3 minute read
Politics
The importance of values and principles in global politics
In a recent debate in the Commons on the war in Ukraine I spoke about a values-based political system. Values or principles are as important in politics as they are in our everyday lives. They help shape our outlook, analysis and approach to often-complex problems. They cannot be straight jackets because pragmatism and realpolitik must be in play; after all, politics is the art of the possible. Foreign policy can be complex, as Robin Cook and his “ethical foreign policy” soon discovered. In my speech I made a number of points, but I want to set out the ones that focused on the application of values.
First, Article 5 of the NATO treaty means that fellow members come to the aid of a NATO country under attack. It’s the principle of the Three Musketeers – one for all and all for one. Over the years this has been narrowly interpreted as only being able to act if the country under attack is a NATO member. But NATO does have the scope to act if it does not restrict its interventions solely to fellow member assaults and territorial invasion. NATO could, and in my judgement should, be able to defend values as much as it can defend territory. The invasion of Ukraine is as much an attack on our common values as it is an invasion of an ally’s territory.
Second, at a recent UN vote condemning Russian aggression, while 141 countries voted in favour, 35 abstained and 5 voted against. Those against were North Korea, Eritrea, Syria, Belarus and Russia. Yes, Russia was able to vote, and just as we have kicked Russia out of the Council of Europe so we should begin expelling Russia from the UN. It is an affront to the world that Russia continues as a permanent member of the Security Council. The UK should have nothing to do with those five countries who voted against condemning Russian aggression. India and Pakistan are numbered among the 35 who abstained from the vote. These are Commonwealth Countries, and their membership should be suspended, as should any aid/direct inward investment programmes. Our message should be simple – if you don’t share our core international values, don’t expect anything from the UK. Actions should have consequences. You cannot run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. More worrying were the large number of African countries numbered on the abstentions. Russia and China have recently been heavily focused on Africa, and we need to have a proper think about how the West responds to countering this creeping geopolitical influence.
My final point links to that above, which is the issue of Free Trade Agreements. Trade is not simply about the buying and selling of commodities; it’s also about whether we are comfortable trading with a country, and part of that comfort comes from a sharing of values and approach. I have called for the talks for an Indian Free Trade Agreement to be suspended. I don’t want to see all the attendant happy smiling faces and flags at an FTA signing with a country that cannot work out that what Russia has done has no defence.
For some, the application of values, ethics and principles is airy-fairy; a naïve abstract unsuited or impractical in the ‘real world’. That’s a view I have never subscribed to. As we see the brutality inflicted on Ukraine (and by proxy the wider West), as the postSecond World War settlement is shaken up like a snowdome, so we must reassert those values that we believe are worth defending: free speech, a free press, democracy, rights, independent judiciary, the Rule of Law and an international order-based system. We have taken them for granted for too long. We have believed their advancement was uninterruptible. They are not. We must stand and defend them.
