Robin Cook's dream of an Ethical Foreign Policy could become reality in an Independent Scotland

I thought that Robin Cook's idea of an ethical foreign policy was a pipe dream when he announced it in 1997. If you are as dependent for your world power (or "clout") on another state as Britain is, it follows that you can't really control your foreign policy objectives. 

Additionally if one of your few export successes is weaponry, then selling to the highest bidder is always going to be on the cards.

But here is LABOUR for INDEPENDENCE's take on the subject. I encourages me to think that, in an independent Scotland we could seriously reimagine our foreign policy, unencumbered by the need to please the USA. 

An ethical foreign policy was the mission statement of then Foreign Secretary Robin Cook. Within this piece, the late Mr Cook outlined the future of British foreign policy under New Labour. In it he set out four goals which would change the nature of the U.K's international commitments and responsibilities. These goals were; the security of all nations, the prosperity of Britain, the quality of life and environment in the U.K, and securing the respect of other nations.

There can be no doubt that Cook's vision did have its successes, UN intervention in Rwanda, reaching out to work with Ireland in the peace process and removing Milošević in Kosovo. Yet with the continued selling of arms to the highest bidder and subsequent war in Iraq led to what the Foreign Policy Centre cited as a 'lack of moral authority.' In truth the achievement of an ethical foreign policy will always prove impossible in the United Kingdom.

As part of the UN Security Council, Britain is more often than not beholding to the demands of our 'special friendship' with the United States. In recent times we have moved from an imperialist empire to a second string back up in supporting the superpowers doctrine of intervention and greed. It is perhaps unsurprising that both the U.K. And United States do not have the moral authority for their demands of Russia's removal from the Ukraine to be met with anything other than derision in the Kremlin.

Lest we forget, before Iraq, the U.S, imposed a military dictator in Chile after a democratically elected government did not suit their interests. Hamas were legally elected in Palestinian Hamas region and were decried a terrorist group. In Cambodia in the 1980's after mass slaughter of 3 million of their own people, The Khmer Rouge were sent weapons by the US, UK and Germany to retake their country from the Vietnamese Communists. One need only look to how Hugo Chavez was described as a dictator despite winning 4 elections inspected by international observers. All of this was before the decimation and destruction of the sovereign nation of Iraq under the pretence of WMD's

In Foreign Policy Britain is stuck between a rock and a hard place, desperate to remain a major player on the world stage, it no longer has the influence, military might or moral authority to do so. This is why it will be intrinsically aligned and subservient to the United States.

In an independent Scotland we would not seek to exert such authority over the world. As a small country we realise, as Britain must also begin to accept, that hard power politics will not be possible, more to the fact it seldom works without the need for bloodshed. Scotland must and will accept it's responsibilities on the world stage, we will work within the UN to promote a safer, fairer and more secure society. While the SNP promote our membership in NATO, we would seek to remove ourselves from this nuclear club. Beginning with removing Trident from our soils, this effort alone has been labelled by some academics as the broken link in the nuclear chain which can lead to mass disarmament or at the very least see them removed from the British Isles, a case supported by John Ainslies 'Nowhere to Go.'

We would act as a soft power nation, allowing our country to be used as a neutral place for international disputes to be resolved. We will be responsible and friendly neighbours to the rest of the U.K and our partners in Europe. We will not seek intervention or aggression against any nation, but will support, with military intervention if necessary any breach of international law of powers imposing genocide on their peoples. We will work within the UN framework for this ensuring a secure and safe world in this globalised time.
By removing ourselves from the 'special relationship' with the United States we will step away from terrorist threats to our nation, working to build stronger relationships in the middle east built on understanding and peace rather than trade, oil and imposition of our will. An independent Scotland should immediately recognise the state of Palestine and offer our nation as a home where negotiations can take place to resolve the peace process.

Scotland at present contributes £3.3billion to defence, yet only receive £1.5 billion on defence in this nation. Scotland has a proud military tradition which is being quashed by proud battalions having to merge under UK cost cutting measures. We would increase defence spending to £2.5 billion (just under Danish levels) to end these merges from occurring. We will maintain and seek to increase our ship building industry by creating a naval defence force to protect our oil fields and fishing from attack. It is astonishing that for all the U.K's pomp there is not one cruiser or battleship protecting our maritime borders. Such an issue was highlighted by Russian fleets reaching 40 KM from the Scottish Coast before the Ministry of Defence found out about it on Twitter. The fact these ships are docked in Portsmouth and Plymouth suggest they are not for defence, rather battle ready for the next intervention.

Currently the UK government has two aircraft carriers under construction, only one is needed and the other will be either left to rust or sold at a huge discount to a foreign county. I support Jim Sillars plan that in the interest of shared assets, Scotland should take the second one and equip it as a Scottish overseas hospital and International rescue ship. This would provide onboard medical experience to young doctors while providing humanitarian aid to nations suffering natural disasters, or countries with health epidemics. The vessel will be docked in Faslane for maintenance and improvements, increasing jobs within the region. This vessel would be the flagship (pardon the pun) of Scottish International policy of soft power and humanitarian conviction rather than policy based on bullets and bloodshed.

In terms of overseas aid, we have a responsibility not only as a developed nation but as human beings to continue to send aid to those who need it overseas. We already have the facilities and trained staff in East Kilbride Department for International Development to continue this. There must, however be a restructuring of how we send aid. There is no doubt of the abject poverty and inequality many in India suffer but by providing the aid directly to the government we are not tackling the suffering. People in the UK rightly complain that the aid is being sent to the country which uses it to fund a space programme. Any money sent as such is seen more as targeting trade than genuine humanitarian objectives

We must rethink our overseas aid and how we can be most effective in producing results. By working with not only governments but also NGO's we will set reachable targets and ensure the money is being spent correctly. Scotland is a small nation and as such our aid budget would be stretched by trying to cure all ills in all countries. I propose we adopt a buddy system of nations with each developed nation working with at least one undeveloped nation to improve poverty levels and inequality. Such measures have already proved workable with our relationship and aid efforts in Malawi. This system would promote closer ties between countries and ensure our overseas aid is put to good effect. As a member of the UN we would promote this idea and work with our partners to ensure the development of such processes.

The introduction of Cook's ethical foreign policy was not without its merits. It was not an idealistic unachievable target, just unrealistic in a British system. An independent Scotland could be seen as a beacon and a starting gun of such a system. We will be good neighbours and good friends with other nations. We will promote peace, stability and development within the world. We will work within international institutions such as the UN and commit to our responsibilities on the world stage. We will defend ourselves and our interests through a strong maritime force and military defence. We will be on the side of what is right and will not shirk when genocide occurs in this world.

Most importantly we will lead by example and use this influence to promote peace and prosperity. We are for a peaceful, humanitarian soft power foreign policy not one based on bullets, bloodshed and greed. We will have an ethical foreign policy, one which Mr Cook would be proud of.