Palmerston's Foriegn Policy and Advantageous Pragmatic Behaviour

Authors Avatar

“We have no eternal allies and we have no perpetual enemies. Our Interests are eternal and those interests it out duty to follow.” – Palmerston

Explain this view of UK Foreign Policy

This quote from Lord Palmerston is definitely an accurate one in regards to his views on foreign policy.  The quote perfectly sums up his views that the interests of Britain is the number one priority of its foreign policy, and that it will do anything to protect them. Factors of Palmerston’s foreign policy can also include the stemming of French and Russian foreign policy, upholding British Naval supremacy and supporting Liberal governments.  However, the quote suggests that Palmerston was entirely pragmatic in his approach towards foreign policy, which although broadly correct was not entirely true.

The Eastern Question incident of 1831-41 summed up perfectly all of Palmerston’s foreign policy goals.  It was imperative to Palmerston that the Britain’s trade with its empire was not disrupted by the likes of France, Russia or the Ottoman Empire.  Britain had trade routes to India through Turkey and it was vital to that trade that they remained functional.  Therefore when the issue of Mohammed Ali and Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt wanting more land from Sultan Mahmood II of Turkey came up in, Palmerston was quick and ready to do his utmost to protect the British trade route.  Pasha’s forces had taken Syria by force and were threatening Constantinople.  Sultan Mahmood has asked Russia under Tsar Nicholas I for help who dispatched armies and a naval fleet to support the sultan.  Palmerston’s urgency to act was increased after the entry of Russia, as Palmerston was against Russian expansion, and this was definitely in his mind when dealing with the issue.  Initially Palmerston failed, as he could not convince Mahmood II to hand over Syria to Mohammed Ali.  Palmerston’s fear of Russian expansion became a reality in 1833 with the Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi.  This was a big problem for Palmerston, and now Pasha and his forces were being supplied by French equipment, which helped them successfully defend Syria from the combined forces of the Russians and the Turks.  After the death of Mahmood II in 1839, his 16 year-old son came to power, forcing Palmerston to draw up the London Agreement, 1840.  This deemed that Mohammed Ali would be independent ruler of Egypt and that he would gain half of Syria.  But Mohammed Ali rejected the deal and received military help from the French.  With the prospect of French support for Mohammed Ali there was a clear prospect of a European war.  Palmerston threatened the French with was and they subsequently backed down.  Palmerston then sent a fleet to Alexandria; and UK and Austrian forces landed at Beirut.  This forced Mohammed Ali to accept terms lesser than those offered in the London Agreement, that forced him to return Syria to Turkey.  Here Palmerston’s actions tie in perfectly with his quote.  Palmerston protected British trade routes over to India that crossed through Turkey, so Britain’s interests were protected.  This incident also strongly suggests that Britain had “no eternal allies” and “no perpetual enemies”.  This is because Britain had sided with the Turks, an undemocratic nation that Britain would not usually associate itself with, just for the purpose of upholding British interests.  Britain had also threatened France with war, a country that Britain would later side with in the Crimean War.  British naval supremacy in the Mediterranean was also upheld with the UK’s fleets being ruthlessly effective.  This incident shows Palmerston’s true pragmatic nature in dealing with foreign policy, Palmerston quite clearly did not take into consideration the principles of who his natural “allies” and “enemies” were, he merely thought about the best way to protect British interests and to stall Russian and French expansion.  In this case Palmerston did all this successfully.

Join now!

Palmerston also defended the trade interests of Britain and upheld its naval supremacy in the 1st Opium War with China, 1839-42.  After disputes between the Chinese and the British East India Company resulted in the Chinese seizing and destroying £1 million worth of opium, Palmerston was quick to uphold the reputation of Britain as a force that shouldn’t be reckoned with.  The Chinese rejected Palmerston’s request for compensation on the opium and his wish for BEIC merchants to be left alone.  This forced Palmerston to defend British honour and win back the compensation, and exploit the situation in order to ...

This is a preview of the whole essay