In the Shadow of Anglo-American Alignment: Traces of the United States in the United Kingdom's Foreign Policy

Year 2026, Volume: 21 Issue: 1 , 30 - 58 , 01.04.2026

Uğur Arslan

https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.1756799

https://izlik.org/JA34JW68SK

Abstract

This study examines the extent to which United Kingdom foreign policy aligns with the strategic orientations of the United States. The central research question asks whether UK foreign policy preserves normative and institutional autonomy within the international order, or whether it functions as a dependent and aligned actor within a broader network of strategic relationships. A comparative analysis of selected strategy documents shows that during and after the Cold War both states articulated similar objectives and threat perceptions. Moreover, despite post-Brexit claims of an autonomous “Global Britain,” the UK largely continues to operate in conformity with US foreign policy priorities.

Keywords

US Foreign Policy , UK Foreign Policy , Global Britain , Special Relationship , Strategy Documents

Anglo-Amerikan Uyumunun Gölgesinde: Birleşik Krallık Dış Politikasında ABD İzleri

https://izlik.org/JA34JW68SK

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Birleşik Krallık dış politikasının ABD’nin stratejik yönelimleriyle ne ölçüde örtüştüğünün analizini hedeflemektedir. Araştırmanın sorusu; “Birleşik Krallık dış politikası, uluslararası düzende normatif ve kurumsal özerklik kapasitesini koruyabilmekte midir, yoksa ülke stratejik ilişkiler ağı içinde bağımlı/uyumlu bir aktör olarak mı hareket etmektedir?” şeklinde formüle edilmiştir. Seçilen strateji belgeleri; karşılaştırmalı olarak incelendiğinde Soğuk Savaş ve sonrası dönemde her iki ülkenin de benzer hedef ve tehdit seti belirlediği görülmektedir. Keza, Birleşik Krallık, post Brexit dönemde “Küresel Britanya” söylemiyle özerk bir küresel aktör imajı sunma iddiasını ortaya koysa da ülkenin büyük ölçüde ABD’nin dış politik yönelimleriyle uyum içinde hareket etmeye devam ettiği anlaşılmaktadır.

Keywords

ABD Dış Politikası , Birleşik Krallık Dış Politikası , Küresel Britanya , Özel İlişki , Strateji Belgeleri

References

• Ambrosio, T. (2010). Constructing a framework of authoritarian diffusion: Concepts, dynamics, and future research. International Studies Perspectives, 11(4), 375–392.
• Armaoğlu, F. (2022). 20. yüzyıl siyasî tarihi (30. baskı). Kronik.
• Arslan, U. (2025). Stratejik savunma ve güvenlik belgeleri ekseninde Birleşik Krallık dış politikası (Doktora tezi, Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesi).
• Ataman, M., & Gökcan, Ö. (2012). Bush dönemi Amerikan dış politikası: Bir aşırı-yayılmacılık denemesi. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi, 7(2), 199–229.
• Avşar, A. K. (2025). 2022 Rusya-Ukrayna savaşı sonrası Çin-Rusya ilişkileri. Küresel Politika ve Uluslararası İlişkiler. https://kapdem.org/2022-rusya-ukrayna-savasi-sonrasi-cin-rusya-iliskileri/
• Best, A., Hanhimäki, J. M., Maiolo, J. A., & Schulze, K. E. (2020). 20. yüzyılın uluslararası tarihi (3. baskı). Siyasal Kitabevi.
• Black, J., Hall, A., Cox, K., Kepe, M., & Silfversten, E. (2017). Defence and security after Brexit. RAND Corporation.
• Brooke-Holland, L., Ares, E., Smith, B., Curtis, J., Dickson, A., Mills, C., Butchard, P., Fella, S., & Dawson, J. (2020). The integrated review: A look ahead to the government’s review [Briefing paper]. House of Commons Library.
• Brooke-Holland, L., Mills, C., & Walker, N. (2024). A guide to British defence reviews (Research Briefing No. 43). House of Commons Library.
• Brooke-Holland, L., Mills, C., & Walker, N. (2023). A brief guide to previous British defence reviews [Research briefing]. House of Commons Library.
• Campbell, M. (1997). British security and defence policy. RUSI Journal, 142(3), 35–38.
• Chalmers, M. (2022). Ukraine, Russia and NATO: The future of deterrence. RUSI Commentary. https://rusi.org
• Chapman, B. (2016). Geopolitics of the 2015 British defense white paper and its historical predecessor. Geopolitics, History, and International Relations, 8(2), 43–58.
• Consterdine, E. (2016). The huge political cost of Blair’s decision to allow Eastern European migrants unfettered access to Britain. The Conversation.
• Cornish, P., & Dorman, A. (2010). Breaking the mould: The United Kingdom strategic defence review 2010. International Affairs, 86(2), 395–410.
• Diamond, J. (2017). Trump scolds NATO allies over defense spending. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/25/politics/trump-nato-financial-payments
• Dilmaç. A. (2024). Ulusal güvenlik stratejisi belgeleri üzerinden Amerika Birleşik Devletleri dış politikası ve uluslararası sistemin analizi (Doktora Tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü).
• Dockrill, M. L. (2002). Britain's retreat from East of Suez: The choice between Europe and the world? Palgrave Macmillan.
• Dodd, T., & Oakes, M. (1998). The strategic defence review White Paper (Research Paper 98/91). House of Commons Library.
• Foerster, S., & Raymond, R. (2017). The US–UK “special relationship” at a critical crossroad. Atlantic Council.
• Günar, A. (2021). Son on yıldaki İngiltere dış politikası (2010–2020). İçinde F. Ç. Oran (Ed.), İngiltere dış politikası (ss. 185–204). Nobel.
• Hill, C. (1993). The capability-expectations gap, or conceptualizing Europe’s international role. Journal of Common Market Studies, 31(3), 305–328.
• HM Government. (1998). Strategic defence review. The Stationery Office.
• HM Government. (2010). Securing Britain in an age of uncertainty: The strategic defence and security review. The Stationery Office. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/62482/strategic-defence-security-review.pdf
• HM Government. (2015). National security strategy and strategic defence and security review 2015: A secure and prosperous United Kingdom. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ national-security-strategy-and-strategic-defence-and-security-review-2015
• HM Government. (2021). Global Britain in a competitive age: The integrated review of security, defence, development and foreign policy. HMSO. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/global-britain-in-a-competitive-age-the-integrated-review-of-security-defence-development-and-foreign-policy
• HM Government. (2023). Integrated review refresh 2023: Responding to a more contested and volatile world (CP 811). HMSO. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/641d72f45155 a2000c6ad5d5/11857435_NS_IR_Refresh_2023_Supply_AllPages_Revision_7_WEB_PDF.pdf
• Howorth, J. (2019). Strategic autonomy and EU–NATO relations. Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(6), 1310–1326.
• Ikenberry, G. J. (2001). After victory: Institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars. Princeton University Press.
• Kuperman, A. J. (2013). A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO's Libya campaign. International Security, 38(1), 105–136.
• Lake, D. A. (2009). Hierarchy in international relations. Cornell University Press.
• McCrisken, T. B. (2003). American exceptionalism and the legacy of Vietnam. Palgrave Macmillan.
• McInnes, C. (1998). Labour’s strategic defence review. International Affairs, 74(4), 823–845.
• Mills, C. (2024). Nuclear weapons at a glance: United Kingdom [Research briefing]. House of Commons Library.
• Navias, M. S. (1989). The Sandys White Paper of 1957 and the move to the British New Look: An analysis of nuclear weapons, conventional forces and strategic planning 1955–57 (Doctoral dissertation, King’s College London).
• Reynolds, D. (1985). A special relationship: Anglo-American relations since 1945. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
• Rogers, P. (1997). Reviewing Britain’s security. International Affairs, 73(4), 655–670.
• Sander, O. (2023). Siyasî tarih 1918–1994. İmge Kitabevi Yayınları.
• Snidal, D. (1985). The limits of hegemonic stability theory. International Organization, 39(4), 579–614.
• Sokullu, E. C. (2017). İngiltere’nin AB ile imtihanı: Siyasal söylemlerde Avrupa-şüpheciliğin evrimi ve Brexit. İçinde F. Akhan (Ed.), Brexit sonrası Birleşik Krallık ve AB’nin geleceği (ss. 11–34). Akademos Yayınları.
• Strong, J. (2015). Why Parliament now decides on war: Tracing the growth of the parliamentary prerogative through Syria, Libya and Iraq. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 17(4), 604–622.
• The White House. (1997). A national security strategy for a new century. https://history.defense.gov/Portals/70/Documents/nss/nss1997.pdf?
• The White House. (2010). National security strategy of the United States of America. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf
• The White House. (2015). National security strategy of the United States of America. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2015_national_security_strategy.pdf
• The White House. (2017). National security strategy of the United States of America. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf
• The White House. (2022). National security strategy of the United States of America. https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf
• Torun, Z., & Çöpoğlu, M. O. (2021). Soğuk Savaş döneminde İngiltere dış politikası. İçinde F. Ç. Oran (Ed.), İngiltere dış politikası (ss. 117–144). Nobel.
• Walt, S. M. (1987). The origins of alliances. Cornell University Press.
• Watt, N., & Hopkins, N. (2013). Cameron forced to rule out British attack on Syria after MPs reject motion. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/29/cameron-british-attack-syria-mps
• Weiler, S. (1987). British Labour and the Cold War: The foreign policy of the Labour governments 1945–1951. Journal of British Studies, 26(1), 54– 82.
• Young, H. (2005). One of us: A biography of Margaret Thatcher. Pan Macmillan.