Dr Victoria Honeyman
Associate Professor in British Politics at the University of Leeds. She writes predominantly on British Foreign Policy and Overseas Development Assistance and how the two main parties publicly justify and ‘sell’ these policies to the British public. In addition, she is interested in the study of teaching politics and is Co-Chair of the PSA Learning and Teaching Network.
Email: v.c.honeyman@leeds.ac.uk
UK Election 2024
Section 5: Policy and strategy
50. It’s the cost-of-living-crisis, stupid! (Prof Aeron Davis)
51. The last pre-war vote? Defence and foreign policy in the 2024 Election (Dr Russell Foster)
52. The 2024 UK general election and the absence of foreign policy (Dr Victoria Honeyman)
53. Fractious consensus: defence policy at the 2024 General Election (Dr Ben Jones)
54. The psycho-politics of climate denial in the 2024 UK election (Prof Candida Yates, Dr Jenny Alexander)
55. How will the Labour government fare and what should they do better? (Prof Rick Stafford and team)
56. Finding the environment: climate obstructionism and environmental movements on TikTok (Dr Abi Rhodes)
57. Irregular migration: ‘Stop the boats’ vs ‘Smash the Gangs’ (Prof Alex Balch)
58. The sleeping dog of ‘Europe: UK relations with the EU as a non-issue (Prof Simon Usherwood)
59. Labour: a very conservative housing manifesto (Prof Becky Tunstall)
60. Why the Labour Government must abolish the two-child benefit limit policy (Dr Yekaterina Chzhen)
61. Take the next right: mainstream parties’ positions on gender and LGBTQ+ equality issues (Dr Louise Luxton)
During general election campaigns politicians usually focus on a select number of key issues in their national campaigns. These are usually driven either by current events or the policies which polls indicate are important to voters during a particular election. Polling evidence from Ipsos Mori in May 2024 indicated that the issues voters care about the most – the NHS, the economy, immigration – scarcely change (Ipsos mori May 2024). Rarely does foreign policy crack the top ten in voters priorities, although there is always the exception (Brexit being the most notable in the 2019 election or the impact of the Iraq war during the 2005 general election).
As with many elections, foreign policy has barely made an appearance in the 2024 general election. Politicians have focused their attention on domestic issues, with Brexit being entirely ignored by the two main parties (although the Liberal Democrats have indicated that rejoining the EU is their long-term goal (BBC News)). Indeed, a casual observer might be forgiven for forgetting that the UK is one of the strongest supporters of the Ukrainian government, which is currently at war with its nearest neighbour, a war which has been raging for over two years.
One notable feature of this election, indeed a feature which might suggest a lack of excitement amongst many involved in fighting it, is the reappearance of long-standing attack lines. Well-worn phrases and ideas such as “unfunded spending, higher taxes” and ‘crime and defence …not taken seriously” are reminiscent of general elections of old (Conservative Party 2024 manifesto, p.1). While these lines might resonate with some voters, it would have taken far more than that for the Conservatives to beat Labour, and in the event their predicted defeat came to pass with Labour securing a majority of over 170 seats.
In foreign policy terms, this election has told the electorate very little they didn’t know, and it has not highlighted any big divides between the two main parties. Indeed, both are steadfast in their support for Ukraine in their war against Russia and both are generally supportive of Israel (although the war in Israel and the Palestinian territories is so politically sensitive that both parties have tried to avoid public pronouncements on it during the campaign). Indeed, very little has been said about the potential impact of elections in the US and France, although again, those are subjects which tend not to be widely commented on within the UK political debate.
So, what has been discussed in foreign policy terms during this election campaign? Almost nothing. The focus has been on domestic policy, and there is undoubtedly good reason for that. While the attention of voters is dominated by domestic issues, in foreign policy terms there really is very little to choose from between the two main parties. Putting Brexit aside (as they have), there is no real dispute between them, and therefore very little to say. That doesn’t mean that the reality is exactly the same as the election rhetoric. A Labour government might reinstitute the 0.7% GNI spending on development aid, they might soften relations with their European neighbours, they might take a slightly different line on Ukraine (although the changes, were we to see any, would be largely minimal). However, at the moment, we simply don’t know. What history tells us is that Labour Prime Ministers tend to go out of their way NOT to be soft on foreign policy, perhaps because they are keen to fight the Conservative attack line that they are. Attlee, Wilson and Blair all made tough foreign policy decisions (the Korean War, the decision not to join the US in the Vietnam War, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and Prime Minister Starmer will almost certainly need to make some tough foreign policy decisions. What those will be, we simply don’t know yet, as foreign policy is often driven by events beyond the control of a single nation.
What we do know is there are threats in every corner. The world has rarely looked less safe since the end of the Cold War. Russia is currently engaged in a war with Ukraine, and it is unlikely to be the last in Putin’s pursuits of a Greater Russia. Xi Jinping, the Chinese premier, has been exercising his influence in Hong Kong, with Japan and Taiwan looking on nervously. South Korea and Japan remain on high alert to a threat from North Korea. Donald Trump might be re-elected into the White House with uncertain results. Global warming, poverty and internal violence continue to put pressure on many nations, leading to death, destruction and mass migration. Any or all of these could affect the premiership of Prime Minister Starmer. The election has given little hint as to how he might deal with these, but as with anything, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Winning an election is really only the beginning.
