British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s foreign policy doctrine will now have a bearing on world affairs. His appointment by King Charles III on the 25th of October 2022 came at a critical juncture in British politics which has been reeling from the chaos of Boris Johnson’s nonchalance and apathy and Lizz Truss’ perceived ineptitude to address the flailing economy. With a new face in power however, the Conservative Party would hope to salvage its nosediving popularity and credibility through Sunak. Much of that salvation stems from the foreign policy that Sunak adopts as part of his playbook. In the Middle East, he does not instill much confidence.  

Given the UK’s history of political meddling in the region, which ranges from endorsing the Balfour Declaration of 1917 to opposing Iranian policies, Sunak has not proposed anything constructive. With a reputation of being a recluse who maintains a low profile, Sunak has continued to bill himself as a conservative, centrist and pro-Brexit politician. Hence, anything could be expected on the global front. Such uncertainty mirrors the international curiosity witnessed when former US President Donald Trump was elected which quickly turned into international condemnation as his policies became a disaster for the region. 

The same can be said about Sunak. Similar to most conservative politicians and lobbyists in the UK, Rishi Sunak is a pro-"Israel" Prime Minister. Earlier in 2022, he spoke to the Conservative Friends of Israel parliamentary group that is dedicated to strengthening cultural, economic, and political ties between the UK and "Israel". He relayed his controversial views by claiming that occupied Jerusalem is "Israel’s" capital. Such unabashed, insensitive and callous remarks not only downgrade years of international diplomacy dedicated to offsetting tensions between the Palestinians and Israelis but also normalizes apartheid and Palestinian isolation. Furthermore, in an interview with the Jewish Chronicle, Sunak denounced the apartheid label for "Israel" despite harrowing evidence of illegal settlements, summary killings, and deprivation of human rights being routine throughout the occupied West Bank and Gaza.  

A continuation of this open endorsement of "Israel" will only result in Sunak being viewed as a controversial, polarizing, and divisive figure in the Middle East. Not much would change either from his predecessor’s doctrine, given that Lizz Truss in September 2022 spoke of moving the UK’s embassy in Tel Aviv to occupied Jerusalem which was in line with the United States. Such moves have fomented instability and given the leadership in "Tel Aviv", an open license to commit crimes against humanity. It also undercuts the just right of the Palestinians to seek self-determination amid Israeli repression. 

Sunak’s views on Iran are equally polarizing and divisive. It continues the UK’s legacy of employing camp politics in the region by denigrating one country at the expense of another, as a classic zero-sum powerplay. Sunak’s fellow member of Parliament, Theresa Villiers for example, admitted that Sunak’s opposition to Iran developing nuclear weapons is a welcoming thought despite the fact that she ignores how his apparent concern over the UK not taking the nuclear threat seriously, is an affront to nuclear deterrence in the Middle East. Additionally, Sunak’s apathy to "Israel’s" opaque nuclear program which has continued unabated is staggering. Avner Cohen describes the program as the ‘world’s worst kept secret’ and Sunak’s silence on "Israel’s" threat to global nonproliferation efforts speaks volumes about the flawed orientation of his foreign policy. 

Related News

News from Nowhere: You Turn If You Want To

News from Nowhere: The death of trust

Then comes the so-called "Abraham Accords" which were instrumental in sowing divisions in the region and allowing "Israel" to gain regional recognition that it never deserved. Former British Defense Secretary, Liam Fox while speaking to the UAE’s The National said that Sunak views the accords as positive developments and considered the UAE to be an important strategic partner. This is despite the fact that the "Abraham Accords" were met with fierce condemnation by the Palestinian Resistance movement and questioned the credibility of the United States in the region. It also ensured that each of the regional states party to the accords, normalize Israeli apartheid. 

Not much is different from Sunak on other regional disputes either. He has gone on to condemn Turkiye’s rightful claims in Cyprus, unjustly through historical denialism and revisionism. While addressing the Conservative Friends of Cyprus, Sunak claimed that Ankara’s claims in Cyprus in 1974 constitute an invasion and that the Turkish side of the island should refrain from further provocations. This can be construed as a prelude to what Sunak’s policy towards the Turkiye Greece conflict could be, which serves to embolden the Erdogan leadership to remain defiant amid crass neocolonialism from the UK. Turkiye would be tempted to engage in a regional arms race and build up its military presence as it has done in Cyprus. 

It is clear that Sunak’s views prior to the Prime Minister race will only serve to sow divisions and promote unrest in the Middle East. His diplomatic acumen remains transactional, shortsighted, and myopic at best. His experience in government has also been largely in the finance domain which is similar to Donald Trump's prior to joining and forming a government in Washington D.C. Serving as the head and second-in-command of the UK’s Treasury is different from running the affairs of a country which has had a checkered history in regions such as the Middle East. Stability in the region requires constructive approaches which are devoid of animus and so far, Sunak offers little to instill any confidence in that regard.  

Make no mistake, a continuation of such policies is a threat to the region.