The formation in 1900 of the Labour party (initially as the Labour Representation Committee) took place at a time when debate about foreign affairs and Britain's role in the world was becoming increasingly heated. The most immediate reason for this was the Boer War, which had been in progress since 1899. Britain, the greatest imperial power of the age, was experiencing severe difficulties in overcoming a small guerrilla army of Boers. Her resources were stretched and the tactics employed to quash the rebellion were becoming increasingly desperate. Among domestic ‘pro-Boer’ critics of British imperialism, the ‘immoral’ war was outspokenly condemned. British foreign policy, it seemed, had been hijacked by protectionist imperialists.

To a large extent, however, the South African controversy was part of – and seemed to make more urgent – a larger debate about Britain's future in the face of broader economic and political changes in the industrialised (or industrialising) world. The rise of Germany and the USA, as potential rivals to Britain's global position, was the major concern. How should Britain respond to this new, more competitive environment? Should she maintain her longstanding commitment to free trade, or should the state take a more active role in safeguarding Britain's competitive position, through greater domestic intervention and tariff reform? Was British intervention abroad ever justifiable?

These debates, most historians agree, were largely ignored by the Labour party. It is generally accepted that before the first World War ‘working class interest in foreign affairs was sporadic and slight’. This reflected the dominant position of the trade unions in the party. They had agreed to the formation of the new party in the belief that it was the best way to advance the economic and social interests of their members. International affairs were not seen as exercising much influence on this question; therefore, they were largely ignored.