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.
The government and local industries breathed a sigh of relief after Shin Kong Life Insurance Co last week said it would relinquish surface rights for two plots in Taipei’s Beitou District (北投) to Nvidia Corp. The US chip-design giant’s plan to expand its local presence will be crucial for Taiwan to safeguard its core role in the global artificial intelligence (AI) ecosystem and to advance the nation’s AI development. The land in dispute is owned by the Taipei City Government, which in 2021 sold the rights to develop and use the two plots of land, codenamed T17 and T18, to the
Art and cultural events are key for a city’s cultivation of soft power and international image, and how politicians engage with them often defines their success. Representative to Austria Liu Suan-yung’s (劉玄詠) conducting performance and Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen’s (盧秀燕) show of drumming and the Tainan Jazz Festival demonstrate different outcomes when politics meet culture. While a thoughtful and professional engagement can heighten an event’s status and cultural value, indulging in political theater runs the risk of undermining trust and its reception. During a National Day reception celebration in Austria on Oct. 8, Liu, who was formerly director of the
US President Donald Trump has announced his eagerness to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-un while in South Korea for the APEC summit. That implies a possible revival of US-North Korea talks, frozen since 2019. While some would dismiss such a move as appeasement, renewed US engagement with North Korea could benefit Taiwan’s security interests. The long-standing stalemate between Washington and Pyongyang has allowed Beijing to entrench its dominance in the region, creating a myth that only China can “manage” Kim’s rogue nation. That dynamic has allowed Beijing to present itself as an indispensable power broker: extracting concessions from Washington, Seoul
Taiwan’s labor force participation rate among people aged 65 or older was only 9.9 percent for 2023 — far lower than in other advanced countries, Ministry of Labor data showed. The rate is 38.3 percent in South Korea, 25.7 percent in Japan and 31.5 percent in Singapore. On the surface, it might look good that more older adults in Taiwan can retire, but in reality, it reflects policies that make it difficult for elderly people to participate in the labor market. Most workplaces lack age-friendly environments, and few offer retraining programs or flexible job arrangements for employees older than 55. As
RSS