ANALYSIS - Britain's objectives for Russia-Ukraine crisis

By Jonathan Fenton-Harvey

- The author is a researcher and journalist focusing on conflict and geopolitics in the Middle East and North Africa, primarily related to the Gulf region.

ISTANBUL (AA) - As Russia's invasion of Ukraine drags on, the UK has been one of the most vocal opponents of Moscow's actions. From imposing punitive financial measures on the Kremlin to isolating figures close to Russian President Vladimir Putin and even hosting Ukrainians fleeing the war, Britain has tried to present a humanitarian response to uphold international law.

While Britain has mainly followed suit with the US and EU, its foreign policy motives have somewhat diverged from its allies --in part due to the aftermath of Brexit. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Boris Johnson hopes London's response could salvage his reign in the UK.

- UK pressure on Russia

The UK has imposed a broad sanctions regime on Russia, like the US and EU. Britain's key areas are military goods and mercenaries like the Wanger Group, flights travelling to and from Russia and private chartered jets, luxury goods, oil and gas, financial services and banks, and members of Russia's parliament.

A key element of Britain's sanction regime is targeting prominent Russian businessmen or "oligarchs" operating in the UK who have close ties to the Kremlin, including high profile cases like Roman Abramovich, Chelsea Football Club owner.

On March 31, Britain announced further measures on 14 individuals and organizations, particularly in the media sector, to root out Russian "propaganda."[1] This included senior figures and organizations behind Russian state-owned media outlets RT and Sputnik.

The UK's sanctions regime aims to pressure Russia into ending its invasion its Ukraine, which according to the UK government, is "undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty or independence of Ukraine." On March 24, Britain's Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said Britain would be willing to lift sanctions on Russia should it entirely withdraw from Ukraine.[2]

On paper, Britain has sought to align itself with its Western allies as a NATO member and per international law. Indeed, as Ukraine borders NATO member states in Eastern Europe, Britain considers such a Russian expansion a security concern in line with other European NATO members.

- Divergence with the US and EU

While the UK, US, and EU have mostly coordinated their responses in terms of their goals of isolating and pressing Putin, there have been divergences in their exact policies, indicating an ongoing rift between them.

On the one hand, Britain was one of the leading opponents of a no-fly zone in Ukraine, and it has taken this position in conjunction with Washington. With both countries warning of the potential risks of establishing one, such as begetting a greater NATO-Russia escalation should a Russian plane be shot down, it shows security coordination between London and Washington is high.

Yet compared to its European allies, Britain was slower to impose sanctions on Russia. A key sector in which this occurred was academia. While the UK acted more decisively than the US, its initial promises to do so were delayed compared to EU states, including Germany, which suspended all academic links during the first week of the invasion. Moreover, the UK's approach is less sweeping as the government has only targeted funding bodies rather than individual academic institutions.

The impact of Brexit could also signify another divergence in policy between London and Brussels. There have been subtle differences between the UK and EU, which are partly driven by London's post-Brexit desires to increase its leadership capabilities in the world.

On March 6, Liz Truss raised the notion of empowering the G7, increasing the member states to include countries like India, Australia and South Korea, and installing a secretariat to give the bloc similar powers to blocs like NATO. Boris Johnson previously suggested the idea, known as D10, in 2020.

After all, London does not have substantial influence over the sanctions package and may be feeling isolated from its European counterparts following Brexit. Including such member states in an extended version of the G7 would aim to enhance Britain's foreign policy clout, as it would bring in member states with whom London has sought to strengthen relations post-Brexit.

This move could potentially limit the EU's power to lead the rules and enforce decision making over Russia, meaning London and Brussels would disagree on such a policy. And while Johnson's government has tried to use the Ukraine crisis to assert its global position, it could face setbacks given that it is not entirely coherent with the US and EU, which also have their own objectives.

- Boris Johnson's domestic response

Johnson's popularity has ostensibly increased following the UK's response to the Ukraine crisis. Research by the polling company Redfield & Wilton Strategies revealed the public's approval rating for Johnson jumped from -31% to -7%.[3] From Johnson's perspective, taking a firm stance on Ukraine and adopting more humanitarian policies such as its scheme to pay British citizens money to host refugees would benefit the prime minister's attempts to salvage his reputation.

After all, Johnson faced potential challenges to his premiership after revelations of government parties during nationwide COVID-19 restrictions, which triggered distrust towards his government among the public, while some Conservative MPs were reportedly prepared to oust him.

While Johnson's popularity has somewhat recovered, he still remains mostly unpopular with the British public. An opinion poll by the Observer showed that 53% of the public would like to see Johnson resign.[4] A similar number at 52% believe the UK government has not done enough to accept Ukrainian refugees.

Although most Britons have negative feelings towards Johnson, this may not be enough to dislodge his government. After all, Johnson's Conservative Party won the last general elections in 2019 with 43% of the votes. Moreover, Conservative MPs who were prepared to rebel against Johnson following the controversies around his leadership would be less likely to stand against him.

While the Ukraine crisis has revealed a slight rift between Britain and its NATO counterparts, and Britain's vision could likely face obstacles, it could indeed temporarily salvage Johnson's reign as prime minister.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-makes-14-additions-russia-sanctions-list-2022-03-31/

[2] https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-says-russian-sanctions-could-be-lifted-with-ukraine-withdrawal-report-2022-03-26/

[3] https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1500891542470418437

[4] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/mar/12/more-than-half-of-uk-voters-still-think-boris-johnson-should-resign

*Opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Anadolu Agency.