International

Has Britain given up on foreign affairs? Many say ‘We don’t have an Empire anymore’; or that ‘We are not a rich country.’ That has been said since Indian independence in 1947, or perhaps since our economic fragility was laid bare at the end of the First World War. Some ask ‘What right have we got to tell others how to live their lives?’ That question has been gathered momentum since the 1960s. Some ask ‘What business is it of mine?’ That attitude has been going on since the Old Testament.

Meanwhile, the balance of power is shifting to the people, quickly. Parliament blocked government action on Syria. There was the referendum over our membership of the European Union. There is disquiet over our aid programmes. Many fear it is a sign that populism or domestic priorities are undermining Britain’s place in the world. They worry too that people don’t know about the complexities of foreign affairs and don’t care. About this last point, at least, I think they are wrong.

The public is more experienced, more travelled, more informed than at any time in our history. Our education system, and every aspect of our media, encourages us to be critical of our politicians and policymakers, and spot every sign of incoherence, incompetence, or lazy thinking. We have become more aware of our limitations as a country: everyone knows that the Chinese economy is larger than ours, the American economy far larger, and that Germany has been out-performing us in manufacturing. The vast majority of people have now travelled outside Britain. Seventeen per cent of people in London were born outside the United Kingdom. We are immersed in films, music, objects, advertisements and food from other cultures. We have learned to recognise more clearly than previous generations our own prejudices about foreigners. Everyone understands instinctively how difficult it is now to understand or govern Britain, how different Britain is from other countries, and how difficult it is for Britain to influence the world.

Please get in touch with me if you have experience of these issues, or any advice to share.

So when there is public opposition to foreign policy, it is rooted in real concerns about real issues. European rules are rigid, there are terrible challenges in the Euro-zone; there are ten thousand examples of aid programmes which are poorly conceived, wasteful, or poorly implemented; the role of Bashar Al Assad, Al Qaeda, Iran and Qatar in Syria is bewildering; intervention is unpredictable. Champions of these projects imply that their opponents are simply ‘little Englanders’. They should consider instead that their opponents may sometimes have a point. British culture is changing through immigration, new experiences and new values. Government is being forced to become more ‘transparent’ to the public; our foreign policy institutions must change too. Take the recent revelations from Edward Snowden about surveillance. People are already concerned by the potential role of security and intelligence agencies in their lives. They will want to know they can trust parliamentary oversight. That means reform. We need, as a start, to make the Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliament meet the standards of other committees. It is currently appointed; it should instead be elected by the House of Commons. Its chairman is currently a government back-bencher; in the future, the opposition should chair the committee. If a government wants to convince the British people to support an intervention, they must begin by acknowledging our failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and explain what reforms have been introduced in the Foreign Office and Army to prevent a repeat.

We need new institutions to represent the public in foreign policy. In the United States, despite all the mistakes, there is much less cosy consensus. Issues are vigorously debated, and clarified, in daily encounters between the Senate, newspapers, think-tanks, Universities, the military, the State Department, non-profits and the National Security Council. People move between these different worlds much more easily. One of my friends at Harvard, Samantha Power, for example, went from being a journalist, to running a Human Rights centre, to working on Obama’s campaign. She is now the American Ambassador to the United Nations, and it’s likely at some point that she will return to being a Professor. This is not unusual; Americans like Samantha carry ideas and debate into government, back to the public, and into government again.

The British Foreign Office needs to begin to open up, to argue and fight its corner, learn from outside experts, challenge its own officials and ministers, and reflect on its own mistakes, and it needs to do so in a way that includes the public. This will involve cultural change within the Foreign Office, and more opportunities for people to move in and out at a senior level. We need investment to make our think-tanks and universities more relevant to contemporary foreign policy. We must learn how to give more weight in foreign policy discussions to well-informed outsiders: soldiers, professors, members of the House of Lords, experienced foreign correspondents and aid workers.

This could be the beginning of the most exciting period in British foreign policy. A more diverse, critical, and experienced population can help us produce better ideas. The right kinds of institutions and public debate can help us develop policies that are coherent, rational, honourable and constructive. Ultimately, the public might regain some trust in government; and other countries might regain some of their trust in us. The new public is not rejecting foreign policy; it simply wants a credible foreign policy, and a chance to influence it. We must make this possible.

The ‘Good War’ Isn’t Worth Fighting

First published in the New York Times on 23 November 2008. Afghanistan does not matter as much as Barack Obama thinks. Terrorism is not the key strategic threat facing the United States. America, Britain and our allies have not created a positive stable environment in the Middle East. We have no clear strategy for dealing […]

How to Save Afghanistan

First published in Time magazine, July 17, 2008. It is summer now in Kabul, the snow has largely melted from the 15,000-ft. (4,600 m) peaks, and I am sitting with my friends Hussein, Nabi and Zia in the garden of a 19th century fort. Nearby, 10 carpenters who work with my nongovernmental organization (NGO) are […]

Where Less Is More

Published in the New York York Times, 23 July 2007 America and its allies are in danger of repeating the mistakes of Iraq in Afghanistan. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and even some Republicans are insisting on withdrawing from Iraq and sending more troops and resources to southern Afghanistan. The Bush administration’s gloomy National Intelligence Estimate […]

When Less Is Best

First published in The New York Times, 20 March, 2007. Why are we in Afghanistan? Vice President Cheney talks terror, Britain focuses on narcotics. The European Union talks ‘state-building,’ others gender. On a different day, the positions seem interchangeable. Five years ago, we had a clear goal. Now we seem to be pursuing a bundle […]

Our Echoes Come From You

First published in the New York Times, 24 March 2007. Afghanistan is now both more and less than a nation. Dialects of its official language are spoken from Iran to India. Its greetings and rituals are recognizable in Chechnya. Kabuli woodwork incorporates motifs from Syria, the Mughal Empire and pre-Islamic Uzbekistan. On Tuesday, I heard […]

What We Can Do

First published in the New York Times, 27 March 2007 We must acknowledge the limits of our power and knowledge in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere and concentrate on what is achievable. The question is not “What ought we to do?” but “What can we do?” This is rarely discussed. When I ask politicians whether we can defeat […]

An Afghan Policy Built on Pipe Dreams

First published in The New York Times, March 3, 2007. The international community’s policy in Afghanistan is based on the claim that Afghans are willing partners in the creation of a liberal democratic state. Senator John McCain finished a recent speech on Afghanistan by saying, “Billions of people around the world now embrace the ideals […]

Even in Iraq, all politics is local

First published in The New York Times, July 13, 2006. A great many of the failures in Afghanistan and Iraq arise from a single problem: the American-led coalitions’ lack of trust in local politicians. Repeatedly the Western powers, irritated by a lack of progress, have overruled local leaders, rejected compromises and tried to force through their […]

The Looting of Turquoise Mountain

First published in The New York Times In a deserted maze of narrow gorges in the central mountains of Afghanistan, I turned a corner and saw a tower. It rose 200 feet, a slim column of intricately carved terra cotta set with a line of turquoise tiles. There was nothing else. The mountain walls formed […]

Iranian Girls

First published in Prospect Magazine, 1 November, 2001. They are not free because their minds are not free,” said the headmistress, introducing me to my first class. “You are not here only to teach them English, you are here to open their minds.” Ten women were seated around a table in the over-heated room. All […]