December 18, 2024 - 5:00pm
The case of Yang Tengbo, the alleged Chinese spy with links to Prince Andrew, comes at a sensitive time for Sino-British relations. Things have deteriorated dramatically since David Cameron’s premiership, when the two countries enjoyed a so-called “Golden Era” of diplomacy. But the pandemic, trade wars, the erosion of democracy in Hong Kong, and the persecution of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang have all complicated bilateral relations. By the time Rishi Sunak was in Number 10, he was calling China a “threat to our open and democratic way of life”.
The priority of the current Labour government is to improve Britain’s economy, which contracted slightly in the two months leading up to December. The brutal fact is that China, whose economy was half the size of Britain’s when Hong Kong was handed back in 1997, today outstrips it five times. It is too big to ignore, and yet also complicated to engage with: therein lies the UK’s quandary. It also explains the changes which Keir Starmer’s government has spearheaded.
Other Western nations are also having to confront the problem of how to deal with China. Even the mighty US has recently reported that, per the suspicions of analysts, its Government cyber systems have been deeply penetrated by Chinese actors. This is the result of a decade of investment from Beijing, with the goal of increasing its technical capacity. That, in turn, was prompted by reports in 2012, following the Edward Snowden leaks, that America had managed to gain access to some Chinese systems.
The UK may heed America’s likely approach under Donald Trump when he is inaugurated again in January. Everything he has said, not to mention his actions during his first presidency, makes it clear he is seeking a new deal with China, and that security issues are part of that mix. Trump wants access to the Chinese market, better trade with US goods, and clear wins that can help him declare America is winning again.
In the UK, China is still a relatively small investor and, while a significant trading partner, hardly its largest. From China’s perspective, the UK is a middle ranking power: not a negligible one, by any means, but not a priority. There are many areas of technology in which China is fast moving well ahead of the UK. Last year alone, China committed about £360 billion to research and development. In contrast, Britain’s most recent Budget set aside only £20 billion.
The UK might believe that it has a range of options when it comes to China, but pragmatists have powerful arguments on their side. If the country wants to seriously address its economic challenges, it needs to have dynamic agreements and relations with the largest global economies. Even with the current challenges it is facing, China still belongs to that group. Some British politicians can certainly berate Beijing for its moral and political sins, but there has to be some sort of dialogue. There are things about which Britain needs to be well-informed and prudent when it deals with China, but to have nothing to do with Beijing is not a realistic option. On AI, the environment, and global economic growth generally, the decisions made by Xi Jinping will have an impact on the UK whether our leaders like it or not.
That means that however embarrassing and irritating the Yang case is, it is extremely unlikely to stop Chancellor Rachel Reeves going to China in January to restart economic dialogue. Nor will it prevent Starmer’s likely visit later in 2025. Britain needs a cadre of clued-up, effective politicians and public voices who are strategic and skilled about the specific difficulties and opportunities of dealing with China.
There are still many aspects of relations between the two that are asymmetric. British companies experience disadvantages in China that Chinese companies largely avoid in trading and coming to the UK. Achieving reciprocity and fairness in the relationship is necessary, and stoking paranoia by claiming that there is a Chinese secret agent on every street in Britain will be little help. Politicians must realise that China is there whether we like it or not, and any policy that dreams it away is not only ineffective but doomed.
Kerry Brown is Director of the Lau China Institute and Professor of Chinese Studies at King’s College, London. His latest book is The Taiwan Story.
Bkerrychina
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThat penultimate paragraph is priceless.
It contains the phrase “Britain needs a cadre of clued-up, effective politicians”, along with mentioning that two tier and Rachel from accounts will be visiting China.
How will the Chinese stop themselves from snickering over the noodles and sakė?
Achieving reciprocity and fairness in the relationship is necessary, and … Impossible!
Why would the Chinese ever actually do that even if they say they will. They follow the rules they already signed up to unless they figure it is to their advantage.
It’s a little ridiculous to claim that Britain spends £20bn on R&D vs £360bn in China when you are only measuring government direct budgetary spending (the least efficient form of investment usually) and completely ignoring what private industry is doing.
It’s equally ridiculous and frankly naive to decry Chinese espionage and IP theft in the UK as just “paranoia”.
I disagree completely with the author that the UK should engage with China – doing so flies in face of everything we have learned over the last two decades. Unfortunately, I think the author is correct in assessing that the current crop of politicians (in both main parties) WILL, williynilly, engage extensively with China, and the scale of the cost of this will only become apparent a decade down the line when it is too late to do anything about it, when they have stripped the UK down naked and left it shivering in the cold.
Quite.
In the past, useful idiots like Blair would have claimed that engaging with China would allow a new generation of “more progressive” and “democratic” leaders to emerge. There is zero evidence that any such people exist in leadership positions in China. Or that this will change any time soon.
And I agree that there is no chance of the current government changing course. How could they ? They have no comprehension of what they’re doing or what the UK national interest actually is. They’re just locked on some sort of room temperature IQ, dumb auto pilot.
The Chinese, refugees, Muslims it seems everyone should be listened to by the politicians in the UK except the actual regular citizens of the UK.
Seriously I’m just a disinterested observer from across the pond but I can’t get why anyone would be voting for any party except reform at this point because it seems everyone else is more beholden to special interests than their constituents.
Trump’s willingness to make a ‘deal’ with China worries me. The so called phase one deal from his first term has been a study in why it’s futile to make deals with the CCP. They have not come close to meeting their commitments. If they cannot be trusted to honor their commitments, what’s the point of making any deals? They have demonstrated no intention of honoring the agreements they have made. They broke their treaty with Hong Kong and claimed the entire South China Sea as their territory showing no respect for international law. They dangle the carrot of access to the vast Chinese market and revoke it over something as petty as a map showing Taiwan as a country or a careless Facebook post by some executive. After twenty years of allowing them to steal IP, devalue their currency, and manipulate global markets to create strategic monopolies, have they ever actually opened their markets? Western governments and companies are like Charlie Brown. No matter how many times Lucy yanks the ball away, he keeps trying, hoping this time will be different.
At the risk of invoking Godwin’s law, making deals with Xi Jinping now is about as pointless as making deals with Adolf Hitler in 1936. There was no “peace in our time” then, and there will be none now. The only question is who looks like that fool Neville Chamberlain when the history is written decades from now. Maybe Donald Trump will be that fool. It would be typical of him to be the first to actually call out China’s bad behavior and start the trade conflict only to change his mind later and think he can somehow get the Chinese to negotiate in good faith while nobody else has, all out of his personal pride in his “deal making” ability.