Britain’s Grand Strategy of Restrained Punishment
ping Controller. Regulation and management of the economy meant intervention in the conduct of industrial ‹rms, coordination of railways, the manipulation of investment into useful enterprises, the ban on speci‹c exports (chemicals required for the production of explosives), heavy duties to discourage the misuse of limited shipping cargo space (McKenna duties), and currency controls to prevent the loss of foreign exchange.14 Other state schemes included the central allocation of resources and price ‹xing of munitions and food, import licensing, railroads, and shipping insurance. As well, the state intentionally encouraged the development of peak industrial organizations and big business in Britain, and the coopera- tion between capital and labor (Holland 1981, 299–300).
Finally, enhanced economic nationalists, with the support of the Con- servative Party, pushed to expand Britain’s imperial interests in Asia, Africa, and the Paci‹c (Beloff 1970). During the war, Prime Minister Lloyd George summoned an Imperial Conference, creating the Imperial War Cabinet, which regarded the western front as little more than a dis- agreeable necessity (Howard 1972, 64). Lloyd George’s War Cabinet included well-known imperialists such as Milner, Curzon, and later Smuts, while Leo Amery was an adviser on Middle East issues. In 1916, Britain and France partitioned the Middle East into respective spheres (Sykes- Picot Agreement), and in 1917, Lloyd George diverted resources to Pales- tine, ordering General Allenby, the new commander in Egypt, to strike
the Turks as hard as possible. Between 1917 and 1923
, strengthened economic nationalists
attempted to translate their wartime gains into tariff reform, imperial pref- erences, and empire self-suf‹ciency in foodstuffs. Tariff Reformers and newly formed organizations such as the British Commonwealth Union, the British Manufacturers’ Association, the National Union of Manufac- turers, and the British Empire Producers’ Organization provided much of the resources to advance the particularistic agenda of imperial preferences and empire consolidation. At the Imperial Conference (1917) an imperial emigration program was proposed. For national security, segments of industry, especially engineering and provincial businessmen, lobbied for Britain to retreat behind its empire through imperial preferences and imperial self-suf‹ciency over inter-Allied cooperation (Cain and Hopkins 1993a, 51–52). To slow Germany’s industrial recovery and block the renewal of postwar German commercial competition, economic national- ists pressed for reparations in the Versailles settlement. As Liberalism weakened, the Conservative Party was convinced that its hour had come