Peace pays dividends – the UK shouldn't undervalue it
4 min read
This isn’t just humanitarianism; it’s economic strategy. The UK would be unwise to lose sight of that.
When conflict flares, our instinct is often to think about military intervention or humanitarian aid. But some of the most cost-effective, strategic interventions come before the headlines in the form of quiet peacebuilding work that prevents crises, stabilises fragile regions and allows communities to rebuild.
This isn’t soft power for its own sake. It’s diplomacy, economics and security rolled into one. And an area where the UK has traditionally led.
Take the Mozambique–Tanzania border. When violence in northern Mozambique spread, it shut down a critical trade route providing basic goods like cooking oil, fish and cashew nuts, in a region rich in natural gas. Livelihoods were frozen, investment stalled, and the risk of wider instability grew. A relatively low-cost UK-funded initiative — supported by the Integrated Stability Fund (ISF) — helped conduct local feasibility work that ultimately supported the reopening of that border. This isn’t just a success story in diplomacy, it’s a case study in how modest UK investment can catalyse peace and prosperity.
The UK has a real advantage in this space. Mechanisms like the ISF allow us to act quickly and flexibly in fragile contexts, supporting on-the-ground actions paired with the UK’s diplomatic reach. From Sudan to the Middle East to the Democratic Republic of Congo, UK embassies are able to draw on local insights, political access, and frontline partners to prevent escalation and support stability.
In fragile and conflict-affected states, timing is everything. The cost of early action is always lower than the cost of a full-blown crisis. Whether it’s enabling local peace processes, stabilising vulnerable border areas, or responding rapidly to humanitarian shocks, the UK’s ability to deploy funds rapidly can mean the difference between escalation and containment.
But that capability is now at risk.
Recent years have seen an erosion of the very flexibility that made the UK effective in this space, and now the ISF is at risk of being cut or repurposed. The resulting unpredictability not only undermines delivery but also damages credibility. In conflict-affected states, timing is not a bureaucratic issue; it’s a strategic one. Delays cost lives and squander trust. Partners are left waiting, often with the political will and operational plans ready, but without the resources to move.
The UK’s strength has always been its ability to act with agility, not by outspending others, but by anticipating risk, responding early, and most importantly, leveraging our diplomatic networks.
Right now, much of the UK’s attention is rightly focused on high-profile conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza. But history has shown that the next crisis often comes from the blind spot, and governments need the capability to respond quickly to unanticipated conflicts and atrocities.
We should be clear: this isn’t just humanitarianism. It’s economic strategy. Instability kills trade, chases away investment, disrupts supply chains, and displaces people. When the UK invests in conflict prevention, this also protects economic corridors, reduces displacement pressures, and supports long-term growth in fragile regions.
In Syria, the ISF invested in a high-risk program with Search for Common Ground and a network of Syrian organizations in all parts of the country. The people supported then — at a difficult, hard time — are now shaping the future of the country today. These aren’t bloated aid budgets. They’re tightly focused interventions designed to reduce risk and maximise value.
As the UK rethinks its global role amidst shifting geopolitical dynamics of a repositioned Trump administration, this kind of capability matters — it is critical to sustain the most effective and unique tools we have to reduce the humanitarian and financial costs of recurring conflicts.
This work reflects the best of what UK foreign policy can do: strategic, nimble and grounded in real-world outcomes. But it depends on political will, and it depends on maintaining the mechanisms that let us act before the crisis hits.
Peace pays dividends — for communities in conflict zones, for UK interests, and for taxpayers at home. The only question is whether the UK is still willing to invest in it.
Mike Jobbins is vice president of global affairs and partnerships at Search for Common Ground
