The foreign secretary’s approach is an improvement, but there’s still a long way to go
There’s an old joke about a lost traveller asking how to reach their destination. The local they stop helpfully tells them: “If I were you, I wouldn’t start from here.” The foreign secretary made it to Beijing on Wednesday, but finds himself in something of the same situation when it comes to China policy. In a report published the same day, the foreign affairs committee rightly diagnosed a lack of coherence in the UK government’s approach to date. James Cleverly began from an unenviable position.
For too long, the west was complacent in assuming that economic opening up would bring a friendlier, more politically helpful China. But the UK’s specific original sin was George Osborne’s declaration of a “golden era” of Sino-British relations. The then chancellor made it clear that human rights and other considerations were not so much a distant second to doing business as off the table altogether. China’s subsequent actions and rhetoric made that embrace look naive as well as unethical. The rethink on allowing investment and involvement in critical infrastructure was a necessary corrective. But Liz Truss’s reckless, hawkish posturing is also ill-judged.
The wider context is a world in rapid flux. US-China relations have hit new lows, and major players, particularly in Europe, are struggling to recalibrate dealings with a more forceful and hostile Beijing, and rethink broader assumptions.
