Thursday night will see the second of three U.S.-style televised debates between the leading candidates in the upcoming British general election: Gordon Brown, David Cameron, and Nick Clegg. The focus this time will be on foreign policy, making the debate of direct relevance to U.S. viewers, who will be able to watch live on C-Span.
As Tim Montgomerie noted in an excellent earlier post, Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, was widely judged to have won the last debate, on domestic-policy issues (though he failed to offer any real policy solutions), and his party has leapfrogged the ruling Labour Party into second place in the polls behind the Conservatives. Clegg is largely unknown outside of the U.K., but if his party does well on Election Day, he could hold the balance of power in Westminster, and the Liberals could form part of a coalition government if no single party has a ruling majority. This would potentially give Clegg an important say in British foreign policy.
I’ve already described Clegg as the anti-Churchill of British politics, and he is without a doubt the most left-wing major party leader in Britain in a generation. There is some common ground between Clegg’s views and those of the Obama administration, but I think even the current liberal White House would balk at some of Clegg’s extreme positions. Here are five key reasons why U.S. conservatives should be concerned by Clegg’s foreign policy if his party does form part of the next British government:
1. Clegg’s outlook is anti-American.
Clegg, a major opponent of the Iraq War, has made a number of statements calling for a completely new relationship with the United States and an end to what he mockingly calls London’s “subservience” to Washington. He rejects the idea of a “special relationship” with America, and believes that the top priority for Britain is to strengthen ties with a federal Europe.
2. Clegg is not an Atlanticist.
Clegg has called for an end to “default Atlanticism,” and has shown barely any interest in the transatlantic alliance. His party manifesto does not even mention NATO. As Clegg put it in a flagship speech in March: “Our strategic interests will not be served unless we release ourselves from that spell of default Atlanticism which has prevailed so strongly since Suez.”
3. Clegg does not believe in a nuclear deterrent.
Clegg has called for the scrapping of Britain’s trident nuclear deterrent and is firmly opposed to the use of force against Iran’s nuclear facilities as a last resort if sanctions fail. His national-security outlook is extremely weak in the face of mounting threats from rogue regimes, and he has been a fierce critic of key aspects of the U.S.-led War on Terror.
4. Clegg is a fervent supranationalist.
A former European Commission bureaucrat and a strong supporter of the Lisbon Treaty, Clegg firmly believes that Britain must give up key aspects of national sovereignty in Europe, including the pound, and supports the EU having a unified foreign policy and defense identity. He is a big believer in the power of supranational institutions such as the United Nations and summed up his views on sovereignty in a speech at Chatham House: “Globalization requires us to formulate a system of supranational governance capable of controlling forces which escape the limitations of the nation state.”
5. Clegg harbors strong anti-Israeli views.
To describe Clegg as a vociferous opponent of Israel would be an understatement — I’ve written in greater detail on this issue here. Clegg has penned a number of articles condemning Israel’s handling of Gaza, and has been the most prominent British critic of Israel’s response to Hamas attacks. He has alleged that the Israeli government “continues to imprison 1.5 million Palestinians and prevent the rebuilding of its shattered infrastructure,” and supports the U.N.’s use of the highly offensive term “collective punishment.” Clegg has drawn parallels between Israel’s defensive actions and the terrorist campaigns of groups such as Hamas, and has urged the European Union in the past to isolate and even sanction Israel.