title: Foreign Policy
layout: policy published: true
What policies should we adopt in our relations with other countries?
We believe that a clear view of the role that the UN, EU, NATO and other international bodies play in reducing the likelihood of war should be clearly and unambiguosly communicated to the electorate.
The UK should also use it's membership of such bodies to influence them to reinforce this role and use this peaceful approach whenever possible to avoid conflict.
The UK should also use its membership of such bodies to influence them to reinforce this role and use this peaceful approach whenever possible to avoid conflict.
We will maintain the UK's committment to the UN Millennium Project agreement of allocating 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI) to Overseas Development Assistance. These funds will be kept separate from military spending; any required security, demobilisation, or peacekeeping expenses will be seperately funded, from Defence budgets.
Resist the adoption of international treaties that could allow unelected institutions to have a chilling effect on government policy that is in the public interest of UK voters. A current example is the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) process in the TTIP treaty currently under negotiation[^1], which undermines democratic processes and could prevent the government taking action which benefits the UK if it causes potential losses for foreign investors.
The UK should join many other countries around the world, as well as the UN, and officially recognise Palestine as a sovereign state. This is in line with our existing national preference for a two-state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict in accordance with international law.
We should use our significant financial position within the global economy to help us achieve our ethical foreign policy goals. We should impose financial and trade restrictions against states who pursue aggressive or expansionist policies against their neighbours, or anti-democratic or oppressive policies against their own citizens.
We recognise that the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) has turned to peaceful means to secure rights for the Kurdish people[^2]. We also note the PKK's leadership in resisting the brutality of the ISIS forces in the Middle East. We therefore wish to delist the PKK as a terrorist organisation, and move that the organisation similarly be de-listed at EU and NATO levels.
[^2]: Why delist the PKK?
From looking around a bit, the designation does seem rather ambiguous and far from universal, so I'm a 👍 in the interests of helping along the peace process.
Interesting - @andrewdwilliams's vote isn't being automatically counted, but he is a contributor, so this has technically passed. One more bug for the robot.
The OpenPolitics Manifesto
@digitalWestie - about 9 years ago