Why we need to be ‘Internationalists’?

Given all our deep-rooted domestic problems, it is understandable that people often feel that politicians should focus on domestic concerns rather than international issues. Historically, in most liberal democracies, internationalists of all parties have had to make the positive case for meaningful involvement in international issues. Sometimes it has been extremely difficult to do so.

Today, however, the task is easier and the case for internationalism is more self-evident. There is a realisation among most people in the West that many of the huge issues that we face domestically have international dimensions to them or are in fact international in character. We only have to think of the environmental challenges being caused by climate change and the movement of peoples, sometimes over vast distances, to recognise that in our modern world, the domestic is also the international.

But the war in Ukraine, caused by Russia’s invasion, has brought home the reality that crises in one part of the world can have global implications. There can be little doubt that Putin’s calculation was that the West would acquiesce, or at least not respond effectively to his aggression in Ukraine. He had reason for thinking this – the West had withdrawn from Afghanistan in disarray; the West had done nothing over Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea; and President Trump had even questioned the continuation of NATO.

The war in Ukraine is the result of Russia’s blatant aggression. There can be no question that it is right to stand firmly with President Zelensky. This is the right thing to do, but it is also worth remembering that the consequences if we fail to show continuing solidarity are huge for all of us who are committed to the international rule of law and the very idea of liberal democracy.

If Russia were to be successful in Ukraine, there can be no doubt that Putin’s aggression would manifest itself in Transnistria and Moldova; in the Western Balkans, where destabilisation is already occurring; and along the Russia border stretching from Poland up to Finland.

Recently, I visited the Finnish Parliament and spoke with fellow parliamentarians. They were pleased to hear that there was genuine and deep cross-party support for Ukraine in Britain and that British politicians were fully behind Sweden and Finland’s application to join NATO.

They explained to me that Finland, since the end of the Second World War, had maintained a position of neutrality. This had now come to an abrupt end because of Russia’s aggression. The application to join NATO has wide political support, but also, it was explained to me, public opinion had shifted dramatically. Historically, most people in Finland have been reluctant to allow their country to be aligned too closely with the West. This has now changed, with the vast majority of Finnish people being concerned about Putin’s aggression and now seeing NATO as an alliance that could protect their country.

The West needs to be clear in its resolve to uphold the independence of Taiwan, remembering that it is an exemplary democratic state.

The case of Finland well illustrates that international events can quickly have a direct impact on domestic views. As one Finnish MP said to me, “If we are to preserve our country and all that we hold dear, then we have to work with those abroad who share our values”. That comment by a Finnish parliamentarian brought home to me that ‘internationalism’ is vital if we are to uphold freedom and democracy.

But it is not only in Europe that the lessons of internationalism need to be learnt. Throughout the world China is flexing its muscles in a whole host of different ways. From Africa to the Pacific, from Europe to South America, China is making use of its enormous financial resources to extend its influence. The Chinese Communist Party clearly has a long-term perspective and hopes that its encroachment across the globe will eventually lead to the achievement of a near hegemonic position. We need to be aware of this.

But in the short term, China’s aim is to end Taiwan’s independence, if necessary by military force. China probably considered the possibility of an invasion soon after Russia invaded Ukraine, but were dissuaded by the resolute response of the West. However, military analysts in Washington believe that the People’s Republic of China will have developed the military capability for a swift invasion within the next few years. The West needs to be clear in its resolve to uphold the independence of Taiwan, remembering that it is an exemplary democratic state.

History has many lessons to teach us. One of the most important is that if ‘might’ is allowed to triumph over ‘right’, then ultimately we will all pay the price.