Abstract
The United Kingdom's National Security Strategy states that it will maintain ‘a commitment to collective security via a rules-based international system and our key alliances, notably with the United States’. But what should the United Kingdom do when the United States is accused (as during the Iraq crisis) of circumventing the procedural norms of the United Nations (UN)? This article examines the normative foundations underpinning what it calls Blairite Atlanticism. This supports the US unilateralism not simply because it is in the national interest to do so, but because ultimately the United States acts as a custodian of the international common good when the UN fails to do so. Drawing on Christian Reus-Smit's critique of ‘liberal hierarchy’, the article challenges the claim that this approach meets the criteria of a progressive foreign policy. The article then draws on Republican Security Theory to demonstrate how the progressive defence of the UN system can avoid the charge of anti-Americanism by appealing to the anti-hierarchical traditions of the American founding.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
See, for instance, the remarks by Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney (Blomfeld, 2012) and the former Prime Minister Tony Blair (2011, pp. 4–5). According to David Sanger (2012), the Obama administration's preventive strategy has been limited to cyber-attacks against Iranian capabilities.
Mark Phythian (2007, p. 5) notes that the defining characteristic of a Labour's foreign policy before Blair was a suspicion of the US power and an ‘insistence on the primacy of the UN’. See also Dunne (2012, p. 423).
On the redefinition of the national interest under New Labour, see Croft (2002).
Good international citizens are not required to sacrifice their vital security interests out of fidelity to the rules of international society, but they are required ‘to put the welfare of international society ahead of the relentless pursuit of [their] own national interests … to place the survival of order before the satisfaction of minimal national advantages’ (Linklater 1992, pp. 28–29). For an application to British foreign policy, one which defines defining the ‘welfare’ of international society to include respect for human rights, see Dunne and Wheeler (1998); also Linklater (2000).
‘Restrictionist’ interpretations of Article 51 of the UN Charter deny the right of any form of anticipatory self-defence, noting that the Charter insists states only respond to an armed attack that has occurred. However, a ‘counter-restrictionist’ argument claims that a customary right to use pre-emptive force against an imminent armed attack is indeed consistent with the UN Charter. The question of what constitutes an ‘imminent’ threat and what thereby triggers the right to use force in self-defence was strongly contested in the National Security Strategy of 2002 (see Ruys, 2010).
On Suez and its legacy – ‘that such a rift must not be allowed to recur’ – see Dumbrell (2001, p. 47).
Written Evidence from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, cited in Foreign Affairs Committee (2010a, p. 39). For details on the ‘deeply rooted, broadly based, strategically important and mutually supportive’ defence and security relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom, see HM Government (2010b, p. 60).
See Goldsmith (2010, pp. 108–129). When asked by the Inquiry why he did not consult with French on the meaning of Resolution 1441 Goldsmith argued that ‘the message that that would have given Saddam Hussein about the degree of our commitment would have been huge. … The United States and the United Kingdom were acting very closely together. We were not acting very closely with France’. This, in his view, made little difference to his decision because, ‘what the French Ambassador said to me, that actually the French knew and believed that there wasn’t a need for a second resolution’ (see also Goldsmith, 2010, p. 157).
On the disappointment that the UK support for the United States during the Iraq War did not translate into particular benefits, see Meyer (2009).
Dunne (2012, p. 421) indicates that Cook and Blair had always differed on how the relationship with the United States related to the ethical dimension of the British foreign policy.
On the emphasis on development and reform of the UN Security Council in Brown's foreign policy, see Honeyman (2009).
On Atlanticism as the default Conservative position, see Beech (2011). On the idea that Blair's American policy was driven by a domestic political consideration and the idea that Labour still had to shake off the anti-American image that had made it unelectable in the past, see Kampfner (2004, p. 161).
Despite this continuities with the Bush administration's approach to the use of force as a matter of self-defence do exist. In the context of the use of unmanned aerial vehicles to target al Qaeda, for instance, Presidential counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan (2011) echoed the 2002 National Security Strategy when he noted that the US policy was based on ‘a more flexible understanding of “imminence” ’. He argued that ‘the traditional conception of what constitutes “imminent” attack should be broadened in light of modern-day capabilities, techniques and technological innovations’. Also see a speech by the Attorney General, Eric Holder (2012) who noted in the context of Obama's programme of drone strikes that the President was not required ‘to delay action until some theoretical end-stage of planning – when the precise time, place and manner of an attack became clear. Such a requirement would create an unacceptably high risk that our efforts would fail, and Americans would be killed’. According to Klaidman, Harold Koh, the Legal Adviser to Obama's State Department, also developed a theory of ‘elongated imminence’, which he likened to ‘battered spouse syndrome’. ‘If a husband demonstrated a consistent pattern of activity before beating his wife, it wasn’t necessary to wait until the husband's hand was raised before the wife could act in self-defense’ (Klaidman, 2012, pp. 219–223). On the US use of drones and allegations that the United Kingdom had ‘a policy of passing British intelligence to US forces planning attacks against militants’, see BBC (2012).
Hague (2010) did introduce the new emphasis on bilateralism in a networked world by starting ‘with our unbreakable alliance with the United States which is our most important relationship and will remain so. Our shared history, value and interests, our tightly linked economies and strong habits of working together at all levels will ensure that the US will remain our biggest single partner for achieving our international goals’. But, he quickly added, ‘other bilateral ties matter too, whether they are longstanding ties which have been allowed to wither or stagnate or the new relations that we believe we must seek to forge for the 21st century’. Neither went as far as the Foreign Affairs Committee (2010b, p. 3), which stated that ‘it has long been assumed that UK national interests are best served by the touchstones of the US special relationship and our economic interests within the European Union. Uncritical acceptance of these assumptions has led to a waning of our interests in, and ability to make, National Strategy’.
This stemmed from the tendency, following Churchill, to view British foreign policy as occupying a unique position at the centre of ‘three great circles’: the Commonwealth, the United States and Europe. On the need to adapt the model ‘to make sense of a vastly different global political landscape’, see Daddow and Gaskarth (2011).
References
Alexander, D. (2007) The role of international development in a changing world. 12 July, http://www.cfr.org/economic-development/role-international-development-changing-world-rush-transcript-federal-news-service/p13910, accessed 16 February 2013.
Atkins, J. (2012) A renewed social democracy for an ‘Age of Internationalism’: An interpretivist account of new labour's foreign policy. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Early view online, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-856x2012.00537-x.
BBC. (2003a) Newsnight: Transcript of Blair's Iraq interview. 6 February, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/2732979.stm.
BBC. (2003b) Clare Short interview. 10 March, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2836925.stm.
BBC. (2012) William Hague facing legal action over drone strikes. 11 March, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17335368.
Beech, M. (2011) British conservatism and foreign policy: Traditions and ideas shaping Cameron's global view. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 13 (3): 348–363.
Blair, T. (1999) Doctrine of international community. 22 April, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/international/jan-june99/blair_doctrine4-23.html.
Blair, T. (2001) Speech to Labour Party Conference. Brighton, 1 October, http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=186.
Blair, T. (2003) The Prime Minister's address to British Ambassadors in London. 7 January, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/jan/07/foreignpolicy.speeches.
Blair, T. (2004) Prime Minister warns of continuing global terror threat. Sedgefield, 5 March, http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=282.
Blair, T. (2006) A global alliance for global values, http://fpc.org.uk/fsblob/798.pdf, accessed 16 February 2013.
Blair, T. (2010) Oral evidence before the Iraq Inquiry. 29 January, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/transcripts/oralevidence-bydate/100129.aspx.
Blair, T. (2011) Oral evidence before the Iraq Inquiry. 21 January, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/50865/20110121-Blair.pdf.
Blomfeld, A (2012) Mitt Romney backs Israel military action against Iran. Daily Telegraph, 30 July, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/mitt-romney/9436624/Mitt-Romney-backs-Israeli-military-action-against-Iran.html.
Brennan, J. (2011) Speech to Harvard Law School. 16 September.
Browne, J. (2011) Navigating the New World Order: The UK and the Emerging Powers Transcript of Speech at Chatham House. 20 July, http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Meetings/Meeting%20Transcripts/200711browne.pdf.
Buchanan, A. and Keohane, R.O. (2004) The preventive use of force: A cosmopolitan institutional proposal. Ethics and International Affairs 18 (1): 1–22.
Bull, H. (1971) World order and the superpowers. In: C. Holbrand (ed.) Superpowers and World Order. Canberra, Australia: Australian National University Press, pp. 140–145.
Bull, H. (1977) The Anarchical Society. A Study of Order in World Politics, 2nd edn. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bush, G. (2002) Speech to General Assembly. 12 September, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/sep/12/iraq.usa3.
Cameron, D. (2006) A New Approach to Foreign Affairs. Speech to British–American Project, 11 September, http://www.conservatives.com/News/Speeches/2006/09/Cameron_A_new_approach_to_foreign_affairs__liberal_conservatism.aspx.
Caverley, J.D. (2010) Power and democratic weakness: Neoconservative and neoclassical realism. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 38 (3): 593–614.
Chandrasekaran, R. (2012) Afghanistan: How the US army battled it out with the British. The Guardian, 3 July, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/03/us-army-battles-british-afghanistan.
Clark, I. (2009) Democracy in international society: Promotion or exclusion. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 37 (3): 563–581.
Coates, D. and Krieger, J. (with Rhiannon Vickers) (2004) Blair's War. Cambridge: Polity.
Cook, R. (2003) Personal Statement, House of Commons. 17 March, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansrd/vo030317/debtext/30317-33.htm.
Croft, S. (2002) Ethics, labour and foreign policy. In: C. Hay (ed.) British Politics Today. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Daddow, O. and Gaskarth, J. (2011) Introduction: Blair, Brown and New Labour's Foreign Policy, 1997–2010. In: O. Daddow and J. Gaskarth (eds.) British Foreign Policy: The New Labour Effect. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–27.
Deudney, D. (2007) Bounding Power. Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Dumbrell, J. (2001) A Special Relationship. Anglo-American Relations in the Cold War and after. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dumbrell, J. (2009) The US–UK special relationship: Taking the 21st century temperature. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 11 (1): 64–78.
Dunne, T. (2004) When the shooting starts: Atlanticism in British security strategy. International Affairs 80 (5): 893–909.
Dunne, T. (2012) Blair's Britain and the road to war in Iraq. In: S. Smith, A. Hadfield and T. Dunne (eds.) Foreign Policy. Theories, Actors Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 419–440.
Dunne, T. and Wheeler, N.J. (1998) Good international citizenship: A third way for British foreign policy. International Affairs 74 (4): 847–870.
Elden, S. (2007) Blair, neoconservatism and the war on territorial integrity. International Politics 44 (1): 11–24.
Foreign Affairs Committee. (2010a) House of Commons. Global Security: UK–US Relations, Sixth Report of Session 2009–2010, 18 March.
Foreign Affairs Committee. (2010b) House of Commons. Who does UK National Strategy, First Report of Session 2010–2011, 12 October.
Gamble, A. and Kearns, I. (2007) Recasting the special relationship. In: D. Held and D. Mepham (eds.) Progressive Foreign Policy. New Directions for the UK. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Goldsmith, P. (2003) Iraq: Resolution 1441. 7 March, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/27/iraq.iraq, accessed 16 February 2013.
Goldsmith, P. (2010) Oral evidence to the Iraq inquiry. 27 January, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/transcripts/oralevidence-bydate/100127.aspx.
Greenstock, J. (2009) Oral evidence to the Iraq inquiry. 17 November, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/40456/20091127am-final.pdf.
Hague, W. (2009) The Future of British Foreign Policy with a Conservative Government. Speech to International Institute for Strategic Studies, 21 July, http://www.iiss.org/recent-key-addresses/william-hague-address-jul-09/.
Hague, W. (2010) Britain's foreign policy in a networked world. The Locarno Room: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London, 1 July, http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=Speech&id=22462590.
Held, D. and Mepham, D. (2007) Introduction. In: D. Held and D. Mepham (eds.) Progressive Foreign Policy. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, pp. 1–17.
Holder, E. (2012) Speech to Northwestern University School of Law. 15 March.
HM Government. (2010a) A strong Britain in an age of uncertainty: The National Security Strategy. October, http://www.direct.gov.uk/nationalsecuritystrategy.
HM Government. (2010b) Securing Britain in an age of uncertainty. The strategic defence and security review. October, http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/strategic-defence-review/.
Honeyman, V. (2009) Gordon Brown and International Policy. Policy Studies 30 (1), Special Edition 85–110.
Henry Jackson Society. (2012) Statement of principles, http://henryjacksonsociety.org/about-the-society/statement-of-principles/, accessed 28 August.
Hurrell, A. (2007) On Global Order. Power, Values and the Constitution of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ikenberry, G.J. and Slaughter, A.M. (2006) A bigger security council with power to act. International Herald Tribune, 26 September, http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/26/opinion/edslaughter.php.
Kagan, R. (2003) Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order. London: Atlantic Books.
Kampfner, J (2004) Blair's Wars. London: Free Press.
Kennedy-Pipe, C. and Vickers, R. (2007) ‘Blowback’ for Britain: Blair, Bush and the War in Iraq. Review of International Studies 33 (3): 205–221.
Klaidman, D. (2012) Kill or Capture: The War on Terror and the Soul of the Obama Administration. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Kirkup, D. (2010) Defence cut threat to the special relationship. The Telegraph, 10 September, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/7998785/Defence-cut-threat-to-the-special-relationship.html.
Kritsiotis, D. (2004) When states use armed force. In: C. Reus-Smit (ed.) The Politics of International Law. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Linklater, A. (1992) What is a Good International Citizen. In: P. Keal (ed.) Ethics and Foreign Policy. London: Allen and Unwin, pp. 21–41.
Linklater, A. (2000) The good international citizen and the crisis in Kosovo. In: A. Schnabel and R. Thakur (eds.) Kosovo and the Challenge of Humanitarian Intervention: Selective Indignation, Collective Action, and International Citizenship Tokyo. New York and Paris: United Nations University Press.
Manning, D. (2009) Oral evidence before the Iraq inquiry. 30 November, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/40459/20091130pm-final.pdf.
McCain, J. (2007) Address to the Hoover Institution. 1 May, http://www.cfr.org/us-election-2008/senator-mccain-addresses-hoover-institution/p13252.
Meyer, C. (2009) Oral evidence before the Iraq inquiry. 26 November, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/40453/20091126am-final.pdf.
Miliband, E. (2010) Labour Leader's Conference Speech. 28 September.
Morris, J. (2011) How great is Britain? Power, responsibility and Britain's future global role. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 13 (3): 326–347.
Phythian, M. (2007) The Labour Party, War and International Relations, 1945–2006. New York: Routledge.
Phythian, M. (2011) From asset to liability: Blair, Brown and the ‘special relationship’. In: O. Daddow and J. Gaskarth (eds.) British Foreign Policy: The New Labour Effect. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Reisman, W.M. (1999–2000) The United States and International Institutions. Survival 41 (4): 62–80.
Reus-Smit, C. (2005) Liberal hierarchy and the license to use force. Review of International Studies 31 (Special issue): 71–92.
Ruys, T. (2010) ‘Armed Attack’ and Article 51 of the UN Charter. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sanger, D.E. (2012) Confront and Conceal: Obama's Secret Wars and the Surprising Use of American Power. New York: Crown Publishers, Kindle edition.
Schmalenbach, K. (2002) The right of self-defence and the war on terrorism. German Law Journal 3, http://www.germanlawjournal.com/index.php?pageID=11&artID=189.
Scott, L.V. (1999) Macmillan, Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis: Political, Military and Intelligence Aspects. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shanker, T. (2011) Defense Secretary warns of ‘dim’ future. New York Times, 10 July, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/11/world/europe/11gates.html.
Shanker, T. and Erlanger, S. (2012) US faces new challenge of fewer troops in Europe. New York Times, 13 January, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/14/world/europe/europe-weighs-implications-of-shrinking-us-troop-presence.html.
Sherwell, P. (2012) Barack Obama upgrades ‘special relationship’ for White House welcome to David and Samantha Cameron. The Telegraph, 10 March, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9136318/Barack-Obama-upgrades-special-relationship-for-White-House-welcome-to-David-and-Samantha-Cameron.html.
Smith, T. (2007) A Pact With the Devil: Washington's Bid for World Supremacy and the Betrayal of the American Promise. New York and London: Routledge.
Slaughter, A.M. (2003) Good reasons for going around the UN. New York Times, 18 March, http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/18/opinion/good-reasons-for-going-around-the-un.html.
Slaughter, A.M. (2009) The Crisis of American Diplomacy: Wilsonianism in the Twenty-First Century. Speech to Carnegie Council, 21 January, http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/trasncripts/0108.html.
Straw, J. (2010) Oral Evidence before the Iraq Inquiry. 21 January, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/44190/20100121pm-straw-final.pdf.
Sylvester, R. and Thomson, A. (2007) Mark Malloch Brown: ‘Let's not rely just on US’. The Telegraph, 14 July, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1557402/Mark-Malloch-Brown-Lets-not-rely-just-on-US.html.
Tucker, R.W. (1993) The Triumph of Wilsonianism? World Policy Journal 10 (4): 83–99.
Vickers, R. (2008) Harold Wilson, the British Labour Party and the war in Vietnam. Journal of Cold War Studies 10 (2): 43–72.
Vickers, R. (2011) The Labour Party and the World, Volume 2: Labour's Foreign Policy 1951–2009. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Wallace, W. and Phillips, C. (2009) Reassessing the special relationship. International Affairs 85 (2): 263–284.
Wedgwood, R. (2003) The fall of Saddam Hussein: Security council mandates and pre-emptive self-defense. The American Journal of International Law 97 (3): 576–585.
Wheatcroft, G. (2010) A love lost over the Atlantic. The National Interest, September–October, http://nationalinterest.org/article/love-lost-atlantic-3914, accessed 16 February 2013.
Wheeler, N.J. (1992) Pluralist or solidarist conceptions of international society: Bull and Vincent on humanitarian intervention. Millennium. Journal of International Studies 21 (3): 463–487.
Wheeler, N.J. (2004) The Kosovo bombing. In: C. Reus-Smit (ed.) The Politics of International Law. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
White House. (2010) National Security Strategy. May, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf.
Wilson, G. (2007) Brown ally hints at new UK relations with US. Telegraph, 13 July, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1557371/Brown-ally-hints-at-new-UK-relations-with-US.html.
Wintour, P. and Borger, J. (2007) Brown message to US: It's time to build, not destroy. The Guardian, 13 July, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/jul/13/uk.topstories3.
Acknowledgements
Research for this article was supported by a British Academy Mid-Career Fellowship. It was presented at the ISA, San Diego. The author would like to thank the panellists, in particular Paul Sharp, for their comments. He would also like to thank Mick Cox, Graeme Davies, Jamie Gaskarth, Aggie Hirst and two anonymous reviewers for their comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ralph, J. No longer special? Britain and the United States after Iraq. Int Polit 50, 333–359 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/ip.2013.10
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ip.2013.10