Opinion | Britannia doesn't rule the waves anymore
By Tom Fowdy
Russia's War in Ukraine is having the adverse effect of ramping up tensions all around the world, and for Ultra-Hawks such as British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, there's never been more opportunity embedded in that. Truss, described as "demented" by Australia's former Prime Minister Paul Keating, has been long seeking to shape a foreign policy based upon ideological confrontation, particularly against China, and such intentions became explicit last week with a highly provocative speech at a London event where she took aim at both Moscow and Beijing.
Although in her typical style Truss has long sought to rant on about ideas such as a "network of liberty" seeking to affirm western political, economic and military dominance over the rest of the world, Truss affirmed the war in Ukraine as "our war", called for driving Russia out of all Ukraine, and in her most aggressive posture towards China yet, demanded that Beijing "play by the rules" stating that its rise was "not inevitable", with Truss also vowing to involve the UK and NATO in the Taiwan region. A Financial Times report a few days later stated the UK and US had held a defence meeting over Taiwan. Arguably so, Truss's address amounts to the single most aggressive set of comments ever given by a British foreign secretary concerning Beijing.
But British foreign policy right now is not level-headed, and that transcends far beyond Truss as an individual. The process of Brexit, Britain's withdrawal from the European Union, is an irrational decision which was premised on identity rather than empirical merits, that being the nostalgia of Empire, or "Britannia rules the waves". Supporters of Brexit had grown to see participation in Europe as an assault on Britain's exceptionalist identity, and argued that by exiting this union, Britain can return to its "true destiny" of being "in the world" that is projecting power and trading with far-flung nations and imposing its own ideological vision on them.
China of course is no stranger to that legacy. With the opium wars, Britain opened what Chinese people understand as the "century of humiliation" when European powers learned they could use their growing military might to force political and economic concessions on a declining Qing Dynasty and quasi-colonize the country. Liz Truss, addicted not to opium but this nostalgia of British Imperial glory and self-righteousness, clearly believes that London is capable of doing the same thing to China again, and is hungry for confrontation with Beijing, showing ever less restraint as time goes by.
But none of this fiery rhetoric has any basis in reality. The world has changed, and circumstances are no longer favorable for the UK. Britain's withdrawal from the European Union was in fact nothing more than a self-inflicted wound which has had a huge detrimental impact on the economy across the board. It has created supply shortages, labor shortages, added to burgeoning in inflation and severely hurt services too. This has coupled with surging energy prices and shrinking standards of living. The truth is that in lieu of Brexit, Britain's economic relationship with China is of critical importance and Boris Johnson had long understood this and made it clear. The United Kingdom cannot afford to distance itself from the largest consumer market and trading nation on Earth.
However, the Prime Minister is increasingly struggling for influence with these ultra-hawks within the Conservative Party who are attempting to mould Brexit into a broader ideological and civilizational struggle in the name of Anglophone exceptionalism. These people, such as Truss, do not base Britain's economic and trade interests on empirical realities but see it also as an extension of identity politics and Imperial nostalgia. They argue that Britain should be primarily trading with the nations of the Anglosphere (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States) as well as of course India, which Britain also heralds a post-colonial nostalgia towards, and not of course on the actual merits of what these countries can contribute to Britain.
For example, according to House of Commons Research, Britain's "free trade agreement" with Australia will only increase GDP by 0.08% per annum (which also has been widely criticized for undermining British agriculture), illustrating the bizarre decision making of the British government premising trade on identity and economic reality. Whereas China, which has a bilateral trade with Britain in terms of £100 billion per annum, is seemingly off limits. If it wasn't clear already, post-Brexit Britain is harboring a foreign policy which is based purely on nationalistic sentiment and Imperial good feeling, and as a result has no coherent grasp of the country's strategic realities or national interest, leading to self-destructive decision making. As an old saying goes: "the lunatics are in charge of the Asylum".
Despite the deep interdependence and mutual self-interest of the British-China relationship, there is nothing that could be more offensive to the Chinese people themselves to a Britain roleplaying its Imperial past and believing that it has the right to bring China to keel, there is a political will in Beijing that history won't be allowed to repeat itself. China is the 2nd largest economy in the world with a GDP estimated at over $17 trillion, whilst the UK is a stagnating country whose future prosperity will hinge upon access to its markets. If Britain is to be truly "global" as its government markets its to be, then the sensible choice is to step back from the brink, regain control of its foreign policy from the United States, and engage with China on pragmatic, realistic and independent terms. Fanatical Cold War chauvinism will undermine decades worth of progress.
The author is a well-seasoned writer and analyst with a large portfolio related to China topics, especially in the field of politics, international relations and more. He graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University in 2018.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | American hegemony is rooted on an unwillingness to compromise
Opinion | The Principles of China's zero-COVID approach remain correct
Comment