SAJID JAVID on Monday (14) said “respect for the rule of law” was sacrosanct as he rebelled against Boris Johnson’s legislative bill that would override parts of the Brexit treaty struck with the European Union last year.
The former chancellor was joined by top Tory figures such as former attorney-generals Geoffrey Cox and Jeremy Wright in abstaining from voting on the internal markets bill.
Notably, every living former prime minister -- Conservatives John Major, David Cameron and Theresa May and Labour's Tony Blair and Gordon Brown -- also warned of the risk to Britain's global reputation.
Though the bill managed to clear the first hurdle in Parliament, the prime minister saw two Tory MPs — Sir Roger Gale and Andrew Percy — voting against it.
Johnson had argued that the legislation was a "safety net" against what he claimed were EU threats to impose tariffs on UK internal trade and even stop food going from mainland Britain to Northern Ireland.
However, Javid, who had stepped down as chancellor in February, said: “One of the UK’s greatest strengths is respect for the rule of law.
“Breaking international law is a step that should never be taken lightly. Having carefully studied the UK internal market bill it is not clear to me why it is necessary to do so.
“I will therefore regretfully be unable to support the Bill… and urge the Government to amend it in the coming days.”
In another blow for the government, Conservative MP Rehman Chishti quit as the prime minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief on Monday morning, saying he would not vote for the bill as a “matter of principle”.
“I have real concerns with the UK unilaterally breaking its legal commitments under the Withdrawal Agreement,” he said in his resignation letter to Johnson.
“During my 10 years in Parliament and before that as a Barrister, I have always acted in a manner which respects the rule of law.
“I feel very strongly about keeping the commitments we make; if we give our word, then we must honour it.
“Voting for this bill as it currently stands would be contrary to the values I hold dearest.
“I am only too sorry that our difference on this matter means that I cannot vote for the Bill in its current form, on a matter of principle, and thereby will not be able to continue to serve as your Special Envoy.”
Cox, who was axed during the cabinet reshuffle in February, echoed similar views, saying: “It is unconscionable that this country, justly famous for its regard for the rule of law around the world, should act in such a way.”
He added that the UK should opt for “lawful remedies open to us… rather than violating international law and a solemn treaty”.
“What I can say from my perspective is we simply cannot approve or endorse a situation in which we go back on our word, given solemnly not only by the British Government and on behalf of the British Crown, but also by Parliament when we ratified this in February, unless there are extreme circumstances which arrive involving a breach of duty of the good faith by the EU,” he told Radio Times.
“We signed up, we knew what we were signing, we simply can't seek to nullify those ordinary consequences of doing that and I simply can't support that.
“The breaking of the law leads ultimately to very long-term and permanent damage to this country's reputation and it is also a question of honour to me.”
Shadow business secretary Ed Miliband, who stood in for self-isolating Labour leader Keir Starmer, targeted the prime minister, saying the issue highlighted “incompetence” and “failure of governance”.
“And I have to say to him, this is not just legislative hooliganism on any issue, it is on the most sensitive issues of all.”
He added that there was only “one person responsible” for the logjam. “This is his deal, it's his mess, it's his failure,” he said.
Johnson, however, remained unrelenting even as many Conservative MPs planned to pressure him to amend the bill before it is taken up for discussion at the committee level.
He said the bill will ensure "unfettered access" for trade after that within the UK's four nations -- Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
But the legislation would see London unilaterally regulate UK trade and state aid within Northern Ireland -- in violation of the Brexit treaty, that demands Brussels have a say.
The prime minister acknowledged some personal "unease" at giving ministers powers to override the Brexit treaty but said they would not be needed if a trade deal was agreed as hoped with Brussels.
"What we cannot do now is tolerate a situation where our EU counterparts seriously believe that they have the power to break up our country," he said.
"That illusion must be decently despatched."
Johnson, though, said it was essential to counter "absurd" threats from Brussels including that London put up trade barriers between Britain and Northern Ireland and impose a food blockade - steps he said threatened the UK's unity.
"The EU still have not taken this revolver off the table," he told Parliament before the vote. "What we cannot do now is tolerate a situation where our EU counterparts seriously believe that they have the power to break up our country."
Home Secretary Priti Patel was among stalwarts who backed Johnson. “When it comes to preserving the integrity of the UK and clearly delivering for the people of Northern Ireland... we’ve said from day one that we would always stand by our word and not compromise when it comes to unfettered access in goods and services but also standing by the Good Friday Agreement,” she said on BBC Breakfast.
TENSIONS with Pakistan, fluctuating ties with Bangladesh, and growing Chinese influence in Nepal and Sri Lanka have complicated India’s neighbourhood policy, a top foreign policy and security expert has said.
C Raja Mohan, distinguished professor at the Motwani Jodeja Institute for American Studies at OP Jindal Global University, has a new book out, called India and the Rebalancing of Asia.
He also described how India’s engagement with the US, Japan, Australia and Europe has moved from symbolism to one of substance. Raja Mohan said, “After independence, India withdrew from regional security politics, focusing on global issues and non-alignment. But the past decade has seen a reversal. India is now back in the Asian balance of power. The very concept of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ reflects that, putting the ‘Indo’ into the ‘Pacific.’”
The idea, he explained, has deep historical roots: “The British once viewed the Indian and Pacific Oceans as interconnected realms. Now, after decades of separation, those spaces are merging again.”
Narendra Modi with Xi Jinping and (right)Vladimir Putin at last month’s SCO summit in China
While India once aspired to build a “post-Western order” alongside China, those dreams have long since faded, according to the expert.
“Contradictions between India and China have sharpened,” he said, citing territorial disputes, a $100 billion (£75bn) trade deficit, and China’s growing influence among India’s neighbours.
By contrast, India’s ties with the US and Europe have strengthened.
“Where once India shunned security cooperation with Washington, it is now deeply engaged,” he said. Yet he emphasised that India remains an independent actor, “not a traditional ally like Japan or Australia.”
His comments were made during the Adelphi series, hosted by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) last month. According to the expert, who is also a visiting research professor at the National University of Singapore, the return of India to regional security politics marks a significant change in its foreign policy since independence. Popular discussions about the “rise of Asia” tend to oversimplify what Raja Mohan explained was a deeply uneven transformation. “It’s more accurate to say Asia as a whole is rising,” he said, adding, “but not evenly. China has risen much faster than the rest.”
This imbalance has created internal contradictions within Asia, according to the academic. “China’s sense of entitlement to regional dominance and its territorial claims have provoked reactions from other Asian countries,” he said.
While China’s economic ascent, once “a marriage of Western capital and Chinese labour”, that relationship has strained over the past 15 years as the Asian country grew into a global military and economic powerhouse, according to Raja Mohan.
And the US, which previously nurtured China’s growth, now seeks to restore balance in Asia, shifting from a policy of engagement to one of cautious competition, he said.
Dwelling on India’s rise, he said, “The question is not whether India can match China alone, but whether it can help build coalitions that limit unilateralism. History shows weaker states can play crucial balancing roles, as China once did against the Soviet Union.”
He explored how the US-China and India-China dynamics might evolve, particularly under US president Donald Trump.
“Some believe the US is retrenching to focus on Asia, others think Trump might seek a grand bargain with China,” Raja Mohan said. “Much depends on how Washington manages its ties with Russia and its global posture.”
He also described how India’s engagement with the US, Japan, Australia and Europe has moved from symbolism to one of substance. Raja Mohan said, “After independence, India withdrew from regional security politics, focusing on global issues and non-alignment. But the past decade has seen a reversal. India is now back in the Asian balance of power. The very concept of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ reflects that, putting the ‘Indo’ into the ‘Pacific.’”
The idea, he explained, has deep historical roots: “The British once viewed the Indian and Pacific Oceans as interconnected realms. Now, after decades of separation, those spaces are merging again.”
While India once aspired to build a “post-Western order” alongside China, those dreams have long since faded, according to the expert.
“Contradictions between India and China have sharpened,” he said, citing territorial disputes, a $100 billion (£75bn) trade deficit, and China’s growing influence among India’s neighbours.
By contrast, India’s ties with the US and Europe have strengthened.
“Where once India shunned security cooperation with Washington, it is now deeply engaged,” he said. Yet he emphasised that India remains an independent actor, “not a traditional ally like Japan or Australia.”
His comments were made during the Adelphi series, hosted by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) last month. According to the expert, who is also a visiting research professor at the National University of Singapore, the return of India to regional security politics marks a significant change in its foreign policy since independence. Popular discussions about the “rise of Asia” tend to oversimplify what Raja Mohan explained was a deeply uneven transformation. “It’s more accurate to say Asia as a whole is rising,” he said, adding, “but not evenly. China has risen much faster than the rest.”
This imbalance has created internal contradictions within Asia, according to the academic. “China’s sense of entitlement to regional dominance and its territorial claims have provoked reactions from other Asian countries,” he said.
While China’s economic ascent, once “a marriage of Western capital and Chinese labour”, that relationship has strained over the past 15 years as the Asian country grew into a global military and economic powerhouse, according to Raja Mohan.
And the US, which previously nurtured China’s growth, now seeks to restore balance in Asia, shifting from a policy of engagement to one of cautious competition, he said.
Dwelling on India’s rise, he said, “The question is not whether India can match China alone, but whether it can help build coalitions that limit unilateralism. History shows weaker states can play crucial balancing roles, as China once did against the Soviet Union.”
He explored how the US-China and India-China dynamics might evolve, particularly under US president Donald Trump.
“Some believe the US is retrenching to focus on Asia, others think Trump might seek a grand bargain with China,” Raja Mohan said. “Much depends on how Washington manages its ties with Russia and its global posture.”
China, he noted, has already toned down its aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomacy, realising that assertiveness has backfired. Yet the underlying structural contradictions between China and both the US and India “are unlikely to disappear.”
Asked about India’s balancing act between the US and Russia, especially after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, the expert was pragmatic.
“India has steadily moved closer to the US and the West, but Trump’s trade-first approach has caused turbulence,” Raja Mohan said.
He cited the threats of high tariffs on Indian imports and resentment over trade imbalances with Washington DC.
On Russia, Raja Mohan’s view was that the relationship has been “in slow decline since the 1990s.”
While India’s GDP now outpaces Russia’s, it continues to engage Moscow for practical reasons. “India’s oil purchases from Russia rose from two per cent to forty per cent after 2022. That’s pragmatism, not alignment,” Raja Mohan said.
He added that prime minister Narendra Modi’s recent handshakes with China’s president Xi Jinping and Russia’s president Vladimir Putin at the Shanghai Co-operation Organization (SCO) summit in China were “signals, reminders to the West that India has options.”
Raja Mohan said India was at the cusp of a historic transformation. “India once provided security across Asia - in both world wars, millions of Indian soldiers fought overseas. That history was forgotten when India withdrew from global security,” he said.
“Now we are reclaiming that role. Ideally, the partnership with the US is the best. But if not, India and other Asian powers will have to shoulder the burden themselves.”
“Japan, Korea, India, Australia - all will have to do more on their own,” he said. “We’ll need to pull up our own bootstraps.”
Dr Benjamin Rhode, senior fellow at IISS, chaired the session.
aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomacy, realising that assertiveness has backfired. Yet the underlying structural contradictions between China and both the US and India “are unlikely to disappear.”
Asked about India’s balancing act between the US and Russia, especially after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, the expert was pragmatic.
“India has steadily moved closer to the US and the West, but Trump’s trade-first approach has caused turbulence,” Raja Mohan said.
He cited the threats of high tariffs on Indian imports and resentment over trade imbalances with Washington DC.
On Russia, Raja Mohan’s view was that the relationship has been “in slow decline since the 1990s.”
While India’s GDP now outpaces Russia’s, it continues to engage Moscow for practical reasons. “India’s oil purchases from Russia rose from two per cent to forty per cent after 2022. That’s pragmatism, not alignment,” Raja Mohan said.
He added that prime minister Narendra Modi’s recent handshakes with China’s president Xi Jinping and Russia’s president Vladimir Putin at the Shanghai Co-operation Organization (SCO) summit in China were “signals, reminders to the West that India has options.”
Raja Mohan said India was at the cusp of a historic transformation. “India once provided security across Asia - in both world wars, millions of Indian soldiers fought overseas. That history was forgotten when India withdrew from global security,” he said.
“Now we are reclaiming that role. Ideally, the partnership with the US is the best. But if not, India and other Asian powers will have to shoulder the burden themselves.”
“Japan, Korea, India, Australia - all will have to do more on their own,” he said. “We’ll need to pull up our own bootstraps.”
Dr Benjamin Rhode, senior fellow at IISS, chaired the session.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.