Contradictions of the UK Foreign and Defence Policy: European Aspect
- 作者: Godovanyuk K.A1
-
隶属关系:
- Institute of Europe, Russian Academy of Sciences
- 期: 编号 6 (134) (2025)
- 页面: 85-99
- 栏目: SECURITY ISSUES
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/0201-7083/article/view/357487
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.7868/S3034599525060075
- ID: 357487
如何引用文章
详细
The article explores the goals and features of Starmer’s Cabinet’s practical solutions, as well as some contradictions in their foreign and defense policies. The setting of tasks, factors of the domestic and international political context, and distinctive features of the strategic thinking of the elites constitute the subject field of the study. The author uses a combined scientific paradigm of realist constructivism to analyze the features of London’s policy in the European arena. The emphasis on the defense element is explained to be down to a set of internal (socioeconomic) and foreign policy factors (request for greater independence of Europe in the defense sphere), including the government’s latest attempts to justify the special foreign policy identity of the UK. The article analyzes the main strategic documents, developments in London-Brussels defense cooperation, including the new UK-EU security and defence partnership, as well as bilateral agreements between the Labor Party and its EU and NATO allies (France, Germany, Poland, Norway, etc.). The author notes that the “NATO First” approach, on the one hand, demonstrates a high degree of dependence on the US and, on the other hand, it limits cooperation between London and the EU on defense issues, fragmenting the security space. It is highlighted that tactical decisions within the European direction create long-term risks for Britain associated with increasing strategic dependence on contradictions between Europe and the US, as well as ensuring competitiveness in the context of economic, geopolitical and technological rivalry with key global players.
作者简介
K. Godovanyuk
Institute of Europe, Russian Academy of Sciences
编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: kiragodovanyuk@yandex.ru
Candidate of Sciences (Politics) Moscow, Russia
参考
- Алешин А.А. (2023) Великобритания–Евросоюз–НАТО: реорганизация «трансатлантического пространства безопасности». ИМЭМО РАН. Издательство «Аспект Пресс», Москва. 317 с.
- Алешин А.А. (2025) Объективное и субъективное в антироссийской политике Великобритании. Общественные науки и современность. № 3. С. 20–33. doi: 10.31857/S0869049925030021.
- Ананьева Е.В. (2025) Британия между Европой и США. Научно-аналитический вестник ИЕ РАН. № 1. С. 7–19. doi: 10.15211/vestnikieran12025719
- Британия после брекзита (2021) Монография. Отв. ред. К.А. Годованюк. Ин-т Европы РАН, Москва. С. 145–162. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/report82021_386
- Годованюк К.А. (2024) «Прогрессивный реализм»: между преемственностью и переменами во внешней политике Британии. Современная Европа. № 7. С. 44–58. doi: 10.31857/S0201708324070040
- Гриняев С.Н. (2025) Перевооружение Европы к 2030 году: вызовы и перспективы. Регионология. № 33(3). С. 536–548. https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.129.033.202503.000-000
- Европейская стратегическая автономия: оценки и вызовы: [монография] (2025) Аниксеев С.А. [и др.]. Ин-т Европы РАН, Москва. 190 с. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/report32025_420
- Истомин И.А. (2025) Логика поведения государств в международной политике. «Аспект Пресс», Москва. 304 с.
- Barkin J.S. (2010) Realist Constructivism: Rethinking International Relations Theory. Cambridge University Press, 204 p.
- James W.D. (2024) British Grand Strategy in the Age of American Hegemony. Oxford University Press, 272 p.
- Martill B., Mesarovich A. (2024) Foreign Policy as Compensation: Why Brexit Became a Foreign and Security Policy Issue. International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 68. Issue 2. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae014
- Prior A. (2025) Starmer’s Foreign Policy Narrative: The Special Relationship or European Integration? Political Insight. No. 16(2). P. 36–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/20419058251351498
- Ralph J., Gaskarth J. (2025) A Pragmatist critique of progressive realism in foreign policy, International Affairs. Vol. 101. Issue 2. P. 623–641.
- Wraight T., Green K.R. (2025) Global Britain versus Little England? National Identity and the Future of the British Right. The Political Quarterly. No. 96. P. 356–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.13482
补充文件

