The projection of Britain in the moral maze
Which has the greater claim on state spending, defence or international aid?
Michael Buerk, in the chair on BBC’s Moral Maze
On BBC Radio’s Moral Maze this week, we tackled the competing priorities of international aid and defence spending.
Boris Johnson’s government has increased spending on defence, aiming to modernise Britain’s armed forces after years of diminished funding; but it is reducing international aid from 0.7 per cent of public spending to 0.5 per cent.
Both aid and defence are projections of Britain’s place in the world, but each presents a different face of the country. At a time of unprecedented economic crisis, which should take priority? Is one morally superior to the other? Is the defence of the realm the first duty of a government, or is it more important to relieve poverty in the developing world?
One world-view contends that prioritising investment in defence is jingoistic and problematic, while funding international development is benign and benevolent. Others, however, consider there to be a greater moral obligation towards those closer to home in response to changing threats from malicious regimes, and question whether international aid merely props up dictators, institutionalises corruption and prevents poor countries from creating their own routes to sustainable progress.
My co-panellists were Anne McElvoy, Matthew Taylor and Ash Sarkar. Our guests were Professor Michael Clarke, former Director-General and now a Distinguished Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute; Dr Sam Perlo-Freeman, research co-ordinator at the Campaign Against the Arms Trade; Ian Birrell, journalist and former speech writer for David Cameron; and Dr Sabina Alkire, Director of the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative at Oxford university.
You can listen to the programme on BBC iPlayer here.
Recent posts
Premium subscribers can read my latest exclusive post, which observes that it’s not just the current US president who accuses the media of fake news, by clicking here.
And you can read my previous post that’s available to everyone, on the line connecting the Nuremberg tribunals to modern-day antisemitism, if you click here.
One more thing…
This is how my website works.
It has two subscription levels: my free service and the premium service.
Anyone can sign up to the free service on this website. You can of course unsubscribe at any time by clicking “unsubscribe” at the foot of each email.
Everyone on the free list will receive the full text of pieces I write for outlets such as the Jewish News Syndicate and the Jewish Chronicle, as well as other posts and links to my broadcasting work.
But why not subscribe to my premium service? For that you’ll also receive pieces that I write specially for my premium subscribers. Those articles will not be published elsewhere. They’ll arrive in your inbox as soon as I have written them.
There is a monthly fee of $6.99 for the premium service, or $70 for an annual subscription. Although the fee is charged in US dollars, you can sign up with any credit card. Just click on the “subscribe now” button below to see the available options for subscribing either to the premium or the free service.
A note on subscriptions
If you purchase a subscription to my site, you will be authorising a payment to my company Dirah Associates. In the past, that is the name that may have appeared on your credit card statement. In future, though, the charge should appear instead as Melanie Phillips.
And thank you for following my work.