The Independent View: “The Rising Price of Freedom”

In 2011, Paddy Ashdown made a critical observation:

We are all now deeply, deeply, deeply interconnected… the idea of a nation state acting alone, not connected with others, not working with others, is no longer a viable proposition. Because the actions of a nation state are neither confined to itself, nor is it sufficient for the nation state itself to control its own territory, because the effects outside the nation state are now beginning to affect what happens inside them.

This led Ashdown to a deep commitment to multilateral cooperation, one which is at the heart of Liberal Democrat values—liberty, equality, democracy, community, human rights, internationalism, and environmentalism. Liberal internationalism, rooted in these values, has shaped the party’s support for open markets, cooperative security, and strong global institutions. It’s no surprise, then, that the Liberal Democrats remain steadfast advocates for EU membership and a proactive global role for the UK.

This liberal internationalist outlook has defined the Liberal Democrats for generations, and with 72 MPs in Parliament, it’s time to drive a more active, collaborative UK foreign policy.

As Labour unveiled its first Autumn Statement this year, however, the UK’s foreign policy prospects look bleak.

The Liberal Democrat commitment to internationalism should impel those in the Party to advocate for a strong, active foreign policy grounded in internationalist values and interests. This requires balanced investment across defence, diplomacy, and development. Such investments aren’t simply an “extra” to the Liberal Democrat mission—they are foundational to it.

But why now?

Years of shrinking budgets have compromised national security and diminished the UK’s capacity to act as a progressive force globally, and have signalled a concerning retreat from global engagement, even as threats grow. Russia’s aggression, for instance, has intensified. The Kremlin’s brutal invasion of Ukraine was not an isolated event but the latest escalation in a pattern of hostilities toward the UK and Europe. Russia’s cyber-attacks on our critical infrastructure, manipulation of media, and financial infiltration undermine our rule of law and democracy.

In the past year, the Middle East has gone from uneasy stability, to a rapidly escalated situation which is already spilling out beyond the confines of national borders and has resulted in vast humanitarian catastrophe. Intrastate conflict also threatens the collective security of the globe. In places like Afghanistan, Sudan, Ethiopia, and Haiti–to name just a few–the security and humanitarian situation have degraded beyond what can be accurately reported by journalists.

For Liberal Democrats, diplomacy is, rightly, the first port of call; it is the cornerstone of peace and security. Our diplomatic network needs the resources to build and sustain alliances crucial for countering authoritarianism and ensuring that Britain’s influence serves as a force for good in a fractured world.

Prevention of these major conflicts remains the best way to avoid the enormous cost societies incur due to violent conflict. This is why for Liberal Democrats development has remained both a moral duty and a practical step toward a safer world. Reducing poverty, inequality, and instability addresses the root causes of conflicts that could later draw the UK into costly interventions. Development spending is not mere charity—it is a forward-thinking investment in people, and in global stability.

Cuts to development aid are dangerously shortsighted. As climate change worsens and populations grow, resource scarcity, humanitarian crises, and mass migration will increase, often fuelling future conflicts. By supporting sustainable development in regions facing these pressures, we can bolster global stability and safeguard the future.

With the rise of authoritarianism, the impacts of climate change, and escalating global instability, the UK must not retreat from the world stage and instead reject isolationism, the antithesis of what the Liberal Democrats stand for.

That is why the Coalition for Global Prosperity have produced a new report titled “The Rising Price of Freedom”. In this report Sir Myles Wickstead and I argue that to tackle the rising threats from hostile states and manage the existential risk that climate change poses, the Government should commit to 3.5% of GDP across defence, diplomacy, and development. It is not about promoting militarism or unchecked spending—it is about ensuring a balanced, comprehensive approach to security. As the geopolitical landscape shifts, we must match our capabilities to emerging threats while standing firmly by the liberal values that have defined the UK for decades.

The Liberal Democrats have long championed a world that values peace, cooperation, and justice. Now, the Party must advocate for a foreign policy that unites defence, diplomacy, and development in a values-driven strategy.

* Zoe Swanwick is a researcher at the Coalition for Global Prosperity.

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in Op-eds and The Independent View.
Advert

4 Comments

  • Steve Trevethan 7th Nov '24 - 5:09pm

    Thank you for an interesting and timely article.

    Might a factor in many conflicts be a submerged American policy of working for/maintaining r a uni-polar world?

  • An excellent article Zoe – thank you. In Putin we face an ambitious opponent with an endless capacity to sacrifice the lives of other people’s children and impose hardship on his own people. Following the US election result there is an urgent need to work with our European allies to present a strong, united and militarily capable front that will deter him from further aggression in Europe. He will inevitably exploit any sign of weakness or disunity, and stress-test Article V.

    That means both an increase in, and major re-prioritisation of, defence spending, alongside investment in development and diplomacy.

  • Peter Martin 10th Nov '24 - 1:07pm

    Of course there needs to be “multilateral cooperation”. The climate issue, for example, won’t be solved without it. There needs to be co-operation in fishing quotas and oil rights in the seas and oceans. There needs to be co-operation in aviation.

    However, it shouldn’t mean that we live in each others’ pockets. If any Nation State wants to run a government deficit or a debt of whatever it deems appropriate for its own economy , there’s no reason why any other nation should object . If any country wants to move its clocks backwards and forwards in summer and winter then that’s really no-one else’s else’s business. Except, it is mutually beneficial for all countries who wish to do that to voluntarily co-ordinate the dates on which they do that. If a country wants to totally nationalise/privatise its railways there’s no reason for anyone else to object.

    The powers of the Nation State are real enough and shouldn’t be ignored. Largely its they who issue the currencies, make the laws, have standing armies, have police forces, have the power to fine and imprison people etc. The bankers were widely considered the villains behind the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. But only one managed to convict and imprison any of them in a court of law. It wasn’t the biggest country. It was actually the smallest. Iceland pop 300k.

    They also did much better than most in standing up to the big hedge funds who demanded compensation for their losses.

  • Peter Hirst 15th Nov '24 - 2:26pm

    This article makes a lot of sense. Defence, development and diplomacy are a three edged sword for living in a complicated world. Conflict can only be the last resort when the other two have clearly failed. If they are never given the chance, then we resort to conflict too early and with unfortunate results.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Nonconformistradical
    @Simon R "We should certainly be asking why it’s apparently so hard to make a good profit by farming and producing food (supermarkets’ oligopoly? price com...
  • David Garlick
    The EU problem made worse by UK leaving . Started like most bad decisions by our dreadful Conservatives....
  • Simon R
    There seem to be a fair few comments that hint that IHT should be lower for farmers because farming produces so little income. But those seem like separate iss...
  • Mick Taylor
    @nonconformistradical. I am making no value judegments at all about value to society. It just seems to me that IHT (or any other tax) should fall equally on peo...
  • Diana Simpson
    I'm shocked! Not at the party goers antics but the fact that any Lib Dems would eat oreos manufactured by Mondelez a company renowned for its anti-green practic...