With the United Kingdom poised to preside over both the G20 and the G7, Prime Minister Andy Burnham has a unique opportunity to usher in a new internationalism grounded not in military posturing, but in the pursuit of a fairer global economy. But he must abandon his predecessor’s defensive approach.
LONDON—Andy Burnham faces no shortage of challenges as the United Kingdom’s latest prime minister. Fortunately, he also has a unique opportunity to lead the way in addressing major global economic issues and redesigning outdated institutions.
Burnham took over after a tumultuous decade bookended by the UK’s decision to leave the European Union in 2016 and the premiership of Keir Starmer, who struggled to convince the public that international cooperation serves British interests. Burnham therefore inherits a foreign policy that feels both defensive and diminished, focused on holding fragile alliances together and cutting foreign-aid budgets dramatically in the name of “progressive realism”—a tagline that inspires no one.
Although threat management may be unavoidable in today’s world, it does not offer people a positive vision. To do that, Burnham should set out to help shape norms and institutions that will outlast today’s chaos. The payoff would be a new internationalism grounded not in military postures, but in the pursuit of a fairer global economy that enables people everywhere to flourish. Such a framing would mirror Burnham’s promise of renewal at home and position Britain to lead on economic cooperation precisely when the old order is being undermined.
The timing is ideal because the UK will hold the G20 presidency in 2027 and the G7 presidency in 2028. Such opportunities are rare; those who seize on them benefit. Many still recall how Prime Minister Gordon Brown helped steady the world economy in 2009, and how his predecessor, Tony Blair, used the 2005 G8 to advance debt relief and aid for Africa.
Burnham should be similarly bold. The safe option is to keep Britain’s head down, flatter a difficult US president, and avoid controversy. But defensiveness will not deliver meaningful results. Launching something new, even without a full consensus, is the better option. That is what South Africa did with the International Panel on Inequality during its G20 presidency, and it is what Brazil did by putting taxation of the super-rich in its Rio leaders’ declaration.
Britain, for its part, could urge concrete action on the debt crises that are strangling dozens of countries, crack down on illicit financial flows, or introduce a minimum tax on billionaires. Leading by example on any of these issues would signal that it wants to shape the future rather than merely salvage remnants of the past. A prime minister who promised to “build a new economy” that delivers fairer outcomes for his constituents in Makerfield should embrace the same goal for people struggling to get by in Maputo or Mumbai.
To that end, Burnham also has an opportunity to break ground on building new institutions for global cooperation. The international legal, political, and economic institutions that Britain helped design in the 20th century increasingly seem ineffective, and some are facing ruthless attacks from allies or even some British politicians (in the case of the European Convention on Human Rights). The answer is not to defend the status quo but to help create a new one.
A good place to start is with the “coalitions of the willing” that are already bringing together small groups of states (often odd bedfellows) to advance a shared agenda. For example, Barbados, France, and Kenya are co-chairing a Global Solidarity Levies Task Force to develop new international fees on aviation, premium flyers, shipping, fossil-fuel extraction, and financial transactions to generate revenues for climate and development finance. Similarly, Colombia and the Netherlands have led an effort to drive progress on the transition away from fossil fuels, and other groupings are working on debt relief, central-bank swap lines, and wealth taxes.
By joining, funding, or simply giving airtime to these initiatives at the G7 or the G20, the UK would send a strong signal that it is not relying only on existing international mechanisms to pursue global goals. It would also help convince countries across the Global South that their voices and leadership are valued.
Though building global consensus seems impossible nowadays, these ongoing efforts should give us hope that progress is still possible. The building blocks of a new 21st century internationalism are already being assembled. In some cases, like the proposal to tax polluting activities through solidarity levies, new initiatives allow a small group of countries to test and study novel approaches without having to achieve a global consensus or overcome vetoes from powerful countries. In other cases, such as the International Panel on Inequality, the goal will be to establish new norms and principles for international cooperation. The more successful these emerging initiatives are, the greater the number of countries that will join them, and the greater the likelihood that new, universal rules and practices will emerge.
Reforms are especially needed in international development, where we are still relying on aid architecture that was designed by a commission in the 1960s. That world no longer exists. Aid now accounts for only a small share of the money flowing to the Global South, and it is based on an outdated donor-recipient model. Promising to restore an aid target of 0.7% of gross national income would inspire neither British voters nor the UK’s southern partners. Instead, Burnham should commission an independent inquiry into what might replace the system altogether, and to test new ideas built on universality and solidarity rather than charity.
There is no doubt that Burnham will have his work cut out for him on diplomacy and defense. But his government also has a chance to help usher in a fairer global economy and a new set of global institutions. After a difficult decade, progress on these fronts would finally give the British people—and the wider world—something to believe in.
