In the year following the end of the Second World War, the Labour Party under Clement Attlee was in power. But while domestic reconstruction was proceeding apace, Britain’s foreign policy was floundering. What was needed, says this New Statesman writer, were clear directives from the most senior members of the cabinet as to what British aims should be overseas, rather than a series of expedient reactions to events. Clarity of aims would lead to clarity of delivery. “Our best security is to set an example of rational moderation in a world of ruthlessness and insanity,” they write, “keeping our own balance and helping others to maintain theirs between the ideological precipices.” British socialism should be apparent abroad as well as at home. Easier said than done.
The Cabinet crisis in America has reminded us of the inherent instability of American policy. Bismarck, with reference to Great Britain, once remarked on the danger of relying on an alliance with a democracy, whose policy could be reversed by a change of government. The constitution of the USA sanctifies this uncertainty by forbidding the concentration of power. As a result, American foreign policy is formed by an explosive series of domestic conflicts which can be controlled only by the personality of a great President.
Content from our partners
