A Question of National Secuirty

A piece for the UK in a Changing Europe on the place of national security in the UK-EU relationship. Read here: http://ukandeu.ac.uk/a-question-of-national-security/

Views on the UK’s renegotiation: Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and India.

In addition to the series I've been compiling on how other EU member states view the future of UK-EU relations, and in particular the UK's attempt at a renegotiation, I have been able to secure views from people based in Russia (Alexey Gromyko – Russian Academy of Sciences), Ukraine (Alyona Getmanchuk – Institute of World Policy), Turkey (Sinan Ulgen – Centre for Economics and Foreign Policy Studies) and India (by Dhananjay Tripathi – South Asian University). 

EU views of the UK-EU renegotiation

LSE's EUROPP blog has today concluded a series, compiled by me, setting out how the rest of the EU views the prospect of a UK renegotiation of its EU membership. You'll find below links to the countries we've covered (in order of publication) and an LSE list in alphabetical order can be found here.

• Italy: A Brexit would create a dangerous political precedent for Italy
• Poland: Warsaw’s stance will remain uncertain until after the October elections
• Bulgaria: Brexit has been overshadowed by Ukraine, Grexit and the refugee crisis
• Malta: Should Brexit materialise, UK influence in Malta is likely to diminish 
• France: The French are looking for a fair deal for France and the EU, not just Britain
• Netherlands: There is support for the UK’s renegotiation, but only up to a point
• Slovenia: The government believes the EU’s four freedoms should remain the basis for any change
• Latvia: National security, not EU reform, is the priority
• Romania: There is staunch opposition to restrictions on the free movement of people
• Denmark: The Danish government is a firm supporter of UK demands, albeit with some caveats
• Belgium: The Belgian view is that European challenges can only be tackled through deepening European integration
• Luxembourg: There is no enthusiasm in Luxembourg for treaty change
• Ireland: Brexit is a matter of significant and growing concern in Ireland
• Portugal: Lisbon’s attitude has been fairly positive to the renegotiation, but without support for Treaty changes
• Austria: After Brexit and Grexit, could Auxit be next?
• Croatia: Zagreb sympathises with the UK’s positions, but sees few short-term gains from a renegotiation
• Spain: A flexible but Europeanist Response
• Finland: Supportive, but a wait-and-see approach
• Estonia: Brexit would be contrary to Estonia’s interests
• Cyprus: Special ties with the UK will determine Cyprus’s final stance
• Czech Republic: A desire to accommodate British demands, but without treaty changes
• Hungary: A natural supporter for Cameron, but with caveats
• Sweden: Both risks and opportunities in EU renegotiation
• Lithuania: Britain is threatening the EU’s fundamental principles
• Germany: Doubts that Britain really knows what it wants
• Greece: Fears of Grexit slowly shifting to fears of Brexit
• Slovakia: Preserving equal treatment while keeping the UK inside
• EU institutions: The dog that hasn’t yet barked

Security and the Brexit Debate

A piece for the LSE's Brexit Vote blog about David Cameron's argument that EU membership is a matter not only of jobs and trade but of national security. Read here.

Living awkwardly ever after: what if the UK voted to leave the EEC?

The UK in a Changing Europe have run a piece by me looking at what would have happened if Britain had voted to leave the EEC in 1975. The piece is divided into two parts:

Part 1 (9 November)

Part 2 (10 November)

A few words on BBC R4's Westminster Hour

Radio 4's Westminster Hour asked me to set out what David Cameron will ask the EU for in his letter this week to Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, setting out his demands for a UK renegotiation of its EU membership. You can hear me quite early on.

An elephant in the room: Brexit and the UK’s Defence Review

While the EU plays only a small role in traditional defence matters, its central place in the geopolitics of Europe means it plays a central part in the geopolitics that shape Britain’s security. I explain, in this short piece for the British Politics and Policy blog, the implications of the upcoming referendum on shaping Britain’s defence strategy.

Piece on UK-EU relations in Queries Magazine

I have a piece entitled 'Facing Europe's British Question' in the latest issue of Queries magazine. Download it here (starts p38).

Interview for 'The Beacon', the podcast of the Oxford University IR Society

I spoke to William Yeldham on 'The Beacon' podcast about the UK-EU relationship. Listen here.

Strengthening Britain’s Voice in the World

I'm one of the signatories to the report 'Strengthening Britain Voice in the World', released today by Chatham House and Ditchley Park.

To remedy the growing imbalance between its spending on defence, development and diplomacy, the UK government must reverse cuts to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s budget. In the long term, the UK should commit to increase spending on the UK's overall diplomatic effort to 0.2% of GDP. 

As the new Strategic Defence and Security Review nears completion, the UK faces a far more unstable world than when it published its last review in 2010. Yet, at the same time, significant cuts have been made to many of the traditional levers of the UK’s influence overseas. While recognizing the serious resource pressures that exist, the signatories argue that Britain’s long-term interests in the world do not change amid temporary economic difficulties.

They argue that as one of the most globalized countries in the world, tied by its economy, its people, its institutions and its allies to developments beyond its shores, the UK must remain internationally engaged and committed to multilateralism.

The signatories make a number of recommendations to help ensure the UK lives up to its goals as a constructive force in the world, including:

• Increase spending on the UK’s overall diplomatic effort in the long-term to 0.2% of GDP. In the short-term it is important to avoid further real terms cuts to the UK's spending on the FCO's non-ODA budget in the upcoming spending review.
• Rethink visa policy for international students and commercially-valuable talent, as well as the system of regional visa hubs which mean that decisions on UK visas are often taken in a regional centre by staff with limited knowledge of the country concerned.
• Seek more structured and long-term defence collaboration with EU partners and under EU structures. Britain’s continuing determination to block much European defence cooperation does not serve its own interests and no longer finds favour in Washington.
• Return in a more significant way to participation in UN peacekeeping. It should also be willing to send UK forces to assist with training and strengthening institutions of civil-military cooperation, for example in fragile states in Africa.
• Ensure continued funding of key elements of the UK's soft power such as the BBC World Service and the British Council.

Signatories to the paper

Professor Malcolm Chalmers, Royal United Services Institute
Professor Paul Cornish, RAND Europe
Dr Jonathan Eyal, Royal United Services Institute
Sir John Grant, Former UK Permanent Representative to the EU
Sir John Holmes, Ditchley Foundation
Laura Kyrke-Smith, Portland
Mark Leonard, European Council on Foreign Relations
Dame Mariot, Leslie Former UK Permanent Representative to NATO
Dr Patricia Lewis, Chatham House
Sir Roderic Lyne, Former UK Ambassador to Russia
Sir David Manning, Former UK Ambassador to the United States
Dame Rosalind Marsden, Former EU Special Representative for Sudan and South Sudan
Dr Robin Niblett, Chatham House
Dr Tim Oliver, London School of Economics
Thomas Raines, Chatham House (Rapporteur)
Philip Stephens, Financial Times
Lord Wallace of Saltaire, Former Government Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs in the House of Lords
Nick Witney, European Council on Foreign Relations
Lord Williams of Baglan, Former UN Under-Secretary General, UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon

The paper reflects the views of its signatories and not the institutions to which they belong.