Strategic void, new Parliament report on the Indo-Pacific, AI Summit, Standard Chartered
A Beijing to Britain briefing
Hello,
Does the British Government think strategically? That’s the question the catchily named Liaison Sub-Committee on Scrutiny of Strategic Thinking in Government put out for expert insight at the beginning of summer. Half a year later, the Committee has published some of the expert evidence shared with it. On a positive note, this endeavour should be applauded: it is a tangible acknowledgement of a growing realisation that the Government's strategic thinking is falling short of expectations.
Nevertheless, an examination of the expert testimonies reveals some concerns. The Cabinet Office, a central component of the Government and ostensibly responsible for coordinating strategic efforts, begins its testimony by asserting that "recent events - including the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia's unauthorized incursion into Ukraine, and the subsequent economic fallout - have underscored the importance of strategic thinking within the government." It's disconcerting that it took such extraordinary crises to highlight the need for strategic foresight.
Lord Ricketts (the UK’s first-ever National Security Advisor) was particularly critical in his evidence. Successive governments “have lost the art of strategy-making.” He cites three reasons for this:
“The internet revolution enabling the 24/7 media and the fire-hose of social media has vastly increased the tempo of politics and the transparency of public life. As a result, the urgent drives out the important. Ministers spend their time on crisis management.”
“The short-termist pressures may be particularly acute in parliamentary democracies, where Prime Ministers and senior ministers spend much more time being held to account by Parliament than is the case for their colleagues in presidential systems.”
“Many political leaders prefer to avoid making choices where possible. Choosing means leaving some colleagues disappointed. It can mean taking risky guesses on the basis of inadequate evidence, and later being found to have made the wrong choice. Muddling through can often seem a safer strategy, even though this is also a choice which can have longer-term implications.”
It’s worth coupling the above points with this observation given by the Rand Corporation in its evidence. “A culture that enables frank discussions and comfort with failure as an opportunity to learn and adjust is far preferable for a long-term strategy. Achieving this cultural change can take a long time and requires mechanisms that allow space for difficult conversations on progress, or lack of, to be established.”
In my 2021 End-Of-Year note, I observed the following of the UK-China bilateral:
“What comes next will be harder for the British Government. The headline work has been done - the substantive policy issues that should come next will require clarity around strategy, strong leadership, and expert input - some of which will run counter to current political values and will demand a deep understanding of Chinese policy, the thinking behind it, and of their ambitions in a number of critical areas.
It is not yet clear that this strategic thinking exists either in Downing Street or at the top of many Departments. Positions are being awarded for political loyalty over relevant experience by a Prime Minister unable to go through a month without becoming embroiled in scandals…The new Foreign Secretary [Liz Truss] talks of championing Global Britain through patriotic diplomacy while the Foreign Office faces a 10% staff reduction and a new Brexit brief. Although understandably keen to establish a foreign policy agenda in her new position, to the onlooker it appears more time is being spent laying the groundwork for a potential leadership campaign…[meanwhile] some of the more rent-a-quote backbenchers have chosen to present the UK-China relationship in deliberately black and white terms, lambasting any attempts to find a middle ground on key issues that will require proper collaboration between London and the world’s second-largest economy while offering no realistic alternatives themselves. The Overton window only works if those in the middle are allowed to voice political views without being shouted down by the extremes.”
Strategic thinking in a democracy requires constantly fostering an environment in which ideas can be discussed, critiqued and built upon. Too much of the discussion around the bilateral has been through the “outrage economy” trend that has consumed British media and politics over the last couple of years. As the evidence to the Committee so far has shown - Westminster’s inability to debate and discuss strategy properly is becoming a threat.
On that note:
— Sam Hogg, Editor
In this week’s Briefing Note, we look at:
Parliament wraps up another year
A new Defence Committee chair and report on the Indo-Pacific
The AI Summit and China’s potential inclusion
**A message from Great Britain China Centre: China's economic and political outlook will impact economies worldwide and affect many UK businesses, from exporters of goods to professional services firms and agencies attracting inward investment. Join us for a half-day insights briefing with top sector experts to future-proof your China business strategy. Register here**