Britain Does Not Want To Go To War

Freddie Sayers writes:

The differences between the two main parties in the UK on most foreign policy questions are matters of almost imperceptible nuance. As we were reminded in the first election debate, both Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer are united in their support for Ukraine, are committed to Israel’s continued right to self-defence and share an increasingly hawkish attitude towards China.

Unfortunately for them, this is at odds with the electorate: a new poll of British voters by UnHerd, conducted by Focaldata, reveals a notable realism towards foreign policy that is not reflected in either of the main party platforms. This is just one of the big issues facing the nation that isn’t being properly interrogated in the general election campaign, and it is the focus of the first instalment in a polling series that will seek to understand the views of UnHerd Britain.

Eighty years on from D-Day, our headline finding is a clear scepticism towards foreign adventures and an unambiguous focus on British national interest, a view which markedly differs from the prevailing liberal interventionism of past decades. A majority of voters (52%) believe that “British foreign policy should be focused on what is in Britain’s interests, even if that is not in other countries’ interests”, compared with only 30% who believe that “British foreign policy should try to make the world a better place, even if it has costs for Britain”.

This more “realist” option is preferred by overwhelming majorities of Reform and Conservative voters, but is also the preference of people planning to vote Labour, at 45% to 36%. Only Liberal Democrat and Green voters tend the other way, preferring a more idealist foreign policy.

When it comes to overseas conflicts in general, only 7% of voters think that Britain should be more engaged than it currently is, while 44% think it should be less engaged, and 36% think we should keep roughly the current levels of involvement. Again, in a powerful sign of how ideas of British imperialism are no longer in favour on the Right, 64% of Reform voters want less engagement and this is also the preferred position of Conservative voters (44% compared with 42% who say “about the same”). In fact, there is support across all parties, with the exception of Labour, for a reduction in Britain’s engagement in overseas conflicts; Labour voters narrowly opt for the current level of engagement (41% to 39%).

These findings highlight the conundrum that awaits a future Labour government: while its voters are broadly the most supportive of idealistic British involvement in overseas conflicts, the party also contains a strain of passionately anti-war Leftists. The “progressive realism” coined by shadow foreign secretary David Lammy to describe Labour’s approach is best understood as an attempt to square this circle.

The thorniest issue for Keir Starmer will be Israel. Labour voters have a far more critical view of the current war in Gaza than their leader. Asked who they blame for the war, Labour voters choose “the Israeli Government” ahead of Hamas, while British voters in general blame Hamas ahead of Israel. Endorsement of the ICC’s prosecution proceedings against Benjamin Netanyahu is at 53% among Labour voters; only 14% oppose it. Starmer has voiced support for the arrest warrant, and one assumes he would comply with it if issued.

Right-leaning voters, when asked about the conflict, would prefer to disengage entirely rather than taking a tougher stance on either Israel or the Palestinians — this is the preferred option among both Conservative and Reform voters. But Labour voters fall narrowly alongside more progressive voter groups such as the Greens and Liberal Democrats in believing that “the UK should take a tougher stance on Israel”. Once again, disengaging from the war is the most popular option among British voters in general.

This move towards “realism” extends also to the escalating standoff between the United States and China. Asked what British policy should be towards the standoff, 41% would align with the US; notably however, it is not a majority. Most voters think the country should either be aligned with neither (37%), or China (5%) or aren’t sure (15%).

There is an exception, however, to British voters’ more isolationist mood: Ukraine. Most think that the UK’s level of involvement is about right [most people do not know the extent of it], or could be further increased. Only a minority of voters would prefer a reduced role or none at all. Voters would reject, if offered, a peace treaty in which Russia would gain possession of eastern provinces of Ukraine and Crimea, and there is even substantial support for the UK allowing Ukraine to shoot missiles into Russian territory (40% compared with 22% against) and allowing British troops into Ukraine to help train Ukrainian forces (39% support compared with 34% against). However, any suggestion of British troops engaging in active combat against Russia is dismissed entirely, by absolute majorities of all political party voters.

Questions of distant wars, however, only become the defining political issue when citizens are asked to fight in them — and on this question, the results of the UnHerd Britain poll make concerning reading for any government. We asked parents whether they would be prepared to send their children into battle for a range of causes, and the numbers of those who would are vanishingly small. Only 15% would consent to their children taking up arms to defend Poland from a Russian invasion, 14% to defend France from invasion, 9% to defend Ukraine from further Russian attacks, and 7% to defend either Taiwan or Israel. Overwhelming majorities, between 71% and 82%, would object to their children being called up to defend any of these causes.

Even in the event of a direct invasion on British soil, only 21% of parents say they would want their children to fight to defend the country, 67% of parents say they would not want them involved and a further 10% are not sure.

These results confirm a sobering reality that has not been reflected in the election campaigns yet: there is a strong antipathy to military engagements of any kind, and if a new war should arrive, it is not at all clear that Britain could muster an army even to defend itself.