rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Regenerating leadership or rhetoric? UK's new foreign policy

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

The new coalition government in the UK is expediting efforts to mark a differentiation from its predecessor. In regards to foreign policy, the Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs William Hague has identified human rights as the "irreducible core" in his initial speech of a four-part series intended to outline the new government's priorities and approach.

It is interesting that Secretary Hague would choose "irreducible core" for a term which only appears once in a speech containing over 5,000 words. In comparison, "security" appears eighteen times and "influence" twelve. If human rights are indeed to form the core of British policy, this aspirational goal must be weighed against a few inherent realities which are currently challenging the government.

In Secretary Hague's second speech within the series, delivered in Japan on July 15, 2010, the phrase "humanitarian assistance" was mentioned once, "human rights" was not mentioned at all and "economic" and "economy" combined were mentioned 38 times within the 3,425 word speech.

The true potency of human rights as the nucleus of policy development will be dependent on the level of priority the government places on this ambitious objective -- and there are competing priorities, especially on the domestic front. The temptation to simply apply the rhetoric of human rights and not the substance will be overwhelming given the resource-intense nature that the protection and promotion of human rights demands.

A practical example of this is the coalition government's renewed commitment to meet 0.7% GNI in foreign aid by 2013. If this was an easy objective, the previous UK government along with its G8 counterparts would have satisfied the commitment long ago. Justifying such resource allocation in recessionary times when domestic social security cuts are inevitable will be challenging to say the least. The G8, which includes the UK, has already acknowledged that 2010 AIDS treatment targets will not be met following the Summit in Toronto. Coming good or continuing the rhetoric on this initial 0.7% commitment will be indicative of the government's true prioritizations.

In terms of utilizing a moral authority in foreign policy, it can be agreed that the high ground as a rights respecting nation, which the UK claims, has been visibly eroded following the military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as government complicity in torture and renditions following 9/11. Prime Minister Cameron has made overtures to increase accountability, announcing a judicial inquiry into torture and renditions, almost one year exactly after Gordon Brown announced the Iraq Inquiry.

In terms of Afghanistan, the new coalition government is encountering the problem of declaring a departure from the previous foreign policy approach while still maintaining previous foreign policy commitments. On July 21, 2010, Secretary Hague reported to the House of Commons the results of the Kabul Conference in which he fully endorsed the Kabul Process and the UK's combat role for the next five years.

If the new coalition government is truly wishing to establish human rights as foreign policy's "irreducible core," a substantial effort (even in terms of paying lip service to the idea) remains. At such an early stage in its mandate, the only praise the government can expect is a cautious endorsement of the concept.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.