Defending the Liberal World Order: Time for the UK to take a lead in confronting China
In its recent Integrated Review of defence and foreign policy the UK Government set out its intent for a tilt in strategic focus towards the Indo-Pacific region. This tilt has been primarily motivated by the increase in tensions between the West and China. Yet, what threat does China pose to the West and what action can the UK Government take in response?
Why the West must stand up to China
Since the turn of the century, when it became clear that China was on course to become a global superpower, Western foreign policy debates concerning China have centred around one key question: Will China rise peacefully? However, this debate increasingly appears to be settled. Since Xi Jinping came to power in 2012, China has grown more repressive at home and more assertive in its near abroad.
Its hypersensitised nationalism was on full display this past month when Chinese consumers and celebrities, provoked by the government and state-run media, reacted with outrage to the news that several Western brands had decided to boycott cotton from China’s Xinjiang region. China has come under intense criticism over its treatment of the Uighur minority who reside in the region. At the same time, Chinese warplanes have been making increasingly frequent and provocative incursions into Taiwan’s air defence zone, escalating tensions with its neighbours and the US.
As a result, it is unsurprising there exists a growing consensus amongst Western publics and policymakers that China represents a clear threat to their interests and values. Polls have shown that majorities in the UK, US and much of Europe have negative perceptions of China, and the attitudes of Western governments have mirrored this. Sanctions have, for instance, been recently imposed on China over its human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
There is good reason for Western concern. Many of the values espoused by China’s ruling Communist Party (CCP) run in direct contravention with the values of the liberal world order. This is significant since Chinese foreign policy is argued to be largely influenced by the party’s own domestic priorities, first among them the need to preserve CCP rule in China. Motivated by this desire to hold onto power, the CCP has acted to brutally suppress any internal threats to its authority, with little regard for democratic freedoms or human rights.
In Xinjiang it has unleashed a vast campaign of repression against the Uighur Muslim minority, involving mass incarceration, intense surveillance, forced labour, and forced sterilisations. Meanwhile in Hong Kong, China has effectively abandoned its commitment to the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ principle, forcing through greater and greater restrictions on the territory’s political autonomy and cracking down on free speech, despite mass public opposition.
Thus, for the CCP, a Western led world order rooted in the liberal values of democracy and human rights represents an existential threat to its power. That the party, and Xi personally, place such a great emphasis on restoring national prestige in establishing their legitimacy to rule, only enhances the danger China poses to the current world order.
Consequently, over the past few years, China has been increasingly challenging international norms, aggressively asserting its internationally unrecognised claims of sovereignty over much of the South China Sea and raising the rhetoric over the issue of Taiwan. In response to these events and China’s internal repression, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has denounced China’s actions as a threat to ‘the rules-based order that maintains global stability’.
Blinken is right. China’s actions severely undermine the rules-based international order. The most severe threat it poses is the threat of example. Allowing China to trample over the current rules-based order would set a terrible precedent. If the world’s democracies do not take decisive action against China over its human rights violations in Xinjiang, disregard of international treaties, such as with the UK over Hong Kong, and the bullying of its neighbours and disrespect for international maritime borders in the South China sea, then other decidedly illiberal countries may be similarly encouraged to flout the rules.
To prevent the decay of the rules based international order, the liberal democracies of the West must demonstrate to the world that regardless of how large or economically strong a country is, it must adhere to the rules or suffer consequences. As a result, the West cannot just contain China, it must confront it and engage with it. This multipronged strategy would involve strong multilateral deterrent efforts in the Indo-Pacific region and robust action to discourage repression within China, alongside cooperation with China on issues of common interest.
What role can the UK play?
Owing to military and economic realities, any Western or global effort to stand up to China will depend upon the US. Fortunately, that country appears increasingly willing to take on this responsibility. In contrast, by describing China as a ‘systemic competitor’ which nonetheless requires continued engagement, the UK Government’s approach may appear inconsistent. Yet it is this approach which provides the opportunity for the UK to play a key role in shoring up the liberal rules-based order.
In fact, there are four key things that the UK can do:
1 — Focus on regional allies.
China lacks allies in the region and its aggression makes it unlikely it will gain any soon despite its economic efforts. The UK should focus on forging economic, intelligence, trade, and military partnerships with countries such as Japan, Australia, and India, but also smaller powers, to create a strong bloc to combat China in the Indo-Pacific. Pooling resources to increase capabilities and then carrying out increased freedom of navigation exercises and naval drills alongside the US may go a long way to deterring China in the South China Sea.
2 — Present a united front alongside Europe.
Despite Brexit the UK still largely collaborates with its European partners in many areas of foreign policy and can collaborate with them to take a more robust stance against China. The EU’s involvement in the Xinjiang sanctions and French and German eagerness to deploy naval assets to the South China Sea suggests there is scope for this.
3 — Engage with China on climate change and trade.
It is important to demonstrate to the world that this is not just the West confronting China on everything and that when you work within the rules you are respected and engaged positively. The UK can play a pivotal role in this regard by bridging the gap between Washington and Beijing, supporting the US in pushing back against China in some areas, while also making sure not to lose China’s cooperation on important matters of global interest like the world economy and climate change.
4 — Make human rights a central part of engagement.
The UK must and can reduce its strategic economic reliance upon China, while continuing to remain an important trade and financial partner. However, economic and diplomatic cooperation with China should be made contingent upon human rights issues. China does not like to be isolated, so if engagement is unsuccessful, the UK should put pressure on it by working through international institutions to condemn and act against its human rights abuses and breaking of international law.
In undertaking such a strategy, the UK could help show the world that liberal democracies remain committed to both their values and the rules-based international order which upholds them. It remains to be seen whether the Government is truly committed to its proposed tilt to the Indo-Pacific, but if it is, then there is every reason to believe that it can play an essential role in defending the liberal world order against the growing threat posed by China.
