Britain is good at chaos. But imagine if its leaders knew where they were going | Timothy Garton Ash

lEverything Ike does in the world has long-term illness, strategic inconsistencies. Keir Starmer’s real achievements in resetting continental relations Europe – Witnessing the recent visits of French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz – is not obscure and even emphasizes this deeper confusion to some extent.

[After1945WinstonChurchillenvisionedBritain’sglobalroleattheintersectionofthreecircles:theBritishCommonwealthand(andstilltheEmpireatthattime);thepost-warrestorationandunifiedEuropereceivedstrongsupport;andtheUnitedStatesAstheCommonwealthstatesformstrongertieselsewherethefirstcircleisnolongerstrategicInthe1970sthemostdevelopedpoliticalandeconomicformsdedicatedtothesecondcirclenow[1945年后，温斯顿·丘吉尔（WinstonChurchill）设想了英国在三个圈子的交叉点上的全球角色：英国英联邦和（当时仍然是帝国）；战后恢复和统一的欧洲得到了强有力的支持；和美国。由于英联邦国家在其他地方形成了更牢固的联系，因此第一个圈子不再具有战略意义。在1970年代致力于第二圈的最发达的政治和经济形式，现在European Unionthe UK has withdrawn. With President Donald Trump’s revolutionary nationalism, the third circle is also rapidly disappearing. Therefore, this is the 80-year countdown for the British strategic community: three…two…one, nothing is gained.

Instead of being at the intersection of the three circles, Britain found itself trapped between three elephants. “There are three elephants in the room, we just need to be careful not to trample on it” is how A British official described In the Financial Times, Starmer attempts to navigate between the global economic power of the United States, the European Union and China.

Like Tony Blair a quarter of a century ago, the government talked about Britain being the “bridge” between Europe and the United States. But what bridge can be today when Britain is outside the EU and Trump involves the EU’s special hostility throughout the transatlantic relations?

There is only one logical conclusion to draw on the way to Brexit, that is, to become the offshore of Singapore, Nordic, from Switzerland. No matter what these states do to their neighbors or their own citizens, they can find profits anywhere; become a country with hedge fund ethics. Ironically, the closest European country to this cynical “multi-signature” is Viktor Orbán’s Hungary, a full member of the EU. But even for most Brexit, this is not a serious option, with five or six different (usually vague) visions for post-Brexit Britain. For most British people, this is completely incompatible with our feelings about what Britain should do in the world and be the world.

With Vladimir Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Churchillian instinct in Britain reactivated and brought us to a place where we work together with countries like France, Germany and Poland to defend Ukraine and Europe as a whole. Merz and Starmer have just signed a German treaty This provides a framework for enhancing cooperation in many areas. Faced with uncertainty about Trump’s commitment to NATO’s eastern side nuclear deterrence, Macron made an unprecedented announcement on the internationalization of Britain that Europe’s only two nuclear-weapon powers would “coordinate” their nuclear deterrence forces and that “no extreme threat to Europe will not cause a reaction from both countries.”

This brings us back to the strategic question. If we are prepared to defend the dangers of Europe even if our nationwide survival risked itself, would it make sense to speak on how Europe would develop? And if you put everything about economic growth in the domestic government like Starmer, does that help get closer to your largest single market?

The situation is that Britain is completely committed to defending Europe, but has no economic advantage belonging to the EU. Indeed, it even had to pay, for example, the offer to fish for the French – in order to contribute to the safety of other parts of Europe. Speaking to British MPs, Macron said: “The EU is stronger for you, and you are stronger for the EU.” It is correct in both ways. But among both sides, the UK is definitely weaker. In diplomatic language, Britain is now need No matter when and where,,,,, Want something from the other side. Indeed, its diplomatic victory, whether it is a “reset” with the EU or a “reset” in a trade deal with Trump, involves largely removing barriers that did not exist before.

The only strategically coherent long-term answer to this puzzle is that Britain’s re-entering the EU, painfully swallowing its pride, and accepting the new membership terms would not be as good as the previous membership terms. Midway houses, e.g. UK EU Customs Union The proposed by British Liberal Democrats will bring some moderate economic advantages. Only the full membership of the EU can bring huge economic benefits, as well as the political influence that shapes the future of Europe and through the European world. In a jungle filled with elephants, you’d better or at least have to ride yourself.

Any British government that is serious about promoting national interests should keep the long-term strategic logic in mind. But British politics is far from this. Even when Liberal Democrats advocate Breturn, the political campaign was held by Nigel Farage, the country’s most successful anti-European politician. People in the EU saw this and they themselves did not start thinking about remarriage. Brexit wounds are still painful, and the disconnect between security and economics is better for them than Britain. Anyway, the EU is already enough on the plate.

Then what’s left? confusion. Fortunately, the Muddy Experience is a British specialty. A few years ago, I read an article about the UK in a German magazine that talked about Die Philosophie des durchmuddelns. (Only Germany can turn mud straight through into a philosophy.) In domestic politics, it is strange that Starmer is very good at building good relationships with Macron, Merz and Ursula von von der Leyen, as well as Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He showed real leadership in Ukraine and of course he fulfilled his promise. Make Britain seriously again.

His cabinet is full of individuals, who look like him, competent and decent. Maybe a little boring – but a glimpse of the Trump administration shows that you are worse than that. There are many problems in the UK, but so are every European country I know. British democracy survived the stress test for Brexit, not Trump, who survived American democracy. Socially and culturally, there is much more to say about the daily tolerance, creativity and humor of Britain.

So if anyone can succeed, the UK can. But if Britain wants to have a clearer idea of the world in 10 years, then Britain will be better. As I believe in Talmud: If you don’t know where you want to go, any road is good.