Margaret Thatcher: Origins of the Iron Lady and Deep Reasons Behind Brexit
Margaret Thatcher’s “Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World” truly excite with the straightforward word put in each sentence without “blah blah” so common among many politicians of the past and, unfortunately, the present too. In the book, Thatcher reflects and provides analysis on the past events focusing on the questions of national security, alliance partnership with America, the strategic importance of NATO, economic and political integration in the European Union, and the consequences of the end of the Cold War.
As a believer in a strong military, Thatcher expressed her concerns about the Western world’s focus on human rights with much less attention put on the defense. She highly criticized liberal politicians who believed that globalization would bring global peace. “Thatcher urges a return to the exercise of state power in pursuit of the national interest. But her essays are not simple affirmations of realpolitik statecraft” but much more (Ikenberry, 2002).
The Iron Lady of the Western World
In the Soviet Union and later post-Soviet states, Margaret Thatcher became famous as the Iron Lady. The nickname comes from her 1976 speech in which she expressed her highly anti-communist stance. “The original Russian item carried the headline ‘Zheleznaya Dama Ugrozhayet,’ which then Reuters bureau chief in Moscow Robert Evans translated as ‘Iron Lady Wields Threats’ (Fisher, 2013). During the speech at Selborne Hall a week later, Thatcher said “I stand before you tonight in my Red Star evening gown, my face softly made up and my fair hair gently waved, the Iron Lady of the Western world.” She added, “Yes, I am an iron lady” (Fisher, 2013).
During that very speech, her main reference point became the military disbalance between the Soviet Army and NATO, as well as the expansionist policy undertaken by the Soviets through communist ideology and military power. Thatcher stressed the cuts in the military budget, especially focusing on the UK, and highly criticized the Defense Secretary and claimed that maybe he “should change his title, for the sake of accuracy, to the Secretary for Insecurity” (Thatcher, 1976). She continued on to stress the importance of NATO in the safety and security of the UK, the Western world overall, and freedom, and said “We look to our alliance with American and NATO as the main guarantee of our own security and, in the world beyond Europe, the United States is still the prime champion of freedom” (Thatcher, 1976). Therefore, the growing gap between NATO and the Soviet Army is a threat to the safety and security of not only the UK but also America and the Western world. To make the difference vivid, she said “the forces of Russia and her allies — in Central Europe outnumber NATO’s by 150,000 men, nearly 10,000 tanks and 2,600 aircraft. We cannot afford to let that gap get bigger” (Thatcher, 1976).
Thatcher was very straightforward while talking about the role of the UK in the world arena. Primarily, she claimed, “Our capacity to play a constructive role in world affairs is of course related to our economic and military strength.” (Thatcher, 1976). She continued by claiming that “Soviet military power will not disappear just because we refuse to look at it. And we must assume that it is there to be used — as threat or as force — unless we maintain the necessary deterrents.” (Thatcher, 1976). The disbalance of power, and the growing gap between soviets and the collective West, will certainly let Soviets dictate their rules and communism, not liberalism widen its borders of influence and conquer more minds in all continents, including Europe.
Deeper Integration: Turning EU into Superstate
In Thatcher’s book “Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World,” there are many references to the European Economic Communities that transformed into the European Union in 1993. Thatcher is firmly against UK’s deeper integration and explains her points via showcasing how the federalist euroenthusiasts strive to create a superstate through the European Union that will eventually undermine the nation-states.
To clarify what she means, Thatchers claims that over time EU creates institutions that are the essential attributes of a conventional sovereign state. Currency, army, executive and legislative body, and judicial system are essential attributes of any sovereign country and the EU continuously works on creating and developing such institutions. EU Commission, Council of the European Union, European Parliament, European Court of Justice, European Central Bank, and attempts to create EU Army by starting with something called “Rapid reaction force” (RRF) are the indicators proving the EU’s intentions to turn into a superstate.
The European Commission is the EU’s executive arm that implements the decisions of the European Parliament and the Council of the EU. The European Parliament is the directly-elected EU body with legislative, supervisory, and budgetary responsibilities. European Court of Justice, ensures that EU law is interpreted and applied the same in every EU country; ensuring countries and EU institutions abide by EU law. This is how a superstate-yet-to-become EU pushes its interventionist policy upon member states and undermines their sovereign rights. In the book Thatcher says “The EU, or rather the class that is in power, cannot accept the value of the idea of independence, since it undermines the very concept of a united Europe. Therefore, instead of stimulating the development of nation-states and their progress, the EU will always try to suppress or undermine it” (Тэтчер, 2021, 349).
The institutions created by the EU are true indicators of its intentions of the establishment of a superstate to eventually undermine sovereign nation-states. Superstate means supernationalims and Thatcher claims that “if nationalism is condemned for the oppression of national minorities, then supranationalism deserves even more condemnation, since it involves the subjugation of entire states” (Тэтчер, 2021, 357). Thatcher continues by referencing Napoleon who aspired to unite Europe by leading it and its later follower Adolf Hitler who had very similar dreams. Thatcher primarily says “in Adolf Hitler, with his aspirations for European dominance, one can easily see a follower of Napoleon. The terminology used by the Nazis is eerily similar to that used by today’s Eurofederalists. Hitler, in particular, spoke arrogantly in 1943 of “a bunch of small nations” that must be destroyed in order to create a united Europe” (Тэтчер, 2021, 358). She continues by saying “I do not at all mean to say that today’s supporters of European unity are inclined towards totalitarianism, although it was not the propaganda of tolerance that brought them fame” (Тэтчер, 2021, 358).
Regarding, EU’s attempts to create an EU Army called Rapid Reaction Force (RRF), Thatcher by referencing the military expenses of the member states claimed that EU Army cannot be technologically as advanced as NATO. Other than that, the US will certainly consider it as an attempt to create a counterbalance to NATO which will deepen the security problems of Europe and UK should certainly restrain from taking part in such affairs. She continued by claiming that “even today, the American military presence in Europe is the most important guarantee of the security of the European continent in the face of threats from the countries of the former Soviet Union and the renewed ambitions of Germany. Believe me, this is by no means an exaggeration” (Тэтчер, 2021, 358).
When Labour Party leader and very pro-European Tony Blair came to power in 1997, the creation of the Rapid Reaction Force (RRF) was at the center of the new administration’s attention. Mr. Blair claimed that “Britain would be at the “heart of Europe” (Tisdall, 2001). “At a summit in Le Touquet UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Jacques Chirac agreed to pool military resources and to ensure that they had one battle-ready aircraft carrier group at sea at all times” (“Defence ties,” 2003). It was in Le Touquet that UK and France reached a mutual agreement on “developing the EU’s ability to act in the face of new threats… means we must intensify efforts to improve military capabilities,” Mr Blair and Mr Chirac said in a joint statement” (“Defence ties,” 2003). It is however fun how Mr. Blair couldn’t explain himself during the meeting with US President George Bush at Camp David and simply rejected everything. “… Tony Blair, assured the US president, George Bush, that EU plans to form a defence force pose no threat to Nato than along comes France’s top soldier suggesting exactly the opposite” (Tisdall, 2001). Thatcher came to be right in her analysis regarding EU Army and NATO.
In addition to that, Thatcher also expressed her concerns about EU’s internal issues and the decision-making process. Primarily, she claims that “the (EU) leadership is incredibly eloquent, but its decisions are a matter of trade” (Тэтчер, 2021, 372). This open reference to the corruption inside the EU is not the only one the reader can see in the book. In fact, there are many instances of that. The other example is Thatcher’s this quote. “An almost religious reverence for the word ‘Europe’ goes hand in hand with overtly materialistic chicanery and corruption” (Тэтчер, 2021, 356).
Thatcher’s opinion regarding UK’s further integration in the EU is clear and well-argumented. In the book, she shares a quote from Winston Churchill that she agrees with. “We have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed. If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea” (Тэтчер, 2021, 393).
*The quotes from Thatcher’s books “Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World” are translated into English from Russian.
References
Тэтчер, М., (2021), Искусство управления государством. Стратегии для меняющегося мира. Альпина Паблишер. ISBN 978–5–9614–7039–0
Ikenberry, J., (2002), Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World, Retrieved from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2002-09-01/statecraft-strategies-changing-world
Jackson, B., and Saunders, R.,(2012), Makin Thatchers Britain. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/making-thatchers-britain/varieties-of-thatcherism/BA0EEE4AC26B0BBD3F14ADC4C8ECC9F0
Young, H. (2021, October 9). Margaret Thatcher. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Margaret-Thatcher
Thatcher, M., (1976), Speech at Kensington Town Hall (“Britain Awake”) (The Iron Lady), Retrieved from https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/102939
Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopaedia (2021, March 25). John Major. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Major
Fisher, M., (2013), ‘Irony Lady’: How a Moscow propagandist gave Margaret Thatcher her famous nickname, Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/04/08/irony-lady-how-a-moscow-propagandist-gave-margaret-thatcher-her-famous-nickname/
Tisdall, S., (March 29, 2001), Conflict looms over rapid reaction force, Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/mar/29/worlddispatch.simontisdall
UK and France boost defence ties, (2003), BBC, Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2726111.stm
