After two debates, the candidates for Conservative Party leadership and therefore the position of Prime Minister have had a chance to show the public their political beliefs.

There has not been much mention of foreign policy. Most of the debates have been focussed on domestic issues such as the cost of living crisis and the economy in general. There has also been verbal sparring over the character of the candidates and their past experience, with candidates trying to distance themselves from the acting Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, as well as each other.

Liz Truss brought up her credentials as foreign secretary, for example mentioning trade deals that she claims to have secured that others had described as ‘impossible’, such as the trade deal with Australia and Japan.  It is easier to be proud of these deals, as they are countries with decent human rights records, but it is harder to do so when associated with countries with poor human rights records, as was shown when in a later moment she asked Sunak if he wanted to do more trade with China.

Sunak argued that China was a threat to national security but if the correct policies were taken to protect national infrastructure, China should be engaged with “as should all countries.” This could indicate that Sunak would also be willing to engage in trade with controversial Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia.

Tom Tugendhat made repeated reference to his military background as a soldier, but didn’t become too involved in the debates over defence spending. Naval reservist Penny Mourdant asked Sunak why he was unwilling to say he wanted to increase defence spending. This fits her character as being a diplomatic hawk. Sunak argued that there shouldn’t be arbritary targets to meet and that military spending should have a ‘threat based’ approach.

If Sunak became Prime Minister, it would be interesting to see where the defence spending could go as it would show where he believed the threat’s to the UK were coming from. His mention of the threat of China earlier on in the debate indicates that Sunak is carrying on with Britain’s move to become more involved in Asian affairs. As China tries to clearly establish itself as a global power, this ‘pivot-East’ could expand to Britain trying to combat China’s influence all over the world – likely in Africa but also in the Pacific and in the Middle East.

Tom Tugendhat repeatedly focussed on what Britain should be, and believed that the ‘Fresh start’ he kept pushing is what could give Britain its self-confidence back. Post-Brexit Britain seems to be in a curious place, confident enough to say it doesn’t need to rely on the EU, but now nervous in engaging with the rest of the world, uncertain of its place in these new waters. Badenoch and Tugendhat both talked about moving past Brexit, but it is unclear what the party and the country will move to.

A global issue Britain is uncertain about is climate change. Johnson has pushed Britain as a leader in the fight against climate change, with COP26 in Glasgow demonstrating this. Many Conservative MPs can be described as Green Tories, believing British capitalistic invention and innovation is what is necessary to stop the crisis – Sunak briefly touched on this. Tom Tugendhat mentioned increasing nuclear energy production and carbon capture.

Yet the right-wing populist streak of the Conservatives could also be seen in Sunday’s debate on the issue as Kemi Badenoch made some unclear comments on not following environmental policies that will “make life difficult for ordinary people.” This could be Britain’s own gilet jaune moment, using people’s frustrations over fuel and energy prices to target environmental policies. However, there could also be attempts to increase imports of oil from other countries in the short term.

Johnson has tried to have his handling of the Ukraine/Russia conflict as part of his legacy. The war is likely to go on until Winter, and it will be interesting to see how the future Prime Minister will handle the conflict, especially as there could be fracturing within Europe on how to reconcile support for Ukraine with a need to continue to import gas from Russia.

Liz Truss said that it was important that “the leaders of the free world face down Vladimir Putin” and “call him out” as a way to send a message to “swing countries like India and Indonesia.” It is likely that some of these swing countries would also be in the Middle East – the likes of Egypt and Saudi Arabia. This doesn’t just seem like a change in foreign policy but a question on whether we do or do not engage with countries outside the Liberal International Order. These differing perspectives could influence how Britain engages with Iran in relation to its nuclear deal – Britain seems likely to want to negotiate with Iran rather than isolate it.

With news on Monday morning that Tuesday’s debate between the candidates won’t happen, there is unlikely to be any dramatic statements on foreign policy any time soon. Candidates will likely want to distinguish themselves on character, experience and domestic policy. There is the possibility that once the two candidates are chosen, and the voters for leader expand from Conservative MPs to Conservative Party Members at large, there will be another televised debate. This seems unlikely as the complaints from Sunak and Truss’ camps that the debates have damaged the Party by showing the divisions within it would continue to hold weight whether there are five or two candidates.

We should not discount foreign policy issues arising over the summer campaign, which the candidates may wish to comment on. We could be faced with a unique Constitutional issue where Prime Minister Boris has little legitimacy in making serious decisions on any possible crisis that occurs in the next couple of months. The candidates might want to lay out how they would address the crisis, which could lead to some debate between the two remaining candidates through speeches and press statements rather than a televised debate.