Britain’s place in the world: Part I

For thousands of years the major developments and events in history have occurred in Europe, and by extension America since Europe colonised it. Yet whilst Europeans were in muddy castles and dirt villages, there were vast cities in China. The current economic crisis gripping the Western world is merely the most noticeable sign of a major shift in global history, that of the West being ousted by the East. Now, more than ever, it is becoming increasingly clear that it is time for Britain to stop pretending it is a superpower still, and take a step back from the global stage.

This might sound selfish, but let's look at this logically. In 2009 the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) released a major study on the education levels of 65 countries. They ranked the United Kingdom as 20th, 22nd and 11th in reading, maths and science respectively. The UK can no longer practically justify the claim that it is one of the best places in the world for education. We didn't even rank in the top 10 for any category. Looking at the UK in terms of population and geography at the height of the British Empire, when Britain truly was a super power, Britain ruled over almost a quarter of the entire world's population, and almost a quarter of the Earths landmass. Contrast this with the state of Britain almost 200 years later, wherein Britain has around the 22nd highest population in the world, and in terms of landmass is only about the 80th largest nation.

Population and landmass are however swiftly becoming outmoded methods of defining whether or not a nation is a "super power”. Britain's political and military influence, at present, is one of only a handful of nuclear armed powers in the world. Britain's published defence budget is around the 3rd largest in the world behind Russia and the U.S (and possibly France depending on who you ask). British troops are involved in dozens of peacekeeping actions and wars around the globe ranging from Bosnia to Afghanistan. In purely military terms, Britain possesses one of the largest power projection spheres of any nation in the world, but at what cost? Britain possesses one of the highest crime rates in the world. Another illustrious statistic we can boast is having the highest teen pregnancy rate in Europe. In the current economic climate with little or no growth, and the Euro looking (unless the politicians get their thumbs out their arses) set to collapse and the very real possibility of us dropping back into a recession, can we really afford to spend around 2.7% of our GDP (world bank figures from 2009) on military expenditure?

Now let us look at the political angle. Whilst it is true that the UK does hold a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, this is more a nod to the role we played in the Second World War, which resulted in the U.N's creation, than anything else. Almost every major conflict we have gotten involved in, in the past 40 years or so, we almost always play second fiddle to another nation, usually the U.S, thanks to our so called "special relationship" with them. Traditionally speaking, British politics has tended to be a stickler for the rules. If we sign or make an agreement we'll stick to it. Thus making us a prime target for some.... less scrupulous governments to take advantage of, such as in the case of immigration, or foreign criminals.

Clearly the heady days of the British Empire are gone, never to return. Yet successive governments have continued to operate on the assumption that Britain should still be at the forefront of the global stage. With a failing health and education system, shaky economy, sky high crime and teen pregnancy rates, the government has more than enough to keep it occupied. A recent example is the intervention in Libya. What was happening in Libya was truly awful, and Colonel Gaddafi's treatment of his people was utterly reprehensible. But if we look at things objectively, quite bluntly, is it our problem? Africa is full of petty warlords and chieftains committing terrible atrocities on the people they rule over. It is simply impossible for Britain to intervene in every conflict, so why Libya? News in recent weeks has been full of stories about this or that position which has been bombed by NATO and RAF jets, but no one seems to be concerned about how much each of these raids is costing us – Or our future generations. With the Western world's economy looking shaky at best, can we really afford the expense of intervening in Libya? Especially when we're already involved in military debacles around the globe? Imagine if you found out that your local hospital had to close a vital care wing because the money the government were going to use to keep it operational, had instead been spent on bombs and missiles to use in Libya, or Afghanistan or one of many other countries. The world is a much smaller place than when our Empire thrived. Now we simply cannot afford to continue pretending we're a super power. The sooner politician's wake up to that fact and stop constantly over stretching out limited resources, the better Britain will be.