Britain’s £4.5 billion foreign aid cut makes a mockery of ‘Global Britain’
By: Charles Mann
Tags: Global Britain, Foriegn Policy, Foreign Affairs, UK Politics, Foreign Aid

“The United Kingdom made a promise to care; to act; to lead.” Those are the words of former Prime Minister David Cameron, following the Government’s victory in a vote to slash its overseas development aid (ODA). Another former Conservative Prime Minister put it in stronger terms, Sir John Major remarked that “the Government has blatantly broken its word, and should be ashamed of its decision”. The covid-19 pandemic has made Britain’s commitment to spend 0.7% GNI on aid a necessity to face down global challenges, yet the recent result spells disaster for those most in need around the world, and paves the way for Russia and China to fill the void.

In a vote, won by 333 votes to 298, the government has confirmed a cut in ODA by around £4.5 bn ($6.2 bn). The result solidifies plans announced earlier this year which intend to recuperate some of the £500 bn ($693 bn) that has been spent throughout the pandemic. The decision faced considerable opposition from Boris Johnson’s own party who challenged the strategic forethought of the move amidst the rhetoric of ‘Global Britain’.

The UK is widely acknowledged as a global champion of ODA, currently the third largest contributor. Its authority in foreign assistance has made it a partner of choice for the United States and many of its European allies. Yet its position has been cast into doubt with this week’s result. Britain’s soft power will be severely weakened, with its hard-won credibility on the international stage following suit.

The Government claims that it is a temporary move until balance sheets settle, but the decision will be locked-in to spending plans for years to come. The implications will be felt across the entirety of the UK’s foreign policy strategy, outlined in the recently published Integrated Review of Defence and Security. It’s claim to be a “soft power superpower” will be greatly undermined.

The cuts in aid spending will fall most dramatically in the Middle East and Central Africa, where competition with Russia is often most visible and unpredictable. There can be no doubt that reduced British support will be capitalised upon by Russia for a propaganda and influence victory. “When Britain withdraws, others step in. By cutting our aid, we have given states such as China and Russia an opportunity to expand their influence at Britain’s expense,” noted Tom Tugendhat, the Chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs, which scrutinises Britain’s foreign policy.

The decision also underestimates the interconnectedness of foreign aid spending in these areas on European security and stability — with the inevitable reduction in support forcing growing levels of migration to Europe. This has implications across the European region, where democratic backsliding in Hungary can be partially traced to migration flows, whilst the refugee population in Turkey has granted President Erdogan leverage over the European Union.

The “profound strategic mistake,” as a third former Prime Minister remarked, Tony Blair, leaves Britain’s overseas influence a great victim, only to be overshadowed by its impact on the world’s poorest and most vulnerable — leaving our adversaries left to pick up the pieces.