The UK in Search of a New Strategic Identity

Commentary

29 April, 2025

Share

The UK in Search of a New Strategic Identity

UK policy since the beginning of 2025 has entered a phase of adjusting strategic priorities against the backdrop of a changing global configuration. The focus is on strengthening defence and trade and economic cooperation with the EU. This not only marks a reset of relations after Brexit, but also represents a subtle diplomatic manoeuvre aimed at not severing ties with Washington, while strengthening the autonomy of the European vector of British foreign policy.

 

The leading trend here is the priority of defence cooperation, which, in fact, becomes the entry point to a broader political and economic convergence. Support for Ukraine, the development of joint defence technologies and the participation of the British military-industrial complex in the mechanisms of the new EU defence fund (€150 billion) represent a pragmatic choice dictated by the need to adapt to the growing fragmentation of the transatlantic security architecture. It is particularly noteworthy that in the context of weakening US guarantees and an unstable global economy, it is security that becomes the basis for further integration steps.

 

London’s statement on “shared values” becomes symbolic, which, although it does not mention Trump directly, actually opposes his approach to international affairs —  unilateralism, tariff protectionism and deviation from climate commitments. The UK demonstrates its intention to act in unison with the EU in supporting Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders, protecting the global trading system and implementing the Paris Agreement. In doing so, it sends a clear message that the sustainability of the international order and multilateral engagement remain a priority.

 

However, such an active rapprochement with Brussels raises domestic and foreign policy dilemmas. Firstly, there is a risk of irritating Washington, especially if the incoming Trump administration again bets on a tough trade policy. Secondly, the British establishment must manoeuvre between the interests of British farmers, industrialists and hardline sovereignty supporters, which limits the scope for deep regulatory integration with the EU. The fact that London has made clear its unwillingness to lower standards in the food and car industries suggests a desire to preserve autonomy in critically sensitive sectors while seeking US easing.

 

The complexity of the UK's position is further exacerbated by the fact that the country essentially acts as a bridge between two competing economic and political centres — the EU and the US. This gives London certain opportunities to mediate and strengthen its own role on the world stage, but requires strategic consistency and diplomatic malleability. If the Starmer government manages to implement the outlined “defence cooperation – economic dialogue – climate solidarity” nexus, it could become a model for a new type of Europe+ relationship — without membership, but with deep cooperation in key areas.

 

In conclusion, the current reset in UK-EU relations is not just a tactical choice, but a response to shifts in the system of international relations itself. With the erosion of US global leadership and growing instability in Eastern Europe, it is regional alliances based on values, security and pragmatism that are becoming points of resilience. The UK, after a painful break with the EU, could once again become one of the pillars of European stability, provided it manages to maintain a balance between the transatlantic and continental dimensions of its policy.

 

* The Institute for Advanced International Studies (IAIS) does not take institutional positions on any issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IAIS.