While Britain’s position in the world wasn’t enhanced, Margaret Thatcher’s foreign policy certainly raised the profile of Britain. Before she became Prime Minister, Britain’s status was in decline because of the process of decolonisation, defence cuts and the relationship with America. Margaret Thatcher’s aim was to reverse the process of decline in which she did successfully. Her strong relationship with President Reagan raised the profile of Britain as she was seen with the strongest nation in the world, as a result, Britain became a key player in the fall of Communism, becoming the negotiator between the reformist Mikhail Gorbachev and President Reagan. When the collapse of the Berlin Wall signified the end of Communism in 1989, Britain was portrayed as being a crucial player, as Margaret Thatcher successfully negotiated with Gorbachev. In spite of this, without Gorbachev and his political views of democracy, Communism may still be prevalent.
Moreover, Margaret Thatcher successfully defended national interests, raising Britain’s profile in the process. The war in the Falkland’s, with the help of the Americans, was hailed a success and Margret Thatcher was considered a capable War leader, defending British land from Argentina. As well as proving to be successful in the midst of a war, Thatcher used her diplomatic skills to preserve national interests as seen with the 1984 rebate in which Thatcher in which Britain was to receive £5billion annually due to the high membership fees paid since 1975 and the fact that CAP benefits Britain the least out of the other European countries. Southern Rhodesia also reinforced Thatcher’s skill in diplomacy and successfully handled a fragile situation where she called a conference to stop the civil war. The outcome saw Mugabe and Nkomo accepting to stop the conflict and being able to participate in the next election which would be called the Lancaster House Agreement.
On the other hand, while Thatcher’s foreign policies did raise the profile of Britain, none of them did enough to enhance Britain’s position in the world and her tenure did not represent a turning point in British foreign policy. Moreover, many of the policies were ambiguous, and in some respects, damaging. Her antipathy towards European integration was evident in her Bruges speech in 1988 where she expressed her opposition to a federal structure, believing it was sociality and against her views. This opposition left Britain out of crucial decisions regarding Europe and ironically when she was forced by her party to join the ERM Britain struggled to stay within the 2.25% threshold.
While Thatcher led Britain further into isolation within Europe, Britain’s ‘special relationship’ with America was never on equal terms and President Reagan never saw Britain as an equal, invading a member of the commonwealth, Grenada, without consulting Thatcher on the matter and our increased involvement in the campaign against Communism saw an increase in defence in which Thatcher bought a £10billion Trident defence system off the Americans which was worthless in enhancing our position in the world and damaged the British economy. Furthermore, in November 1984, Thatcher permitted the installation of 160 cruise missiles at RAF Greenham Common which triggered nationwide protests by the CND and put Britain at more of a risk at a missile attack. Also, Thatcher was prepared to make deals with South Africa even though she tried persuading Botha to abandon apartheid. Even inviting Botha in 1984 to visit Britain, despite the hostility towards his regime expressed by many countries.
In short, Margaret Thatcher’s foreign policy didn’t introduce anything radical in order to enhance Britain’s position, while Britain’s profile increased; Britain’s international position never reached the same heights experienced after WW2 and the reputation of that of Winston Churchill, but Margaret Thatcher fundamentally carried on the same legacy left by previous leaders and didn’t really change anything.
