As Ken McCallum, Director General of MI5, delivered his latest threat update, he ran through the list of usual suspects when discussing state threats. What unites these states is that they view foreign aggression as a means of domestic security – attempting to weaken Western democratic states to strengthen their grip on power. This goes beyond Putin’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine supported by Iran and North Korea amongst others, into efforts to undermine the information space – creating apathy through overwhelming and contradictory disinformation.
The Director General then turned to China, declaring that “China is different. The UK-China economic relationship supports UK growth, which underpins our security … it rightly falls to Ministers to make the big strategic judgements on our relationship with China: where it’s in the UK’s interests to co-operate, and how we do so safely.” This notable difference is unsurprising. As RUSI’s Andrew Cainey recently noted in his contribution to a collection of essays concerning UK-Chinese relations for Civitas, China (including Hong Kong) is the UK’s fourth largest trading partner (1) making a more nuanced relationship necessary. This more nuanced relationship is evidenced by the efforts of the new Labour Government to engage in dialogue with the CCP as Foreign Secretary David Lammy meets with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi. Relationships are built on stability and consistency – whether collaborative, adversarial, or somewhere in between leaders will always prefer dealing with a predictable foe versus a volatile ally. The previous Tory government failed to provide this, swinging between David Cameron declaring a “golden era” of UK-Chinese relations and drinking pints with President Xi Jinping to Liz Truss squeezing into her short-lived premiership, the cancellation of Cameron’s 5G agreement with Chinese telecoms giant Huawei and later calling for China to be designated as a threat to UK security.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently reiterated that the Government intends to engage with China on the basis of the so-called three Cs. Britain will co-operate where we can, compete where we need to, and challenge where we must. It was interesting to see the lame duck Leader of the Opposition, Rishi Sunak, dedicate one of his final PMQs sessions to UK-Chinese relations. This could be a last-ditch effort to cultivate the image of an elder statesman before departing his position as Leader of the Conservative Party or a warning that the Tories are attempting to push a narrative of Labour being soft on China. Tory hypocrisy aside, this narrative must be pre-empted with a coherent China strategy based on the three Cs underpinned by David Lammy’s Progressive Realism doctrine.
Due to the magnitude of our trading relationship with China, which supports around 120,000 British jobs (2), a complete economic de-coupling is neither practical nor desirable. There is also a necessity to co-operate on common pressing issues such as net zero. However, what the Government must do to ensure a healthy balance on the prosperity-security spectrum is pursue what US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan refers to as de-risking to inhibit supply chain dependency or a Chinese monopoly on vital raw materials such as rare earth metals.
Framing challenging China as an obligation is a recognition of the progressive portion of progressive realism. However, we must also be realistic about Britain’s diminished stature on the global stage. We must collaborate with our allies and present a united front to pressure the CCP where we have a moral obligation to do so – on the human rights atrocities being committed against Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang, aggression in the South China Sea, violating the Sino-British Joint Declaration over Hong Kong including the internment of democracy activist and British citizen Jimmy Lai, and efforts to undermine the human rights foundation of the rules based international order.
For example, our government should consider introducing legislation similar to the US Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. Signs of a robust attitude are already there in the Deputy Prime Minister’s decision to call in plans for the proposed new Chinese “super” embassy in London. At a broader level, we must recognise that engaging with any nation is based on fluid identities that are subject to change. The driving ideological force behind the CCP, contrary to what some Western leftists believe, is no longer Communism but nationalism. In the 75 years of the PRC the world has witnessed successive shifts from the revolutionary fervour of Mao Zedong Thought to Dengist pragmatic state capitalism to the, perhaps deliberately, flexible and ill-defined Xi Jinping thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era.
We must recognise the wisdom of CCP reformer Chen Yun’s slogan – Crossing the River by Touching the Stones. This phrase is generally associated with Deng Xiaoping and urges us to consider change gradually and pursue stability by taking one step at a time.
Britain must tread cautiously when engaging with China, seeking a stable footing in our relationship whilst not losing sight of our values as we move forward.
If you liked this piece, follow the link here to read another blog post covering international relations.
