Search

Begin New Search Topic Government Political Geography Britain

1. A Short-Sighted Vision for Global Britain

Author:
Owen Barder, Hannah Timmis, and Arthur Baker
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
here has been a resurgence in calls to reconsider the cross-party consensus in the UK on foreign aid and development. The main political parties are all committed to spending 0.7 percent of gross national income on aid, to using the internationally agreed definition of aid, and to maintaining a separate government department to administer the majority of this aid, led by a Cabinet Minister. In their recent report, Global Britain: A Twenty-first Century Vision, Bob Seely MP and James Rogers lay challenge to these long-established pillars of UK development policy. In this note, we consider some of the questions they raise and suggest alternative answers.
Topic:
Development, Government, Foreign Aid, and Bureaucracy
Political Geography:
Britain and Europe

2. British Public Opinion and Mass-Elite Relations on EU Enlargement: Implications on the Democratic Deficit Debate

Author:
Oya Dursun-Ozkanca
Publication Date:
02-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Central European University Political Science Journal
Institution:
Central European University
Abstract:
Despite the fact that the public in Britain had predominantly negative attitudes towards the Easter n enlargement of the European Union (EU) in 2004, the British government endorsed this policy . Since the legitimacy of elite actions on EU affairs depends on the level of public support, it is important to study the formation of public opinion and the poli tical communication processes in the European context. Using Flash Eurobarometer survey data, this article first tests the determinants of public support for EU enlargement in Britain. It then examines the nature of the relationship between elites and publ ic opinion on the 2004 enlargement. It concludes that the public discussion about enlargement in Britain was fuelled by hysteria rather than facts, and that the British policymakers failed to both provide the worried public with clear facts on the possible effects of enlargement and take substantive policy decisions to alleviate popular concerns.
Topic:
Government and Communications
Political Geography:
Britain and Europe

3. Old world, new world: the evolution and influence of foreign affairs think-tanks

Author:
Donald E. Abelson
Publication Date:
02-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
Before the ink on the Treaty of Versailles was dry, the idea of creating an organization dedicated to educating, informing and advising future leaders about the causes and consequences of war was already gaining traction. At 'a series of unofficial meetings held in Paris in 1919',1 Lionel Curtis, an Oxford professor and visionary with a reputation for possessing an impressive array of entrepreneurial skills, was spearheading efforts to establish an Anglo-American research institution where scholars could explore international problems and advocate policy solutions.2 This kind of organization appealed to Curtis and to those with whom he discussed it for several reasons, not the least of which was that it could provide a valuable forum for both policy-makers and prominent policy experts in the leading western powers to talk to one another about international affairs. It was also a concept with which several of the delegates attending the Paris peace talks had some familiarity. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries a number of institutions had already taken root in Great Britain and in the United States with the aim of helping policy-makers navigate their way through complex policy problems. They included the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies (1831), founded by the first Duke of Wellington; London's Fabian Society (1884), home to a number of prominent scholars, including Sidney and Beatrice Webb, co-founders of the London School of Economics; the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (1910), established by the Scottish-American steel tycoon Andrew Carnegie; and the Institute for Government Research (1916), which merged with two other institutions to form the Brookings Institution in 1927.3 Curtis and his colleagues in Great Britain and the United States were also aware of the ground-breaking research that had been conducted at hundreds of settlement houses in their respective countries. It was at places such as London's Toynbee Hall (1884) and Chicago's Hull House, co-founded by Jane Addams in 1889, that sociologists and other university faculty with expertise in social welfare policy could study the working conditions of the poor.4 In short, proponents of establishing a foreign affairs research institution recognized the importance of encouraging a dialogue between leading social scientists and high-level policy-makers.
Topic:
Government and International Organization
Political Geography:
Britain, United States, America, Washington, Paris, London, and Wellington

4. Indo-Israel Relations and the Iranian Factor

Author:
Amir Sajedi
Publication Date:
03-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs
Institution:
Center for Strategic Research (CSR)
Abstract:
India and Israel share many common characteristics such as having emerged from a colonial past of the British Empire, and having a parliamentary system which encompasses moderate and radical forces. In spite of this shared background, for nearly four decades, India did not show interest in establishing complete diplomatic relations with Israel, and in general supported and voted for defense of the Palestinians and the Arab Middle-Eastern governments and for condemnation of Israel in world bodies such as the United Nations. However the broad changes in the world stage arising in the 1990's such as the break-up of the Soviet Union, the occupation of Kuwait by Iraq and the subsequent crisis in the Middle-East, the rise of the price of oil, the reduction in the remittances sent back to India by the returning Indian workers from Arab countries, and also the change of the political climate in India, the increase in support for the right wing (B J P) all changed the direction of the attitudes of most Indian politicians towards Israel. But developing Indo-Israel relations does not affect Indo-Iran's relations.
Topic:
Government
Political Geography:
Britain, Middle East, India, Israel, Kuwait, Soviet Union, Palestine, Arabia, and United Nations

5. Skyjackers, jackals and soldiers: British planning for international terrorist incidents during the 1970s

Author:
Geraint Hughes
Publication Date:
09-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
On 5 January 1974 a column of 150 British Army troops, supported by armoured vehicles, arrived at Heathrow airport in full battle order, and over the course of the following two weeks they patrolled its runways and the perimeter. These soldiers had been ordered in by Edward Heath's government in response to intelligence reports that the Palestinian fedayeen intended to use a portable anti-aircraft missile to shoot down a passenger jet, and the British authorities had already devised contingency plans (codenamed Operation Marmion) to deploy the army in order to deter a terrorist attack at the airport. Marmion was implemented on three further occasions in 1974—in June, July and September—and in each case the troop presence at Heathrow attracted considerable parliamentary and press comment. Some critics argued that in each case the British government was over- reacting to the threat at hand, and that the military patrols at Heathrow were essentially intended as a public relations exercise. However, Operation Marmion also had an effect which ministers and civil servants had not intended, as it fed contemporary fears that the British Army and right-wing extremists within the establishment and security services were preparing for a coup.
Topic:
Government
Political Geography:
Britain and Palestine

6. A Result That Resolves Little

Author:
Malcolm Chalmers
Publication Date:
10-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
Britain's 2010 National Security Strategy, published shortly after the coalition government took office, was entitled 'A Strong Britain in an Age of Uncertainty'. It made no mention of the two existential challenges—the possible secession of Scotland from the United Kingdom, and the risk of a British withdrawal from the European Union. Yet either event would be a fundamental transformation in the very nature of the British state, with profound impact on its foreign and security policy.
Topic:
Security and Government
Political Geography:
Britain, United Kingdom, Europe, and Scotland

7. St Helena ready for take off

Author:
Michael Binyon
Publication Date:
06-2013
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
A mountain-top airport is about to change island life forever
Topic:
Government
Political Geography:
Britain, South Africa, and Island

8. Britain must engage with a multi-tier EU

Author:
Robin Niblett
Publication Date:
10-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
Bad time to play call my bluff
Topic:
Government
Political Geography:
Britain and Germany

9. Dr Fox and the Philosopher's Stone: the alchemy of national defence in the age of austerity

Author:
Paul Cornish and Andrew M. Dorman
Publication Date:
03-2011
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
The history of British defence reviews has been one of repeated disappointment: a cycle in which policy failure is followed by a period of inertia, giving way to an attempt at a new policy framework which is then misimplemented by the defence leadership. Each failed defence review therefore sows the seeds of its successor. With this in mind, in 2010 the new coalition government embarked upon an altogether more ambitious exercise: a strategy review comprising a National Security Strategy and a Strategic Defence and Security Review. This article suggests, nevertheless, not only that the 2010 strategy review looks likely to follow past performance, but also that it is coming unstuck at an unprecedented rate. This is a pity since the 2010 review had much to commend it, not least the adoption of a risk-based approach to security and defence policy-making. What is the explanation for this outcome? Is it that the British have, as some have suggested, lost the ability to 'do strategy', if ever they had it? The authors offer a more nuanced understanding of the policy process and argue that the coalition government in fact has a very clear and deliberate strategy—that of national economic recovery. Yet the coalition government cannot allow national defence and security to fail. The authors conclude with an assessment of the options open to the defence leadership as they seek to address the failing 2010 strategy review and suggest a variety of indicators which will demonstrate the intent and seriousness of the political, official and military leadership of the Ministry of Defence.
Topic:
Security, Economics, and Government
Political Geography:
Britain

10. Britain's coalition government and EU defence cooperation: undermining British interests

Author:
Clara Marina O'Donnell
Publication Date:
03-2011
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
The formation of a coalition government by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, combined with the need for important cuts to Britain's armed forces has raised significant uncertainties about Britain's attitude to defence cooperation within the European Union. Since taking office the coalition, while grappling with the implications of Britain's fiscal challenges, has shown an unprecedented interest in strengthening bilateral defence collaborations with certain European partners, not least France. However, budgetary constraints have not induced stronger support for defence cooperation at the EU level. On the contrary, under the new government, Britain has accelerated its withdrawal from the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). This article assesses the approach of the coalition to the CSDP. It argues that, from the perspective of British interests, the need for EU defence cooperation has increased over the last decade and that the UK's further withdrawal from EU efforts is having a negative impact. The coalition is undermining a framework which has demonstrated the ability to improve, albeit modestly, the military capabilities of other European countries. In addition, by sidelining the EU at a time when the UK is forced to resort more extensively to cost-saving synergies in developing and maintaining its own armed forces, David Cameron's government is depriving itself of the use of potentially helpful EU agencies and initiatives—which the UK itself helped set up. Against the background of deteriorating European military capabilities and shifts in US priorities, the article considers what drove Britain to support EU defence cooperation over a decade ago and how those pressures have since strengthened. It traces Britain's increasing neglect of the CSDP across the same period, the underlying reasons for this, and how the coalition's current stance of disengagement is damaging Britain's interests.
Topic:
Government
Political Geography:
Britain, Europe, and France