The visit of China’s President Xi Jinping to London in 2015 was described as the onset of a new “Golden Age” in the bilateral relations. While the prime ministerial election race was still going on, Rishi Sunak thought that this “Golden Age” in relations with China could be revitalized. However, after taking office Sunak realized that he can not actualize his individual thoughts about China as a “British Government Policy”. Thus, the Prime Minister declared that “Golden Age” with China ended.
One of the issues that the British Prime Minister was most criticized for was his inability to take a firm stance in relations with China. Even in the election race, Liz Truss’s hawkish attitude towards China was effective in getting ahead of her rival Sunak. When the Truss Government was overthrown, Sunak tried to follow a more cautious and balanced policy in Chinese politics. In this context, Sunak categorized China as a “systemic challenge” rather than a “threat”. Shortly after that, he said that the “Golden Age” was over.
This stance may be due to the fact that the UK actually wants to act together with the United States of America (USA) in many ways. Because Sunak has been optimistic towards China in the past. Due to this moderate aspect, it has been commented that the UK may differ from the USA in Chinese politics. However, when he took office, Sunak had to change his stance due to both the British state mind (pressure of intelligence and security institutions and traditional foreign policy interests) and external factors (pressure of the USA).
In other words, the Prime Minister has adapted to the British foreign policy interests. Despite everything, Sunak argues that China’s role in global relations should be acknowledged, it is necessary to stay away from Cold War rhetoric and to maintain engagement (dialogue) with Beijing at all times.[1] But at the same time, Sunak is trying to take a more combative stance against China as a result of pressure from radical sections in the party, some state institutions and the USA.
It would not be right to evaluate the dilemma of the British and Prime Minister Sunak’s Chinese politics in a special sense, independently of the differences of opinion of the Continental Europe about China. While some European countries are trying to abate dependency on Chinese technologies and investments; others emphasize the importance of cooperating and maintaining dialogue with China. For example, after German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron plans to go to Beijing next year. In short, while discussions about China continue in Europe; The UK is also affected by these changes in global politics.
Sunak sought to meet with Jinping, as did the leaders of Germany, France, and the United States, but failed. In November 2022, the British Prime Minister requested an appointment from Jinping on the sidelines of the G20 Summit; however, the Beijing administration turned down this request due to the tight schedule.
Jinping met with the leaders of major countries, as well as the Presidents of Mexico, Argentina, Senegal, the Netherlands, South Africa and Indonesia at the aforementioned summit. Despite this, he did not give Sunak an appointment due to “schedule jams”. This attitude is tantamount to underestimating, openly rejecting and criticizing Britain. The reason for this may be that the British Prime Minister could not take a clear stance in Chinese politics and turned to bloc politics with the USA. In other words, Sunak, like his predecessor Truss, tries to display a hawkish attitude towards China, and this policy is negatively received in Beijing.
The biggest factor causing British-Chinese tension is the polarization in international politics. As a matter of fact, the global conjuncture also directs the relations between states. While the states (USA and Japan) that fought each other in the Second World War 70 years ago, today become allies and establish defensive alliances; Countries that were allies in the same war (Britain and the Soviet Union-China) can be enemies to each other today. Because states have always been to “the other” since history; So they needed an enemy. In this way, they reinforced their national identity, strengthened morally and became socially interlocked.
Since the establishment of the United Nations (UN) system and the establishment of the status quo based on the sovereign equality of states, the UK has turned to cooperation with Continental Europe in order to survive; In recent years, it has started to create “new others” in order to realize its global interests.
With the BREXIT decision, it broke away from Continental Europe and turned to a more independent foreign policy, and then it started to revive the ideal of Global Britain by marginalizing Russia and China. The official declaration of China as the “other” has taken place in the recent past. In the report titled “Global Britain in the Age of Competition” published by the British Government in March 2021, the expression “China’s rising power and increasing international initiatives” was used and thus China was indicated as a target. The important question here is this: While talking about the construction of the “Golden Age” in bilateral relations in 2015; How did China become the “other” in 2021?
Due to the announcement of China’s Belt-Road Project in 2013 and the high amount of loans provided by the banks established to finance it, many states from Asia and Europe participated in the project until 2016. Britain was another Western power that fell into the “Chinese Dream”. Not long after this, developments such as the appointment of Donald Trump in the USA in 2017, the start of trade wars with China, and the banning of Chinese technology company Huwai from 5G networks, led the UK to follow similar steps. On the one hand, allegations that Chinese technology companies are being used for espionage and on the other hand, China’s increasing military activities in the South China Sea have been the factors that led London to take a stance against Beijing.
The biggest break here is Russia’s intervention in Ukraine. Britain, like the concerns of Continental Europe, thinks that China can take similar steps for Taiwan. In fact, Liz Truss, the former British Foreign Secretary, ardently advocated that the whole of Europe should support Taiwan in order not to repeat the mistake made in Ukraine. Thus, Britain’s China policy became identical with that of the United States. As a result, an unofficial Anglo-Saxon alliance and the Russian-Chinese axis emerged in the international system. Continental Europe is torn between the two.
Another remarkable point is that while China has preferred communication with Germany, France, the European Union and even the USA in recent weeks; avoiding dialogue with Britain. However, Beijing focused on meeting with the Western leader in order to distinguish itself from Moscow, to show that it does not follow Cold War politics and underpins peace. Despite this, the exclusion of Britain reveals the discomfort of China with British politics. Beijing made a similar move to the Government of Former Prime Minister of Australia, Scott Morrison. Chinese authorities did not answer calls from Morrison Government officials for a long time. 4 However, the new Australian Government succeeded in sending Foreign Minister Penny Wong to Beijing by giving moderate messages and establishing a sincere dialogue. However, China cannot yet see the same goodwill and sincerity from Britain. If an air of optimism prevails in relations, Beijing will also agree to meet with London.
[1] “When It Comes to China, Britain Should Decouple from the US”, SCMP, https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3203752/when-it-comes-china-britain-should-decouple-us, (Date of Accession: 23.12.2022).
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 “Fast-Thawing China-Australia Ties Raise Hopes for Trade Easing”, Bloomberg, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-22/fast-thawing-china-australia-ties-raise-hopes-for-trade-easing?leadSource=uverify%20wall, (Date of Accession: 23.12.2022).
