Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)

My Lords, “know thyself” was the message of the oracle at Delphi, and it was good that the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Houghton, enabled us to puncture some of our national delusions, and I follow him in that. It was unusual and significant that the gracious Speech began with a sentence on the “dangerous and volatile world” in which we live. Indeed, the forward perspective is very bleak. Our hope for a peace dividend has gone and has been replaced by wars, rumours of wars and dangers to the global South, including the danger of famine. It is no longer possible for international affairs to be considered self-contained. We saw, for example, in the local elections on May 7, the extent to which Gaza was a significant factor. The old attempts to isolate national and international affairs are no longer. It is also so sad to see the rise of antisemitism in this country. We should bless the contribution of our Jewish community to the position of this country over very many years. The old certainties have gone, and the post-war settlement is being undermined massively. Fundamental to the post-war settlement is the warmth of our transatlantic relations. Yes, there will remain co-operation, intelligence and massive cultural exchanges, but the old warmth has indeed gone. The US has questioned our role in the Falklands—which is a neuralgic issue for us in the UK—has threatened armed force against a NATO ally, Denmark, in respect of Greenland, and has erected tariff wars against its allies. Is it just President Trump? No—the likely successor, Vice-President JD Vance, campaigned for the strongman Orbán in Hungary, a country I know well, having served there for two years. Equally, JD Vance is quoted as saying of Ukraine: “I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another”. The US, alas, is no longer a beacon on the hill. If NATO is indeed, as President Trump has said, a paper tiger, we must question whether we can rely on the US in the way we did in the past. It must be extremely difficult for US ambassadors to follow the volatility of US foreign policy. US policy in Iran underlines this problem. It is a war of choice. There was no consultation. Was there any consultation when the US, on Tuesday this week, was about to renew its war on Iran or was blind support needed in spite of the lack of consultation? Against this background, what way forward is there for us? Surely, the pivot should not now be to the Indo-Pacific. In my judgment, it should be to Europe—perhaps to broader Europe rather than just the European Union. That is the challenge that faces us. We must find means of defending ourselves. On defence, I will say only that, like a number of colleagues, I endorse and adopt what my noble friend Lord Robertson said about our lack of preparation. In my judgment, a safer haven beckons. We need a closer relationship with Europe—it is a much safer haven for us—and we need to reduce our dependence on the US, but that will have to be done incrementally and over time. However, we need to build our relationship with Europe so that we can face the world together. In terms of that relationship we should be bolder and put the Ming vase back in the cupboard where it belongs.