The US has backed down in its tariff war with China. Thanks to US President Donald Trump’s egotistical diplomacy, rare earths can again flow one way, soybeans the other, and less of the chemicals used to make fentanyl in between. No matter that the war was Trump’s own idea and seems to have been a stunt. The stunt is over. Trump has played his favorite game of dealmaker, much to the discomfort of millions.
Meanwhile the UK still cannot make up its mind if China is its enemy. In 2008, British officials visited Beijing Olympics authorities to discuss the next games in London in 2012. The government told them to “raise” human rights issues, about which the British government was most concerned. I am told the Chinese reacted with sympathy at the Britons’ embarrassment at broaching the matter, and then everyone got down to business. Soon, China was a friend, certainly to then-British prime minister David Cameron and then-British chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne.
Not today. China is now a much-enhanced world power, and in the eyes of some, a threat to the UK’s national security. The recent confusion over whether two British officials were Chinese spies has largely and absurdly revolved around whether the Chinese “threat” was greater to a Conservative Party government than to a Labour Party one. China was clearly recruiting spies everywhere, as do most countries. It sought a huge London embassy, befriended former prince Andrew and required former British prime minister Boris Johnson to send two aircraft carriers to patrol the South China Sea.
Pompous countries crave enemies. They have large military empires heavily reliant on them, empires fiendishly resistant to dismantling. After the fall of the Soviet Union, a senior advisor to former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev joked to US officials: “We are going to do a terrible thing to you — we are going to deprive you of an enemy.”
Who is the US’ new enemy? The answer is clearly China. However, as Trump has found, it is an enemy with which it is hard to come to terms. It does not send its armies overseas. As it challenges the US for world economic supremacy, it snaps the bond once thought to hold capitalism in the arms of democracy. It gets richer and richer. China’s BRICS-plus alliance with India and others has overtaken the G7 in world trade. Beijing policy expert Henry Wang (王?耀) even mooted last week that a China-led BRICS force could police a ceasefire border in Ukraine. It would be a sensational intervention.
G.K. Chesterton wrote that “those who appeal to the head rather than the heart … are necessarily men of violence. We speak of ‘touching’ a man’s heart, but we can do nothing to his head but hit it.” Trump could yet be that blow to the head. He is forcing NATO to ask itself what it is really about. He is telling the world not to rely on the US to police its conflicts, in the manner trumpeted by former US presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, and the two Bush presidents. Washington might be about to turn in on itself and deny its manifest destiny to set the world to rights. After all, it was founded to turn its back on the arguments infesting the outside world.
Since the UK, too, enjoyed global fantasies, it of all nations should understand this. It cannot refuse to come to terms with the new Beijing. Yes, China does terrible things to its minorities. It denies freedom of speech and neurotically spies on foreign states. In the new age of artificial intelligence, China is clearly out to rival the US.
Since this rivalry would probably encompass attacks on other countries’ cybersecurity, it makes sense for any country to guard its digital space. Whether that extends to embassy buildings is a matter for experts, but clearly, to locate a foreign embassy just five minutes’ walk from a center of global financial intelligence is a bad idea. China must understand this. Would it let MI6 erect a headquarters overlooking Tiananmen Square?
The UK is no longer a superpower and must deal with superpowers, as must all second-division states. However, in one respect it is unique: Its soft power is probably equal to none, notably its cultural and teaching assets. It has educated more world leaders — apparently 50 — and takes in more Chinese students than any other country, including the US. It also welcomes half a million Chinese tourists a year, many drawn by aspects of British popular culture. We do not measure soft power, but its influence cannot be negligible — and is certainly profitable.
It is therefore absurd that the British government is planning to splurge billions more on defending the UK from a purely notional third world war. At the same time it is slashing the budget of its overseas cultural institution, the British Council. The council is being forced to withdraw from 60 countries and sell its entire property portfolio.
The message of current events in China is simple. The world has changed from the one on which the UK has long founded its foreign and defense policy. It needs to reassess the impact its limited power might still have on the world outside. That must include getting on well with China, and not hyping it as an enemy.
Simon Jenkins is a Guardian columnist.
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
When 17,000 troops from the US, the Philippines, Australia, Japan, Canada, France and New Zealand spread across the Philippine archipelago for the Balikatan military exercise, running from tomorrow through May 8, the official language would be about interoperability, readiness and regional peace. However, the strategic subtext is becoming harder to ignore: The exercises are increasingly about the military geography around Taiwan. Balikatan has always carried political weight. This year, however, the exercise looks different in ways that matter not only to Manila and Washington, but also to Taipei. What began in 2023 as a shift toward a more serious deterrence posture
RSS