Assessing British foreign policy towards the Russian Federation since the Salisbury attack

Abstract

The 2018 poisoning of a Russian ex-spy in Britain made worldwide headlines and jolted many nations into a diplomatic reckoning with Russia. Relations between Russia and the West are at their lowest since the Berlin Wall fell. But how did the target nation, Britain, react? Why does it continue to fall victim to Russian aggression? Has it tailored its foreign policy towards Russia sufficiently, in the aftermath of yet another attack on a Russian resident on its soil? This study will attempt to answer all of these questions and more by examining the role that a selection of internal factors played in determining British foreign policy. Specifically, it looks at the cracks and divisions at the top of the political ladder, known as ‘elite fragmentation’, and whether this negatively impacted the formulation of coherent foreign policy towards Russia.

To test the hypothesis that this elite fragmentation caused British foreign policy ‘underbalancing’ (i.e. taking insufficient measures to match an external threat), this study selected the theoretical framework from international relations most apposite to the subject at hand: neoclassical realism. This is due to its focus on internal factors and ability to explain foreign policy outcomes with fresh perspectives. It then looked at the reactions from the main actors involved, and delved into the debates taking place in the British political arena. In particular, it looked at some key factors confounding the British response to explain why a nation subject to a series of such events still struggles to galvanise itself into action. The results showed that there were indeed fractures in the political elite, particularly among the ruling Conservative party, and that several elements, including leadership challenges and direct and indirect financial links to the Kremlin, suggest that the neoclassical realist concept of elite fragmentation is crucial in explaining the non-response on the part of the British government.

The 2018 poisoning of a Russian ex-spy in Britain made worldwide headlines and jolted many nations into a diplomatic reckoning with Russia. Relations between Russia and the West are at their lowest since the Berlin Wall fell. But how did the target nation, Britain, react? Why does it continue to fall victim to Russian aggression? Has it tailored its foreign policy towards Russia sufficiently, in the aftermath of yet another attack on a Russian resident on its soil? This study will attempt to answer all of these questions and more by examining the role that a selection of internal factors played in determining British foreign policy. Specifically, it looks at the cracks and divisions at the top of the political ladder, known as ‘elite fragmentation’, and whether this negatively impacted the formulation of coherent foreign policy towards Russia.

To test the hypothesis that this elite fragmentation caused British foreign policy ‘underbalancing’ (i.e. taking insufficient measures to match an external threat), this study selected the theoretical framework from international relations most apposite to the subject at hand: neoclassical realism. This is due to its focus on internal factors and ability to explain foreign policy outcomes with fresh perspectives. It then looked at the reactions from the main actors involved, and delved into the debates taking place in the British political arena. In particular, it looked at some key factors confounding the British response to explain why a nation subject to a series of such events still struggles to galvanise itself into action. The results showed that there were indeed fractures in the political elite, particularly among the ruling Conservative party, and that several elements, including leadership challenges and direct and indirect financial links to the Kremlin, suggest that the neoclassical realist concept of elite fragmentation is crucial in explaining the non-response on the part of the British government.