-narrative of British politics shifted to crisis and austerity. In 2010, New Labour was replaced by a Coalition Government of Conservative and Liberal Democrats, in which the former were dominant. This election outcome removed a key institutional relationship that development campaigners had come to rely on: a ruling party that shared many of the development norms of the campaign organisations themselves.
Nevertheless, in 2013 a major national development campaign coalition was once again devised: the Enough Food If campaign (EFIF). This chapter
worst of its rippling social consequences rebelled against systemic
injustices. Left-leaning protest movements of indignados took to the streets. They
rejected economic austerity and promoted progressive social reform. But they soon became
marginal to the spreading politics of anger. In the main, the global backlash is now directed
against progressive neoliberalism – the dominant ideological variant of late liberalism
– with its ‘flexibilisation’ of everything in the economic sphere and its
disintegration of tradition in the social sphere
. Global Precarity A characteristic of late-modernity, at least in relation to the global North, 3 is what Nikolas Rose has called the ‘death
of the social’ ( Rose, 1996 ). This demise is
usually equated with the roll-back of the welfare state. Originally meant as a collective
insurance-based shield against market forces, since the 1980s the welfare state has been
residualised through means-testing, privatisation, cuts and the politics of austerity. Companies
and businesses, however, have also shed their former social-democratic responsibilities
Britain and Africa in the twenty-first century provides the first analysis of the state of UK Africa policy in the era of austerity, Conservative government and Brexit. It explores how Britain’s relationship with Africa has evolved since the days of Blair, Brown and Make Poverty History and examines how a changing UK political environment, and international context, has impacted upon this long-standing – and deeply complex – relationship. This edited collection provides an indispensable reference point for researchers and practitioners interested in contemporary UK–Africa relations and the broader place of Africa in British politics and foreign policy. Across twelve chapters, the book’s contributors examine how far UK Africa policy has been transformed since the fall of the 1997–2010 Labour Government and how far Conservative, or Conservative-led, Governments have reshaped and re-cast links with the continent. The book includes analyses of UK approaches to diplomacy, security, peacekeeping, trade and international development in, or with, Africa. The contributions, offered by UK- and Africa-based scholars and practitioners, nonetheless take a broader perspective on UK–Africa relations, examining the changing perspectives, policies and actions of political parties, advocacy groups and the UK population itself. The authors argue that the Afro-optimism of the Blair years no longer provides the guiding framework for UK engagement with Africa. It has not, however, been replaced by an alternative paradigm, leaving significant space for different forms of relationship to be built, or reconstructed. The book includes a foreword by Chi Onwurah MP, Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Africa.
investors increased leverage over the terms of new loans to the region (Alnasrawi 1991: 175; Chatelus 1993: 148, 154–7). The austerity this enabled the IMF to impose for the sake of debt repayment first hit investment levels, then state spending on health and education, food subsidies and state employment. This, attacking the very basis of the ‘social contract’ in Middle Eastern states, sparked ‘food riots’ across the region. Capital, previously exported on a massive scale, was now being re-imported at the cost of debt, concessions to foreign investment and the same
A comparative case study of Cameroon, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda
Ivica Petrikova and Melita Lazell
project mostly worked with Ugandan civil society).
Discussion and concluding remarks
This chapter began by illustrating how, since the late 1990s, UK development policy discourse has become securitised, increasingly emphasising the role that development aid can play in strengthening UK national security. This was the case during both the Blair and Brown Labour Governments and increased further after 2010 under the Conservatives, who have used it to justify raising aid spending amid austerity. The empirical part of the
The Conservative Party and Africa from opposition to government
Kite, M. (2007) ‘Project Africa: Tories’ drive to re-brand party’, Telegraph , 18 March 2007.
Krutikova, S. and Warwick, R. (2017) ‘The changing landscape of UK aid’, Briefing Note BN204, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Mawdsley, E. (2017) ‘National interests and the paradox of foreign aid under austerity: Conservative governments and the domestic politics of international development since 2010’, Geographical Journal , 183:3, 223–32.
Mitchell, A. (2016
limited impact on international development policy, prompting one commentator to ask whether Labour ‘still cares about international development’ (Haddad, 2010 ). The Iraq war aside, international issues had not played a major role in Miliband’s leadership contest, with attention more focused on domestic issues, austerity and how to reposition Labour. Although Miliband launched a large number of ad hoc policy reviews, including one led by Harriet Harman on international development in 2011, the latter produced few concrete results and her successor as Shadow
important to take into account the international and domestic context at the time. As mentioned previously, R2P was beginning to impact when and where France did or did not intervene. Additionally, from a domestic point of view, France was facing two key challenges that impacted its capacity to intervene abroad for humanitarian purposes. The first was the financial crisis, which put considerable pressure on the French defence budget. In order to reduce the public spending deficit, Hollande had announced strong austerity measures – which included cuts within the defence
employment as a teacher or in the civil
service. He was permitted by the state to collect fees for most of these activities, thus increasing his wealth and status (Yonah et al., 2004:395). Furthermore,
sheikhs acted as middlemen and whenever a demand for workers emerged,
the employers – through the Military Government – approached the sheikhs,
who would then decide who got employment (Swirski and Hasson, 2006:87).
The sheikhs acted as middlemen not only in such benign matters but also in
security-related issues. In the 1950s, during the years of austerity when foodstuff in