The contest to become the next leader of the United Kingdom’s Conservative Party, and by extension the nation’s new prime minister, has transformed into an ugly race to the bottom on who can out-hawk the other and weaponize the most fear in regard to China, as the final two candidates try to score political points.
While Foreign Secretary Liz Truss has vowed to resist “China’s malign influence” through building a “network of liberty”, former chancellor of the exchequer Rishi Sunak has branded China “the biggest threat to the prosperity of the United Kingdom” and leveled a number of accusations.
One vows to attack TikTok, and the other takes aim at Confucius Institutes. How is it that British politics has become such a farce? And how is it that the United Kingdom has built a foreign policy — focused on Brexit and China antagonism — that is so out of touch with reality and national interests?
The aspiring leaders of the UK love to talk about a so-called “Global Britain”.
This theme of a “Global Britain” is a euphemism for the discourse of post-imperial nostalgia. It is highly ideological and lingers from a long-gone age when Britain controlled a global empire and, with it, espoused capitalist dominion and trade in its favor when it was itself the global hegemon.
Brexit harks back to this by continually arguing the premise that Britain should embrace this “global” heritage and reject being locked down in Europe, which is seen as an affront to the UK’s national identity and sovereignty. Thus, it continually advocates themes of free trade and entrepreneurship.
A changing geopolitical climate and interference from the United States, however, have further shifted the discourse of “Global Britain” to not just being about trade, but transforming it into a geopolitical, civilizational and values-based struggle, in which the primary target is China.
This adds the dynamic of a “Britannia rules the waves” mindset. Britain is framed as a benevolent and just nation that seeks to rescue countries from the so-called “malign” and unwanted “influence” of China.
The leadership candidates, as well as the media, subsequently frame China’s cooperation and ties with Commonwealth countries as being illegitimate, and espouse the assumption that it is Britain’s natural right to “dominate” these countries and that the UK is the only power that acts in their best interests.
However, is there truly a “Global Britain”, so to speak, without China?
British foreign policy is now based on the self-defeating premise of having rejected closer ties with Europe, and now, simultaneously, also rejecting ties with China.
From an economic and business perspective, this makes zero sense.
Prior to US interference in Britain’s foreign policy, the UK’s leadership had understood the critical importance of China to Britain’s post-Brexit vision.
After all, there is nothing global about dismissing the world’s largest consumer market of 1.4 billion people, and the largest industrial and trading nation.
It is ironic that both the current candidates for prime minister pitch their vision for governance as a free-trade bonanza, promising trade deals and free ports galore — but what use is any of that without China?
Who is going to buy more British products? While Brexit has also been floated on the exceptionalist dream of fostering a trade deal with the US in line with “the special relationship”, the dream has failed to materialize. America’s highly one-sided and protectionist demands have proved to be a non-starter.
The continuing consensus of “America First” has seen US President Joe Biden reject all new free-trade proposals. Similarly, India, another favored target of British imperial nostalgia, is also highly protectionist, and its focus is on what it can sell, not buy, from Britain.
Although the UK struck a free-trade deal with Australia, the deal is worthless in real terms, with a House of Commons report stating that it will only increase UK GDP by 0.08 percent over the next few years.
All of these choices illustrate how Britain is placing ideology and identity above economic merits and common sense in its post-Brexit vision. As it happens, the economic situation at home is worsening considerably, and inflation is surging.
This might all stand as a reminder that China is not an enemy or a threat to the UK, but a critical economic and trading partner that acts as a pillar of British prosperity and commerce.
The demonization of China by the candidates is shortsighted, opportunistic, motivated by domestic politics, and does not have Britain’s true interests at heart. There is no “Global Britain” without China.
The author is a British political and international relations analyst.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.