UK Government and Politics – Opinion Note (with an update on 24 January, following further military action in the Red Sea)
Government Administration Opinion from a Political Sciences Perspective
By Rocio Ferro-Adams
There is a Convention following the escalation of war and military action in Iraq 2003 and subsequent debates about the decision to go to war, without Parliamentary Agreement at the time, but instead to use the Royal Prerogative without further discussion than the Executive, this led to problems, with regards to accountability for military action to Parliament. Since then, it has been an accepted Convention that laying a Motion to debate such action which could lead to escalation described as war, should be debated in the House of Commons.
It is suggested that the Motion was not laid in 2018, argued by Layla Moran MP today, if this is the case this causes some problems if the prerogative is to be revived without proper due process, and in reality, once changed, even by Parliamentary Convention, could mean to a degree its permanent alteration, because the Convention has existed. This is how the UK Constitution works and the Convention was widely discussed and written about by academics of Political Sciences in UK Universities and internationally, by universities abroad and world institutions.
There are several routes open to UK officials, and Ministers and Members of Parliament.
Government and Politics – Assessments of Administrative Purpose.
- A Senior member of the Opposition calls for a Motion in Parliament for Action in the Middle East reducing the risk of compromising troops already in the field. This reduced the possibility of compromising military flexibility and decision-making processes. It would, given the complexities of the Middle East, be reasonable to expect, Senior Members of all Parties to come together to discuss the possibility of escalation of action in the Middle East – The Red Sea. These are political imperatives, and accepted Government and Parliamentary practise, given also that it is now close to a General Election (now likely in mid-November 2024).
- The Motion or debate in Parliament, The House of Commons, could also be called by the Cabinet Office Minister. Officials should have clear indication of how many PQs have been raised on the issue, on the record to date, what legal advice has been given to the government if any, and what the Chief of The Defence Staff (Navy Lead), believes is the current public position on the Action of UK Warships in the Red Sea and Allies; in relation to the Houthi’s action towards trading ships and the impact on the Global Economy. It should also be aware that it will need to brief on the Government position with regards to the Israel-Hamas war (2023-24) and whether the two are linked in UK Foreign Policy and whether for the purpose of debate the two political positions with regards to the action, should and can be separated, as considerations are given to separate British interest. Departments such as the Cabinet Office should lead, with Number 10 (advice should come from the MOD, FCOD, CO (Cabinet Office) and AG/ Government Legal Advisers). Any legal advice should be available to closed groups of Ministers for Security reasons and Cabinet Committee.
- Risk using the Royal Prerogative to go to war without Parliamentary support. The Prerogative remains in place in as much that its use is limited by the Convention to debate Motions in Parliament. The Power is still in existence. It was said to have been ignored by the Government in 2018. Should the Government decide to do so in 2024, this could change the effectiveness of the Convention if it is under used or not used effectively by Parliament, leaving all power and Authority with the Executive. This, however, does lead the UK Government open to external scrutiny after the decision has taken place. Such as the events following the decision to go to war in 2003. The Media, Parliamentary Committee Committees, and external institutions such as the UN and ICC (although less likely).
The political rationale for action must be clear, whether the two events, the Israeli-Hamas war and response to the disruption caused by Yemeni Militia Groups aligned with Iran, to affect trade through piracy in the Red Sea – are intrinsically politically the same issue: related issue, or marginally a related issue. Who is the enemy and why – in terms of security concerns for the region – must be described clearly and the legal and political rationale must be available to the public after the event of action which is beginning to take place in the Red Sea, with UK Warships in the area, which are supported by the USA and Allies (although it is not clear at this stage which states supported action on 12 January 2024 in the South Red Sea Area).
The risk of relying on the Prerogative are ‘constitutionally significant’, in an international environment which could lead the UK into World War III. Escalation of action with regards to a wider International Perspective looks more likely, as Sweden also informally declared that war in Northern Europe is not inevitable, but likely as the Ukraine-Russia continues, and risks flowing into the Seas of Northern Europe. This is a strong message from a state about to join NATO and its Membership has been accepted. Greater assessment of international security should be given to the views of Sweden on any potential escalation of war into Northern Waters by Russia, close to UK interests and territory. How significant are these threats/risk and how can it (and should it) shape future debates in Parliament, is a question for the Westminster Parliament?
War Powers used under the prerogative often means inevitable military action, however Diplomacy of international proportions cannot be underestimated as having the potential to contain conflict. The two tools available to the UK under the Constitution should be used effectively, by also understanding the potential benefits of High Level political and Official Diplomacy in conjunction with other tools available to the UK Government including the Royal Prerogative power to go to war and the need for flexibility. Large Scale Political Diplomacy like that which took place in the Middle East led by those States has its place, but the West must equally not rely solely on regional diplomacy but consider along with the EU the implications of the of what is taking place. POLITICO and RUSI and other academic observer publications and institutions are describing the international situation as serious, and NATO and the EU are being asked to consider wider European Security; including food, material and boarder security and political economy of the European Region, at the next EU Security Review 2024 and more urgently now, in preparation for expected action in the Middle East Region by the US and the UK and Operational Allies. NATO is expected to catch-up and restructure its Defence Architecture, but at what speed is unclear.
Background
Whether an assessment of the use of the royal prerogative to go to war should be conducted for Academic purposes in Government and Politics (Administration).
Any form of action now risks the perception of escalation, which cannot be re-written when other nations are at war, a war is a war in all historical description and international assessment thresh-holds for meeting a World War may have been met, the UK could be at the beginning of a long line of consequential military activity it is also for Government and Politics researchers to gather and write about information available and for many Academics that has begun to take place; commentary and political science assessments are catching up.
It is however, not evident that the UK is at ‘war’ nor has it declared war and a Parliamentary debate would be expected at some stage. Continued movement of military assets into the Red Sea, without a debate in Parliament could also suggest that Parliament is willing to wait. Therefore, it is not agreed that the UK is in any World War: as arrangements in Europe and the UK are not in place. We do not have evidence yet, that there is a War Economy restructure in both Europe and the UK, which would indicate the case, but European Food Security, affecting the UK and some supplies are at risk due to conflict in the Middle Eastern Region and Eastern European geopolitical conflicts including the larger Ukraine-Russo war.
Any full-scale assessment for public consumption as to the degrees to which the UK and EU Economy and Security are at risk are not available, but it could be early days with fuel for transporting goods, and some commodities being less available in quantity as before. What action needs to be put in place by Government Administrators may be rooted in any assessments provided by the Business led Institutions, retailers, food and agricultural retailers, and other sectors affected -impacting the Cost of Living
It is therefore, sensible for experts in international affairs and international relations to consider the ‘big picture’ of military activity amongst Allies and foreign powers, and separately those who put at risk British interest alongside any publicly available intelligence about UK engagement in the field; to help decide on resourcing, training, and scientific developments, and what information gathering is necessary to come up to speed and to form a larger scale picture of the international geo-politics, of all Regions. The revival of War Committees and Cabinet and Intelligence Committees are the traditional means of UK Government work. The Media receive briefings.
With regards to a Motion to Debate UK military activity in the Red Sea and its implications, such a motion can be brought by the Liberal Democrats in Parliament. Layla Moran MP for instance, raised the use of the royal prerogative during discussions on BBC Radio 4 on 12 January. Whether Labour decide to lead Opposition discussions on debates is yet to be seen.
Edited :[On 14 January 2024 Labour Leader Keir Starmer discussed on BBC Laura Kuenssberg, his previous intention to codify the Constitutional Convention and the principle, that the PM would consult Parliament before committing troops on the ground (where there is a lawful case, viable objective and support from the House of Commons to do so) – a proposal for a ‘Prevention of Military Intervention Act‘, based on the Cabinet Manual had been discussed some time before this interview. He supports the action in the Yemen and Red Sea, on a case-by-case basis. On 23 January the Government decided to provide another statement, as per the Convention, but does not need to ask for permission as this is action in response to piracy in the Red Sea, to protect private trade and this is not full-scale military action, or war – it is a specific targeted act for this purpose – Labour have also addressed the issue on a case-by-case basis, and so these aspects of the Convention are at work – following further action and a Response from the Opposition Party giving their support to the Government].
A wider European Union Security Agenda is expected to be delivered. It is expected that now after Brexit, that the UK will continue to engage in the same way through NATO, and possibly under some Diplomatic arrangements. The question is whether the UK has lost Diplomatic Channels, being outside of the EU Diplomatic and Security Framework under Brexit and if some Diplomatic Arrangements need to be filled by FCOD officials to work towards a more integrated architecture with the EU after Brexit and separately the UK will likely develop a response to a wider war, in which British interests are at stake. This includes an assessment on a Cold War with China.
Background Reading and Listening
Parliamentary approval for military action – House of Commons Library
The role and powers of the Prime Minister (parliament.uk)
The Occupied Palestinian Territories: recent developments – House of Commons Library (parliament.uk)
EU wants to send warships to Red Sea to tackle Houthi attacks – POLITICO
Inside Biden’s decision to strike the Houthis – POLITICO
South Africa’s genocide case against Israel lays bare Europe’s feeble power – POLITICO
Ukraine | Royal United Services Institute (rusi.org)
Implications of the Russia–Ukraine war for global food security | Nature Human Behaviour
@ResearchCapacityLtd.
Research Capacity Ltd 
Leave a comment