No account of Jeremy Corbyn's political career could be complete without an assessment of his approach to foreign policy. His professed mission to create a fairer and more equal Britain has been matched by a desire to transform the country's international relations. Prior to becoming Labour's leader, Corbyn's public profile chiefly arose from his stance on a foreign policy issue: his opposition to the Iraq War. Indeed, according to one well-placed source, he would have preferred to serve as foreign secretary rather than as prime minister (Bush 2018). The Orwell Prize-winning journalist Steven Bloomfield summarized, “Foreign policy is Corbyn's passion. While the ins and outs of NHS reform don't tend to interest him, a conversation about healthcare in Latin America can last for hours” (Bloomfield 2018).

While foreign policy brought Corbyn to public notice, his views on controversial international issues provided considerable ammunition for critics at home and abroad. To his opponents, his “terrorist” groups, such as the IRA and Hamas, made him an enemy to his country, and a security risk even as leader of the opposition. Our present purpose is to offer a more general overview and evaluation of Corbyn's foreign policy, in the light of the most cogent criticisms of his detractors. In recent years, a failed leader of the opposition (William Hague) has ended up serving as foreign secretary. It is unlikely (not least on grounds of age) that Jeremy Corbyn's career will follow the same course. But it is permissible to pose the hypothetical question of whether or not Corbyn was really equipped to realize his ambition of serving in this senior ministerial role, not least because in his relatively brief spell as a major political player he had the chance to inspire others who might seek to shape British foreign policy along “Corbynista” lines.

The case against Corbyn

In September 2019, the Washington-based think tank the Hudson Institute published The Prospective Foreign Policy of a Corbyn Government and its US National Security Implications. Since the Institute has strong “conservative” affiliations it was most unlikely to commission a sympathetic study of Corbyn's views.