In a statement published on GOV.UK, Ed Miliband said his appointment by the Prime Minister as Foreign Secretary would be guided by both Britain’s interests and the values of democracy, freedom and the rule of law. The wording places the role within a clear policy frame: strategic security abroad, combined with a stated defence of constitutional and legal standards. The statement functions as a direction-of-travel document rather than a detailed programme for the Foreign Office. It identifies instability, pressure on international law and risks to democracy as the defining conditions facing the department at the start of the brief.
Miliband also used the statement to set out a personal frame for the appointment. He said his parents came to Britain as Jewish refugees from the Nazis and saw the country as both a sanctuary and a source of hope in the wider fight against fascism. That passage matters because it explains the language used elsewhere in the statement. References to Britain’s role, democratic values and the rule of law are presented not only as diplomatic objectives, but as part of a national tradition that the new Foreign Secretary says he intends to carry into office.
The GOV.UK statement argues that current conflicts are not distant foreign policy concerns. It links Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine and conflict in the Middle East to the cost of living pressures faced by families and businesses in Britain. In policy terms, that is an important choice of emphasis. The statement presents foreign affairs as directly connected to household costs, commercial stability and economic resilience, rather than as a separate sphere of state activity with limited domestic effect.
On alliances, the statement sets out a three-part structure. Miliband said he wanted to deepen and strengthen the UK’s strategic alliance with the European Union, maintain the country’s enduring alliance with the United States, and uphold commitments to multilateral institutions including NATO and the United Nations. He also signalled continued work with global partners, particularly in the Global South. Read together, those commitments suggest a foreign policy built around parallel relationships: closer European cooperation, continuity in transatlantic ties, and continued use of international institutions as part of Britain’s external strategy.
The most immediate operational commitments are set out in the statement’s treatment of conflict. Miliband said Britain would continue to stand with the people of Ukraine against Russia’s illegal invasion, as it has done for the last four years, and would also play its part in seeking to end the conflict in Iran and fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The same statement says the government would work tirelessly for a sustainable peace in Palestine and Israel, including an end to the suffering of people in Gaza and security for people in Israel. In practical terms, that places military deterrence, maritime stability and diplomatic de-escalation near the top of the Foreign Secretary’s immediate brief.
Beyond active conflicts, the statement gives the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office a wider remit. Miliband said the department would work with others to tackle the climate crisis, strengthen partnerships for international development, and reform international institutions so they deliver for all countries, including the world’s poorest people. That is a notable signal about departmental scope. The statement does not treat diplomacy, development and climate cooperation as separate tracks. Instead, it presents them as connected responsibilities that sit within the same foreign policy agenda.
The closing passages focus on delivery through the state apparatus already in place. Miliband describes the FCDO as a major British institution with expert staff, strong consular functions and global reach, and says he looks forward to working with embassies, diplomats, civil servants, businesses and cultural organisations. For officials and partner organisations, the message is one of institutional continuity rather than structural change. The statement offers fewer new mechanisms than broad priorities, but it gives a clear indication of how the Foreign Secretary intends to frame Britain’s role overseas: alliance-based, security-led and tied closely to economic, developmental and climate objectives.