From a defence perspective, we already have a lot of US defence equipment on order, and realistically probably need more of that same kit in the short-medium term. Hence, increasing our orders of, say, F-35 or MLRS (which we are and should be doing anyway) is possibly a good way of keeping the US happy without affecting the long-term goal of boosting domestic defence production.
What the UK needs is a pitch - “this is what we do on the global scene, and this is why you will benefit from us doing it”. In this case, the incentives are two-fold: firstly, there’s a reasonable chance that in the pursuit of resurrecting US manufacturing, a significant portion of the US’s services industry will migrate out the country. Trump himself doesn’t seem to be bothered by this, but one thing that is within his interests is that it doesn’t just go to a China patsy like Hong Kong or Dubai, but instead goes to a solid ally who will spend the dividend in things in the US’s interest. At that point, some effective services concessions that make the UK the best place outside the US to do business with the US is now in the US’s interest.
Secondly, it’s clear the US wants to take a more isolationist approach and focus solely on China and the Western Hemisphere. This is fine, but regions like Africa and Central Asia aren’t going to go away, and it would still be nice for them to be Western allies even if the US doesn’t want to put in the legwork itself to make it happen. The EU is going to be utterly inept here and will have its hands full with Russia anyway, and Japan is already busy in East Asia. However, the UK has both the diplomatic influence, the cultural connections, and sufficient will and competence to leverage these two things in order to best compete with Russia and China over influence. At that point, whilst the US spending time and money directly in Africa may be a non-starter, the US giving a generous trade deal that is mutually beneficial to it and the UK would be, as it can be sure the UK will then turn around and spend the dividend developing and ‘winning’ Africa.
Suddenly, we’ve gone from a situation where the UK is trying to survive a US shakedown, to suddenly the US is giving a deliberately beneficial trade deal in order to better indirectly further its interests around the world.
Great overview!
From a defence perspective, we already have a lot of US defence equipment on order, and realistically probably need more of that same kit in the short-medium term. Hence, increasing our orders of, say, F-35 or MLRS (which we are and should be doing anyway) is possibly a good way of keeping the US happy without affecting the long-term goal of boosting domestic defence production.
It really does feel like an obvious place to start -- I suppose a lot will come down to how successfully we sell it as something "new".
What the UK needs is a pitch - “this is what we do on the global scene, and this is why you will benefit from us doing it”. In this case, the incentives are two-fold: firstly, there’s a reasonable chance that in the pursuit of resurrecting US manufacturing, a significant portion of the US’s services industry will migrate out the country. Trump himself doesn’t seem to be bothered by this, but one thing that is within his interests is that it doesn’t just go to a China patsy like Hong Kong or Dubai, but instead goes to a solid ally who will spend the dividend in things in the US’s interest. At that point, some effective services concessions that make the UK the best place outside the US to do business with the US is now in the US’s interest.
Secondly, it’s clear the US wants to take a more isolationist approach and focus solely on China and the Western Hemisphere. This is fine, but regions like Africa and Central Asia aren’t going to go away, and it would still be nice for them to be Western allies even if the US doesn’t want to put in the legwork itself to make it happen. The EU is going to be utterly inept here and will have its hands full with Russia anyway, and Japan is already busy in East Asia. However, the UK has both the diplomatic influence, the cultural connections, and sufficient will and competence to leverage these two things in order to best compete with Russia and China over influence. At that point, whilst the US spending time and money directly in Africa may be a non-starter, the US giving a generous trade deal that is mutually beneficial to it and the UK would be, as it can be sure the UK will then turn around and spend the dividend developing and ‘winning’ Africa.
Suddenly, we’ve gone from a situation where the UK is trying to survive a US shakedown, to suddenly the US is giving a deliberately beneficial trade deal in order to better indirectly further its interests around the world.