The logic behind Rishi Sunak’s decision to make David Cameron foreign secretary was that he would be a ‘big beast’ on the world stage and wouldn’t need much instruction. Six months on, that plan is going reasonably well, insofar as Cameron appears to be setting his own agenda. It also means he’s making his own mistakes. In February, his foray into US politics misfired when, in an article for the website the Hill, he appeared to lecture Americans about support for Ukraine, telling them not to show the ‘weakness displayed against Hitler’. A key Donald Trump ally, Marjorie Taylor Greene, responded that ‘David Cameron can kiss my ass’.

This week, the Foreign Secretary has been on something of an apology tour. The first stop was Mar-a-Lago in Florida to dine with Trump, whom Cameron had previously denounced as ‘protectionist, xenophobic, misogynistic’. ‘I’d love to have been there,’ said Nigel Farage of their dinner. ‘To see Cameron eating humble pie. Isn’t it funny: all these people around the world who’ve been rude and vile about Donald Trump. In the end, they all have to come and break bread.’

‘A lot of people think he has gone
full-on Foreign Office native or is trying to prepare for his next job’

There was more humble pie to come when Cameron secured an audience with Antony Blinken, the Secretary of State, and said in the press conference which followed that he had ‘no intention to lecture anybody or tell anybody what to do’. Not everyone has forgiven him. Mike Johnson, the most senior Republican in the House, failed to find time for a meeting.

Cameron had been positioning himself as the man who could convince Johnson to release more aid to Ukraine. ‘We need to get on the phone,’ he declared before his trip. ‘Or, in my case, go in person to see Speaker Johnson in the House of Representatives to get that supplemental through.’ While Johnson – nicknamed ‘Maga Mike’ – has suggested he is inclined to put the proposal of $60 billion in foreign aid for Ukraine on the House floor when US lawmakers return from their Easter break, he has yet to confirm a date. He is caught between clashes with the Biden administration over domestic policies and threats from the Trumpian Republican right to depose him if he countenances a vote. He’s considering whether to convert the aid into loans to assuage critics, and get it through the House. A one-on-one with Cameron could have upset this delicate balancing act.

Many Tories have questioned Cameron’s judgment since his return to government. His critics see him not so much as an experienced statesman than as a grifter seeking to set himself up for a lucrative post-election career. His allies respond that he has energised the role and that his Foreign Office, officials say, has been inundated with requests for meetings. But some wonder whether No. 10 is losing control of foreign policy. ‘It’s the law of unintended consequences. They wanted a big name to overshadow the sacking of Suella – but that comes with conditions,’ says an MP.

There are many Cameron loyalists in the cabinet. His former party chairman Grant Shapps is at Defence. His old health secretary Jeremy Hunt is Chancellor. His ex-policy aide Laura Trott is Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the overnight Tory press aide Richard Holden is now party chairman. ‘[Cameron] has gravitas,’ says one cabinet member. ‘Everyone wants to hear what he will say.’ ‘He’s utterly brilliant,’ says another such devotee. ‘It’s almost as if he’s seeing out a year of the second term he had to end too soon in 2016.’

Others think Cameron is enjoying himself a little too much, and is upstaging his boss. Many prime ministers seek refuge in foreign affairs at the end of their term. Sunak has taken the opposite approach, staying home while devolving foreign affairs. Some of his allies think this is a mistake. ‘Rishi has given away one of the easiest ways for a leader to look prime ministerial,’ says a minister.

The question is whether Cameron is reflecting the party in his efforts. He has broad Tory support on his mission to try to persuade Republicans that backing President Zelensky is in America’s interests as well as Europe’s. ‘Flying to the US is exactly what a foreign secretary should do,’ says one former cabinet minister. ‘It also shows what you can get done when No. 10 is not micromanaging.’ In Downing Street, they see Cameron’s experience as prime minister as key to him securing an audience with Trump.

When, however, Cameron talks up what the Ministry of Defence can do to help Ukraine, his colleagues think back to how he enforced budget cuts on the military. ‘At the end of the day, you can try to woo Trump, but we are all going to have to put our hands in our pockets,’ says a defence grandee. There is a campaign under way among Tory MPs to get a commitment of 3 per cent of GDP on defence in the Conservative manifesto.

The choice of candidate for the next Secretary-General of Nato is causing some consternation. Cameron backs his friend Mark Rutte, the former Dutch prime minister, to succeed Jens Stoltenberg. Given that Trump regards Nato as a racket which lets Europeans skimp on defence while hiding behind America’s protection, is it wise to let it be chaired by the former prime minister of a country that falls short of the alliance’s defence spending target of 2 per cent of GDP? In contrast, Rutte’s main rival is Kaja Kallas, the former prime minister of Estonia, which is one of 11 Nato members whose defence spending exceeds the target.

While government aides play down talk of a cabinet rift on foreign policy, some MPs think that Cameron’s support for Israel is lacking. He has threatened to suspend arms sales to Israel unless it lets aid into Gaza and sticks to international law. ‘Cameron has gone further than Keir has,’ says an admiring Labour MP. Many Tories do not share this admiration.

Given the Tory party’s decades-long shift away from it Arabist tradition (starting under Thatcher, whose own constituency, Finchley, had a large Jewish community), Cameron’s position has led to confusion. ‘He used to be very pro-Israel as prime minister,’ says an MP who was close to Cameron in his Downing Street years. ‘A lot of people think he has gone full-on Foreign Office native or is trying to prepare for his next job – something in the UN perhaps.’

This kind of criticism means the Foreign Secretary needs some results. If there is movement on the $60 billion package held up on Capitol Hill, Cameron will claim he played a part in that outcome. But if the deal fails, and Cameron’s hectoring is seen as a factor, there will be more Tories who question whether this self-styled statesman knows what he is doing.