, is eager to join that fight.
Johnson once viewed independence from Great Britain as a competitive advantage. He said that it would allow the country to reach trade agreements with China, the United States or any other person, without the obligation of the European Union.
“As a global Britain, our range is not limited to the immediate European interior as we see new powers emerge,” Johnson, who was serving as Foreign Secretary at the time, said in a speech to Chatham House in December 2016. “It is correct that we must take a distinctive approach to policymaking, as it relates to China.”
But as relations between China and the United States have deteriorated, Johnson is caught in the middle. After initially avoiding Trump’s pressure to keep Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei out of Britain’s 5G digital network, Johnson was forced to reconsider. Some analysts say they expect it to roll back and impose additional restrictions on Huawei.
Part of the reason is technical: US sanctions against Huawei have increased the security risks of allowing the company to build a large portion of the network. But part of this is the geopolitical reality. In any upcoming cold war between the United States and China, Britain cannot afford to alienate its most important ally.
“The danger is being caught between President Trump and President Xi,” Patten said, referring to Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
Trump’s faltering political fortunes pose another risk for Johnson. The President enthusiastically supported Brexit and embraced the Prime Minister as a like-minded populist. If Trump lost in November, Johnson would face an uncertain new counterpart in former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
There is nothing to suggest that Biden would not advocate for the alliance with Britain. On some issues, like Iran and climate change, there would be fewer sticking points. But Biden probably won’t give the same priority to a trade deal as Trump. Former President Barack Obama warned the British that they would be “at the end of the line” for trade talks if they voted for Brexit.
Biden is also a dedicated Irish-American who will watch over Ireland’s interests, as Britain negotiates its long-term trade relationship with the European Union (a breakthrough in those talks seems more difficult to achieve than ever). Preserving the Good Friday Agreement, which ended years of sectarian strife in Northern Ireland, is an article of faith among Democrats.
“Democrats are baffled by the logic of Brexit to begin with,” said Malloch Brown. “There is a very strong Irish Democratic lobby, which will really be looking like a hawk that this does not put Ireland at a disadvantage.”
For some critics, global Britain was never more than a marketing slogan. After all, they said, Britain has been seen for centuries as a global player, one who has outgrown itself economically and militarily, long after the end of the empire and during its 47 years of membership in European institutions.
Today, in any case, Johnson’s powerful advisers, such as Dominic Cummings, are more concerned with transforming British society than asserting their influence abroad. They know that the Conservative Party won its 80-seat parliamentary majority with the votes of working-class people in the Midlands and northern Britain, who care more about saving their jobs than reaching trade deals.
Since Mr. Johnson’s victory, he has used the Global Britain label primarily to shine a bureaucratic decision: merging two government ministries, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Department for International Development. The reason, he said, is to align Britain’s foreign aid with its strategic and commercial interests. Some former diplomats said Johnson should not stop there.
“If you really want a global Britain, and you want the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to have a genuine policy, then bring in the commerce department,” said Simon Fraser, who once headed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
There are reasons for hope about Britain’s role. Its diplomats are pushing a proposal to expand the Group of 7 to include three other major democracies, South Korea, India and Australia. Other countries have embraced it as an alternative to Trump’s highly maligned plan to invite Russia to return to the club.
Britain remains a substantial military power, with nuclear weapons and a close intelligence relationship with the United States and other allies, known as the Five Eyes, which analysts say has recovered from tensions over Huawei.
Mr. Johnson made waves this week with a front-page column in an Israeli newspaper, in which he urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to annex the occupied territories in the West Bank. Mr. Netanyahu has been delayed for now.
The opposition Labor Party of Great Britain also returned to the mainstream, after a period in which it seemed influenced by anti-American sentiment and was tainted by accusations of anti-Semitism. Lisa Nandy, the shadow foreign secretary, has emerged as a fresh new voice for Britain’s place in the world.
If the pandemic finally pierces the illusion of a global Britain, Britain can take comfort in what has not changed. It remains a medium-sized country, anchored in the west, deeply intertwined with Europe and inescapably lashed at the United States.
“It has made them realize that they couldn’t have their cake and eat it too,” said Thomas Wright, director of the Center for the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. “That is an illusion that has now been removed. They have been forced to return to their most traditional space. “
