Matsayin Birtaniya a duniya yakan ta'allaka ne da makaman nukiliya, ta'addanci da kyakkyawar dangantakarta da Amurka. Birtaniya ita ce babbar ƙasar duniya tsawon shekaru 150 har zuwa Yaƙin Duniya na Biyu, inda ta yi nasarar dakatar da yunkurin Napoleon na mamaye Turai, sannan yunkurin Jamus na mamaye Turai a farkon karni na 20. Haka kuma Birtaniya ce ta kasance a gaba wajen tsayayya da yunkurin Hitler na mamaye Turai. Muradun Birtaniya ba su canza ba tsawon shekaru.

Britain's role in the world usually centres on nuclear weapons, terrorism and the special relationship with the US. Britain’s was the worlds superpower for 150 years until WW2 where it successfully halted Napoleon’s attempt at conquering Europe, then Germany’s attempts at occupying Europe in the early 20th century. It was again Britain who was at the forefront of facing against Hitler’s attempts at conquering Europe. British interests have not changed over the years.

Yakin Duniya ta Biyu ta yi wa Birtaniya illa har ta kai ga kawo ƙarshen Daular Birtaniya da matsayinta na ƙasa mai ƙarfi a duniya. Wannan ya faru ne saboda Birtaniya ta kusan fita hayyacinta daga tattalin arziki tun Yakin Duniya ta Ɗaya. Rundunar sojanta ta yi ƙarfin fiye da kima, kuma Birtaniya ba ta da ikon shiga wani yaƙi kuma. Shi ya sa a zamanin bayan yaƙi, burin Birtaniya na duniya ya takaitu saboda hakikanin tattalin arzikinta. Saboda haka Birtaniya ta ci gaba da taka rawa a duniya ta hanyar shiga harkokin duniya, amma ba ta iya sauya daidaiton ikon duniya gaba ɗaya ba. Fareed Zakaria, marubucin jaridar Newsweek na harkokin duniya, a littafinsa mai suna ‘The Post American World,’ ya bayyana manufar Birtaniya da cewa: "Hotunan Roosevelt, Stalin da Churchill a Taron Yalta a watan Fabrairu na 1945 na iya ɓad da kai kaɗan. Babu wani 'manyan uku' a Yalta. Akwai 'manyan biyu' da wani ɗan siyasa mai basira wanda ya iya ci gaba da kasancewa a cikin wasa shi da ƙasarsa, har Birtaniya ta riƙe abubuwa da yawa na babban ƙarfin ƙasa har zuwa ƙarshen karni na 20."29

World War Two consumed Britain to such an extent that it brought an end to the British Empire and its international standing. This was because Britain was virtually bankrupt from WW1. Its army was overstretched and Britain was not in a position to enter another war. This is why in the post war era, British global aims have been restricted by its economic reality. For this reason Britain worked and continues to have a role in the world by partaking in global issues, however it is unable to completely shift the global balance of power. Fareed Zakaria, the Newsweek international columnist in his book ‘The Post American World,’ encapsulated British policy: "The photographs of Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill at the Yalta Conference in February 1945 are somewhat misleading. There was no 'big three' at Yalta. There was a 'big two' plus one brilliant political entrepreneur who was able to keep himself and his country in the game, so that Britain maintained many elements of great powerdom well into the late 20th century."29

Manufofin Birtaniya a yau an gina su ne a kan samun rawa a Turai da kuma yin tasiri ga Amurka. Masu tsara manufofi na Birtaniya sun amince da raunin ƙasar bayan Yaƙin Duniya na Biyu, kuma sun ƙirƙiri manufar kiyayewa maimakon gwabzawa kai tsaye da Amurka. Birtaniya ta sami nasarar cimma muradunta ta hanyar kiyaye burinta na duniya, tana aiki tare da Amurka da Tarayyar Turai, a lokaci guda kuma tana ƙoƙarin karkatar da manufofinsu, sauya su, rikitar da su da kuma takaita su. Manufofin Birtaniya na baya-bayan nan wajen cimma muradunta sun nuna cewa a siyasance Birtaniya a matsayinta na ƙasa koyaushe za ta yi gogayya da Amurka, ammaban da haka, ba ta da albarkatu ko tattalin arziƙi da zai ba ta damar cimma wani abu mai muhimmanci.

British foreign policy today is built upon having a role in Europe and influencing the US. British policy makers have accepted the nation's weakness after WW2 and developed a policy of preservation rather then outright competition with the US. Britain has managed to achieve its interests through a policy of preserving its global ambitions by working with the US and the EU, whilst at the same time working to divert, alter, complicate and limit the aims of both. Britain’s recent policies to achieve its interests show that politically Britain as a nation will always compete with the US, however beyond this it lacks the resources or the economy to achieve anything substantial.

Burtaniya ta kawo cikas ga shirin Amurka ta hanyar ceto gwamnatin Gaddafi daga hannun masu tsattsauran ra'ayin mazan jiya na Amurka waɗanda, bayan harin 11 ga Satumba, suke son a canza gwamnati a Libya. Burtaniya ta matsa wa Gaddafi lamba har ya amince da rawar da Libya ta taka a bala'in Lockerbie, kuma ta tabbatar da sakin Al-Megrahi a shekarar 2009, wanda hakan ya tabbatar mata da samun ingantaccen man fetur daga Afirka.

Britain frustrated US plans by rescuing Gaddafi's government from the clutches of American neoconservatives who after September 11 wanted regime change in Libya. Britain manipulated Gaddafi into accepting Libya’s role in the Lockerbie disaster and secured the release of Al-Megrahi in 2009, securing in turn a stable supply of Africa’s oil.

A Afghanistan Birtaniya ta taka rawar da ba ta dace ba. Bayan shekaru takwas na yaki, kawayen yammacin duniya ba su kusa da kayar da Taliban ba. A yayin da duk wadanda ke da muradi a Afghanistan suka taru a London a watan Janairun 2009 don kulla yarjejeniya da za ta jawo Taliban da tayin mukaman gwamnati, Birtaniya ta bayyana tana kara dagula kasancewar Amurka a kudancin Afghanistan, inda yawancin fadan ke ci gaba. Lardin Helmand, inda sojojin Birtaniya suke, har yanzu ba shi da tsaro bayan duk wadannan shekaru. Birtaniya ta kulla yarjejeniya da Taliban a kudu, wanda ya hada da bada cin hanci ga Taliban, kamar yadda binciken jaridar London Times a 2007 ya bayyana, inda aka kashe sama da fam miliyan 1.5 wajen bada cin hanci ga mambobin Taliban. Haka kuma, bincike da kungiyar masana ta Afghanistan Analysts Network, wata cibiyar tunani mai zamanta a Kabul, ta yi a cikin rahoton mai taken Golden Surrender, ta soki sosai tsarin Zaman Lafiya da Sulhu (PTS) da Birtaniya ke goyon baya, wanda aka kafa a 2005, inda ta ce an bar shi yana tangal-tangal karkashin mummunar shugabanci, ba tare da jarin siyasa ko na kudi da yake bukata ba.

In Afghanistan the UK has played an ominous role. After eight years of war the western allies are no closer to defeating the Taliban. Whilst all those with interests in Afghanistan met in London in January 2009 to hammer out a deal to entice the Taliban with offers of government positions, Britain appears to have complicated America's presence in South Afghanistan where most of the fighting still continues. The Helmand province where British troops are stationed is still not secure after all these years. Britain cut deals with the Taliban in the South which included bribing the Taliban, the London Times investigation in 2007 revealed over £1.5 million was spent in bribing members of the Taliban.30 Similarly Research by the independent Afghanistan Analysts Network, a Kabul-based think tank, in a report, titled Golden Surrender, was highly critical of the British-backed Peace and Reconciliation Scheme (PTS), established in 2005, which it says has been left to flounder under bad leadership with neither the political nor the financial capital it required.

Amurka ce ta shiga tsakani wajen cimma yarjejeniyar zaman lafiya ta Naivasha a shekarar 2005, wadda ta kai ga kawo karshen yakin basasa tsakanin babbar kungiyar 'yan tawaye, Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A), da gwamnatin Sudan. Sharuddan yarjejeniyar sun hada da matakai iri-iri da suka ba Kudu 'yancin kai na cikin gida da kuma damar ballewa a shekarar 2011, lokacin da yarjejeniyar za ta kare. Ingila da Faransa duka sun ba Chadi makamai, wadda ke goyon baya tare da ba 'yan tawaye a Darfur makamai, lamarin da ya haifar da matsalar Darfur. Kasashen biyu sun yi nasarar mayar da batun Darfur na kasa da kasa, lamarin da ya dagula shirin Amurka na raba Kudancin Sudan da mayar da ita kasa mai cin gashin kanta. Maimakon haka, yanzu Amurka dole ta magance matsalar Darfur, wanda hakan ke jinkirta shirinta na Kudu.

America brokered the Naivasha peace accord in 2005, which culminated in the eventual termination of the civil war between the main rebel group, the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) and the Sudanese government. The terms of the agreement included a variety of measures that gave the South autonomy and the prospects of secession in 2011 when the deal expires. Both Britain and France provided arms to Chad, which supports and arms the rebels in Darfur, which created the Darfur issue. Both nations have successfully internationalised the issue of Darfur and complicated US plans to separate the South of Sudan and turn it into an independent nation. Instead the US must now deal with the Darfur issue thus delaying its plans for the South.

A Lebanon a cikin kisan gillar da aka yi wa manyan 'yan siyasa ya raba ƙasar sosai zuwa sansani biyu: wanda ke goyon bayan Syria/Hizbullah da wanda ke goyon bayan EU. Ƙawancen 8 ga Maris, wanda Hizbullah ke jagoranta, ya yi amfani da ikon ƙin amincewa da ƙuri'a (veto) don sa a yi wahalar kafa gwamnati. Dukkan Birtaniya da Faransa sun yi hulɗa da ƙawancen 14 ga Maris, wanda Ƙungiyar Future ta Saad Hariri ke jagoranta, don su ci gaba da kasancewa masu tasiri a siyasar Lebanon. Hizbullah ya yi nasarar tabbatar da cewa an kare muradun Amurka a Lebanon ta hanyar amfani da ikon ƙin amincewa da ƙuri'a, abin da ya sa babu wata jam'iyyar masu goyon bayan EU da ta samu rinjaye, don haka ba ta iya kafa gwamnati da kanta ba. Ta haka ne Amurka ba ta iya mayar da Lebanon sansaninta ba.

In Lebanon the assassinations of prominent politicians have deeply divided Lebanon into pro-Syrian/Hizbullah and pro-EU camps. The Hezbollah-led March 8 coalition utilised its veto vote to complicate the forming of a government. Both Britain and France have engaged with the March 14 coalition led by Saad Hariri's Future Movement to maintain their relevance in Lebanese politics. Hizbullah has successfully ensured US interests are protected in Lebanon by utilising its veto vote resulting in none of the pro-EU parties from achieving a majority and therefore unilaterally forming a government. In this way the US has been unable to turn Lebanon into a US stronghold.

Duk da cewa Birtaniya memba ce a kwamitin P5 + 1 da ke ƙoƙarin sa Iran ta bi ka'ida tare da dakatar da yunƙurinta na tace Uranium zuwa matakin ƙera makamai, ta yi amfani da matsayinta wajen dagula muradun Amurka. A zaɓen Iran na 2009, Birtaniya tare da Turai sun ƙara girman sakamakon zaɓen fiye da kima, kuma sun yi aiki don amfani da lamarin. Birtaniya ta ce gwamnatin Iran na buƙatar magance halastattun damuwar masu zanga-zanga; haka kuma ba su amince da halaccin Ahmadinejad ba. Amurka kuwa, wadda ke neman ƙaƙabawa ƙasar takunkumi mai tsanani, a zahiri ta goyi bayan gwamnatin ta hanyar cewa lamarin al'amari ne na cikin gida na Iran. Birtaniya da Faransa sun yi ƙoƙarin yin tasiri a kan zanga-zangar, amma yunƙuri ne mai rauni na kawar da gwamnatin Ahmadinejad. Haka kuma Amurka ta yi amfani da membobin Majalisar Ɗinkin Duniya marasa na dindindin domin ta ci gaba da takunkumin man fetur mai illa a kan Iran, duk da matsin lamba daga Birtaniya. Ga Amurka, rikicin nukiliya yana cimma manufofinta da dama a yankin, shi ya sa rikicin ba ya kaiwa ga wani matsaya ta ƙarshe, duk da abin da ake faɗa a lokacin. Ta hanyar aiki tare da Amurka kan wannan batu, Birtaniya ta yi aiki wajen raunana Amurka.

Whilst Britain is member of the P5 + 1 commission attempting to bring Iran in line and halt its attempts to enrich Uranium to weapons grade standard, it has used its role to complicate American interests. In the Iranian elections in 2009 Britain alongside Europe blew the election result out of proportion and worked to exploit the situation. Britain argued that the Iranian regime needs to address the legitimate concerns of the protesters; they also didn’t recognize the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad. The US on the other hand, who is looking to impose harsh sanctions on the country, actually supported the regime by arguing that the issue was an Iranian domestic matter. Britain and France had tried to influence the protests, but it was a weak attempt to bring down the Ahmadinejad’s regime. Similarly the US made use of the non-permanent members of the United Nations in the face increased pressure from Britain to push ahead with crippling gasoline sanctions against Iran. For the US the nuclear stand-off achieves a number of its aims in the region, this is why the stand off never reaches anything conclusive, whatever the rhetoric at the time. By working with the US on the issue Britain has worked to undermine the US.

Gwamnatin Birtaniya tana ganin cikakken keɓewa daga Tarayyar Turai a matsayin abin da ba zai yiwu ba. Turai tana kusa sosai kuma tana da girma sosai, don haka ba za a iya yin watsi da ita kawai ba. Gwamnatocin Birtaniya da suka biyo baya sun yi imani cewa ta hanyar shiga harkoki, London za ta iya yin tasiri a kan ci gaban Tarayyar Turai da kuma alkiblar manufofinta a ƙarshe. Ba ta adawa da haɗakar siyasa ta Turai, muddin London ba za ta zama kamar Luxembourg ba ta narke cikin Tarayyar Turai, tana son samun babban kujera a teburin irin wannan haɗaka.

The British establishment views complete isolationism from the EU as unrealistic. Europe is too close and too large to be simply ignored. Successive British governments believe that through engagement, London can influence the EU’s development and the ultimate direction of its policies. It is not opposed to a European political union, as long as London does not turn into Luxemburg and melt into the EU, it wants a prominent seat at the table of such a union.

Birtaniya ta yi nasarar kiyaye matsayinta a wasan siyasar duniya ta hanyar shiga cikin dukkan al'amuran duniya. Misali shi ne yakin Afghanistan. Birtaniya ba ta da wani muhimmin muradi a kasar, amma ta shiga yakin da Amurka ke jagoranta domin ta ci gaba da kasancewa mai muhimmanci, ta haka za ta iya yin tasiri wajen tsara sakamakon rikicin. Wannan shi ne kawai abin da Birtaniya za ta samu; ba za ta taba kwace matsayin babbar kasar duniya daga Amurka ba, domin ba ta da karfin soja, tattalin arziki ko albarkatun da za su ba ta damar hakan.

Britain has successfully kept itself in the international game through participating in all international issues. An example of this is the Afghan war, Britain has no overriding interests in the country, however it has participated in the US led war to keep itself relevant and in this way it is able to shape the outcome of the conflict. This is all Britain will achieve; it will never shift the worlds superpower from its post as it lacks the power, economy or resources.

Duk da cewa Birtaniya tana da tattalin arziki na fam tiriliyan 1.5, wanda shi ne na shida a duniya, Birtaniya ba ta da ƙarfin masana'antu da zai ba ta damar kalubalantar Amurka. Birtaniya tana da manufofi na duniya kuma ta iya dabarun siyasa sosai; sai dai tana yin fiye da ƙarfinta. Birtaniya ta yi fatara saboda kuɗin yakin Duniya ta ɗaya, don haka ba ta da halin kalubalantar tashin Jamus ta Nazi, kuma wannan a wata hanya yana bayyana dalilin manufar sulhu ta Neville Chamberlain. Sai dai da yake Jamus ta Hitler ta mamaye yawancin Turai kuma tana kusa da cire Birtaniya daga matsayin babbar ƙasa a duniya, Birtaniya ta shiga yaki don dakile ci gaban Jamus, yayin da Tarayyar Soviet ta kaddamar da harin gabas, Birtaniya da Amurka kuma suka kaddamar da sanannen harin sauka na D-day a Faransa, sai Jamus ta sha kaye a 1945. Amma ba Birtaniya ce ta ci Jamus ba – Tarayyar Soviet da Amurka ne suka ci ta. Birtaniya ta lalace, kasar ta zama kufai, kuma ta fuskar tattalin arziki Daular Birtaniya ba ta da halin ci gaba da biyan kuɗin daular ta a duniya.

Whilst Britain has a £1.5 trillion economy, the 6th largest in the world Britain lacks the industrial base to pose any challenge to the US. Britain has global aims and has mastered the art of political manoeuvring; however it punches above its weight. Britain was bankrupt due to the costs of WW1, it was in no position to challenge the rise of Nazi Germany, and this in some way explains Neville Chamberlain appeasement. However with Hitler’s Germany occupying most of Europe and on the verge of removing Britain as the world’s superpower Britain went to war to reverse Germany’s advance, with the Soviet Union launching an Eastern offensive and with Britain and the US launching the infamous D-day offensive landings in France, Germany was defeated by 1945. However it was not Britain who defeated Germany – it was the Soviet Union and the US, Britain was devastated, the country lay in ruins and economically the British Empire was in no position to fund its global empire.

Britain's global outlook is based upon protecting the array of interests it has. This can be summed up as Britain complicating, altering and diverting the plans of other powers. This is how Britain keeps itself relevant. Due to the economic reality of Britain, it has no capacity to achieve anything more. Britain can complicate the plans of other world powers to the extent that it is taken seriously in the world, and this is why the US very rarely goes it alone, and usually takes Britain along with it. For Britain, having the front seat with the world's superpower means it can see at first hand how US plans evolve, which places it in pole position to benefit from US aims and gives it the option to complicate US plans if this serves its aims. Britain has to deal with the prospect of a resurgent Russia and with both Iraq and Afghanistan becoming ever more complex. Britain will also face the prospect of both Germany and France further entrenching themselves in Europe after the Lisbon Treaty, shaping the EU in their interests. Britain will continue to work with the US in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan and continue to alter and complicate US plans in order to keep strengthening itself. This dual, sometimes contradictory approach is how Britain keeps itself relevant in international politics. This is what Britain has resigned its role to in international politics; it no longer has the ability to achieve anything more substantial. Britain plays its weakening hand with impressive political skill, however this is insufficient for becoming the world's superpower.

Britain’s global outlook is based upon protecting the array of interests it has. This can be encapsulated as Britain complicating, altering and diverting the plans of other powers. This is how Britain keeps itself relevant. Due to the economic reality of Britain, it has no propensity to achieve anything more. Britain can complicate the plans of other world powers to the extent that it is taken seriously in the world, this is why the US very rarely goes it alone, and it usually takes Britain along with it. For Britain it has the front seat with the world’s superpower and can see at first hand US plans evolve, this places it in pole position to benefit from US aims and giving it the option to complicate US plans if this serves its aims. Britain has to deal with the prospect of a resurgent Russia and both Iraq and Afghanistan becoming ever more complex. Britain will also face the prospect of both Germany and France further entrenching themselves into Europe after the Lisbon treaty, shaping the EU in their interests. Britain will continue to work with the US in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan and continue to alter and complicate US plans in order to keep strengthening itself. This dual, sometimes contradictory approach is how Britain keeps itself relevant in international politics. This is what Britain has resigned its role to in international politics; it no longer has the ability to achieve anything more substantial. Britain plays its weakening hand with impressive political skill, however this is insufficient in becoming the worlds superpower.