Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
During a recent encounter at the G20 summit in Rio, Keir Starmer expressed the need for Britain to cultivate a “pragmatic and serious relationship” with China. This sentiment raises an intriguing question: Who is advocating for a less practical engagement with Beijing? The absence of vocal critics highlights the complexity of Britain’s current stance towards China, moving beyond mere rhetoric into actionable policy.
One figure whose personal connections have resurfaced amid this dialogue is Prince Andrew. Although he has negligible influence on policy decisions, his connections have drawn the attention of Yang Tengbo, a businessman currently barred from the UK due to alleged espionage activities. Yang, however, contends that he is a victim of worsening Sino-British relations.
This situation has heightened suspicions regarding the extent of China’s covert influence within the UK, adding a new layer of scrutiny to a topic that has been under discussion for some time. Last year, the director of MI5 warned of an extensive campaign orchestrated by the Chinese government aimed at gaining access to sensitive UK businesses, a claim echoed by the National Cyber Security Centre, which characterized China’s cyber capabilities as “vast in scale and sophistication.”
In 2021, MI6’s director pointed out that countering Chinese espionage had supplanted terrorism as the top priority for Britain’s intelligence services, underscoring the urgency of the situation. This clear communication from security officials contrasts sharply with the vagueness in political discussions regarding Britain’s future relations with China. What does it mean to have a “pragmatic and serious” policy towards a nation marked by significant espionage activities?
This week, Prime Minister Starmer was non-committal when pressed for clarity, opting to defer specifics until a comprehensive review of UK-China relations is completed. The government has coined the three Cs—cooperate, challenge, compete—as a framework for navigating this complex relationship. However, this approach does little to clarify how these concepts interact, especially when confronting systemic issues related to commercial ties and human rights abuses.
The tensions inherent in engaging with China as an investment magnet while grappling with its authoritarian regime shine a light on the challenges faced by policymakers. Labour, in its opposition, easily criticized the Conservative government for its erratic China strategy, ranging from a so-called “golden era” under David Cameron to drastic reversals concerning Huawei’s role in the UK telecoms sector during Theresa May’s tenure.
Now in government, Starmer is encountering the inherent contradictions stemming from divergent departmental priorities. While the Treasury might view engagement with China as a pathway to economic growth, the Home Office often sees it through a lens of national security risks.
Finding a middle ground is not always plausible. The classification of China within the “enhanced tier” under the foreign influence registration scheme raises serious concerns. This act mandates the disclosure of lobbying efforts linked to foreign governments, and its implementation has been delayed, fueling accusations against Labour of delaying action due to pressures from businesses wary of reputational damage.
As discussions around this framework continue, the government is also preparing for ministerial visits to China, including key figures like Rachel Reeves and Jonathan Reynolds. Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, is slated to travel as well due to the reality that many low-carbon technology supply chains are closely tied to China. Starmer’s potential hosting of or travel for a bilateral summit could be seen as a step towards refining Britain’s approach, but significant challenges remain unaddressed.
Cross-party concerns about human rights issues exacerbate the situation, with Prince Andrew’s recent associations merely highlighting the intricate web of engagements Britain has with China. In the coming months, global geopolitics may shift again, particularly with Donald Trump potentially returning to power, reshaping trade relations and heightening scrutiny on British alignments.
Navigating these waters requires Britain to be vigilant. The balance between securing beneficial economic ties with China while safeguarding national security has always been precarious but is particularly challenging at this moment, compounded by Brexit complications and fluctuating international alliances.
Starmer has focused on international engagements since taking office but has not yet communicated a coherent vision detailing how Britain should position itself on the global stage. The ongoing ambiguity raises the question: is the Prime Minister intentionally prioritizing a flexible approach, or is there a more concrete strategy that has yet to be unveiled?
Source
www.theguardian.com