By Mark English, policy adviser to European Movement UK – personal views

The war in the Middle East has shown that the UK has no audible voice in Washington – indeed, President Trump has launched anti-British diatribes. So, if we want to be a player on the international stage, we need our voice and our vote in Brussels back - only membership of the EU will give us those, but that will take time. Meanwhile, the UK government’s reset with the EU needs an injection of ambition and urgency, to mitigate the already disastrous economic effects of the war.

The war is bringing major economic challenges

The conflict will not only increase energy bills. Food prices will also be hit in two ways. First, higher oil prices mean higher transport costs. And second, the supply and cost of fertilisers will be seriously affected, with a knock-on effect on food prices and potentially on the security of world food supply.

According to the government’s own Office for Budgetary Responsibility (OBR), all this will likely add a percentage point - possibly more - to UK inflation in 2026. That will make it harder for the Bank of England to keep interest rates low, a precondition for the growth the government hopes for in the run-up to the next election.

The UK now needs urgently to mitigate the coming energy price rises by negotiating -as promised - full participation in the single market for electricity.

It is also now even more urgent to agree a food trade (SPS) deal with the EU. There was a welcome sign this week, as the government began the groundwork to align UK rules with the EU. But even a wide-ranging SPS deal will only partly remove Brexit red tape – what we really need, as European Movement UK is arguing, is a return to the single market and customs union.  

A long-term commitment to Europe

For all of the damaging short-term effects, the most important lesson from the crisis is that the UK must make the long-term strategic choice to commit to Europe.

President Trump’s actions underline that the transatlantic alliance is no longer a basis for European security. This highlights the urgency of delivering on commitments to increase defence and associated spending to 5% of GDP. For the UK this means a rise of about £85 billion, from just over £60 billion annually to roughly £145 billion at current prices.

Estimates of Brexit’s hit to UK GDP vary from 4% to 8%. That corresponds to between £40 billion and £90 billion less in tax revenue every year. So at least half the necessary increase in defence spending - and perhaps even the whole lot! The only way to start getting that money flowing back into government coffers is to sweep away Brexit barriers to UK trade.

European countries also need to make defence spending more efficient. A key part of that must be a comprehensive European defence industry policy. Such a policy can only be delivered through the EU institutions. 

The UK cannot afford to be left on the sidelines and the EU cannot afford to leave the UK’s capacities outside its plans. The first step should be to re-open negotiations on UK participation in the SAFE defence investment fund. But UK participation as a ‘guest’ in EU initiatives will not allow us to influence the design of policies and funding schemes, nor to participate on the same level as member states. Only EU membership can do that.

A boost for Russia, a threat to China and to the UK

The war in the Middle East has strengthened Russia. The US is expending weapons and ammunition that may not now be available for Ukraine. And the rise in oil and gas prices and the need for China to replace supplies from Iran will boost Russia’s flagging economy. Ukraine needs more than ever the EU’s support and the prospect of joining soon. The further the UK goes towards reversing the Brexit that so delighted Vladimir Putin, the better placed the EU and the UK will be to back Ukraine.

Some thoughtful commentators see part of President Trump’s motivation for the US interventions in Venezuela and Iran as being to deny China cheap oil. The Chinese economy will certainly take a hit and that could make China even more assertive in defending its perceived geopolitical interests.

The EU is already acting, for example through its Industrial Accelerator Act to protect its economy from unfair Chinese competition. The war will further accelerate the global race for resources. So if the UK remains outside the EU’s drive for more ‘strategic autonomy’ in areas such as access to raw materials, we risk becoming ever more isolated. We cannot compete with highly interventionist trade and supply chain policies from three well-resourced behemoths at once – the US, China and the EU.

Environment, migration and populism

The war is causing catastrophic damage to the environment in the region and experts fear global ecological damage. With the US opting out of global environmental cooperation, coordination between the EU and UK has become all the more important. Environment policy is also inextricably linked with energy policy – as European Commission Vice-President Teresa Ribera said last week, the only way to protect our energy supply from turbulence in fossil fuel producing regions is to speed up the drive for clean and renewable energy. From the UK’s point of view, this is best done by working closely with the EU, until we can join it and argue within it for ambitious policy choices.

The war will create refugees. If it leads to internal conflict in Iran and/or to economic collapse, the numbers fleeing could increase significantly. Many will end up in Europe and some will want to come to the UK. The only way to deal with high levels of migration is through European-level cooperation. This – both in response to the Middle East situation and more generally - is a subject that should also be on the table in the EU-UK reset.

Finally, the war may boost populist parties across Europe, including the UK. In the short-term, Nigel Farage’s unpopular support for Trump is hitting Reform’s poll ratings. But come the next election, voters are likely to blame the government rather than Donald Trump for a darkening economic picture. More could turn to Reform. It is in the Labour government’s electoral interest to seize every opportunity to shore up the economy – and the biggest opportunity is to join the single market.

Time to come inside the tent

In other non-EU European countries, recent events have made public opinion more favourable to coming inside the EU tent. Iceland will hold on 29 August a referendum on reopening negotiations to join. The debate in Norway is at its liveliest for years. There is no doubt about Ukraine’s commitment to seeking membership, nor that of Montenegro or Moldova.

Meanwhile, the cost of staying outside will increase. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on 8 March that the war in the Middle East is the latest illustration that the EU needs to focus on “using our strengths in pursuit of our interests.” That hard-nosed view is likely to get even harder.

Against a global backdrop of conflict and upheaval, the UK’s rightful place is more than ever inside the EU, contributing our own strengths and benefitting from those of our partners. Outside, we risk being buffeted between an unpredictable and detached US, an assertive and resource-hungry China and a new European realpolitik over which we have no influence.