Britain’s priorities

Shifting or staying?

We dined in an English country house today where an old friend from the China community and his wife are gradually retiring. No, I did not take photographs as I decided it was too gauche but what a place. It was also finally a decently-sized luncheon rather than the surprisingly large British meals on this trip. It was well worth our journey there and back.

We asked our colleague whether China is nearly as front and center here as in the States. He shook his head, saying not so much. This is surprising, on the one hand, as the Rishi Sunak Tory government in power until last month was a founding party to the AUKUS program with Canberra and Washington, implying Westminster believed, as of late 2022 when the accord appeared, the China threat a truly vital once since AUKUS will cost the British hundreds of millions of Pounds Stirling over the next several decades as British, Yankee, and Australian governments and industries gear up to share technology to create new submarines capable of challenging the PLAN throughout the Indo-Pacific, if not global, realm. Just last week, the Starmer government named a new government advisor, Sir Stephen Lovegrove, as the point person to liaise with counterparts to “maximize benefits” for all.

At the same time, Britain’s Royal Navy is demonstrably more modest, thus less engaged in the region over the past century. Those of us in the United States forget that when the Great War, as so many memorials in small towns we are visiting on this trip call the cataclysm, ended in November 1918, George V was sovereign over India and Pakistan, much of Africa and the Middle East, islands across the world. That included, of course, the Crown colony of Hong Kong, at the southern end of the Pearl River delta flowing from mainland China. Great Britain was a global power with global responsibilities and privileges.

But, Hong Kong reverted to China on 1 July 1997, well over a quarter century ago, much as those other areas became independent over the 1940s, &0s, and 60s.

Today, Britain remains is a key a founding and member of NATO, holds a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, and is a trusted ally of Washington. Perhaps the ‘Special Relationship’ is not as unique as it was when the United States entered World War II, our ties with Britain are important, enduring, and strategic.

However, Britain is increasingly consumed with its own future, whether because of “buyer’s remorse” over Brexit, internal stresses over governing (will the Protestant counties of Northern Ireland really remain with London or shift to the Irish Republic at some point? Is Scottish or Welsh independence dead forever? What can be done to prevent the racial violence late last month following the minders in Southport? And other close-to-home concerns for each of those villages I touted day before yesterday).

The new Prime Minister stated only last week that he would like to improve relations between the Middle Kingdom and Britain. That does not necessarily translate into London acquiescing to Beijing’s view of the world but it points to a trend Chinese leaders have seen, regardless of the country, over decades: a persistent return to desiring improved trade, thus economic be predicts, through closer ties with China. That should actually surprise no one because the PRC’s growth no longer is stratospheric but China’s market maintains a sustained positive picture, meaning other states seek an inroad for their exports.

And Beijing expects this will happen despite pledges to the contrary or the drumbeat against China so pervasive in the U.S. capital these days. Despite the condemnations following Tian’anmen in 1989, most countries returned within 18 months.

Additionally, British leaders likely realize that regardless which is the incoming administration, Britain’s role as primary U.S. partner abroad is over. The world is too complex for that to occur with the UK so self-absorbed and Washington too overcommitted everywhere. China becomes one more piece in a jigsaw puzzle for Westminter to put into place as it sorts its interests around the world. This strikes me a rational decision-making realistically recognizing the financial resources available.

At least it is weighing China as a relative issue while Washington treats everything as its military responsibility rather than working off a serious strategy replete with understanding the value and relative disadvantage of each tool of statecraft against a prioritized list of concerns.that is a complicated criticism because strategy is , in fact, bloody hard to do.

Will AUKUS always be as important to Britain or Australia? Time will tell as foci shift with an evolving strategic landscape and pocketbook options.

Actions create consequences, immediate, medium, and long-term. Things shift rather than straightlining outcomes due to seen and completely unforeseen circumstances.

Thank you for reading Actions today. Please feel free to circulate if you find it if value. I genuinely welcome your thoughts on this or any other column.

it rained buckets last night and today so the photographs are few. I did manage these garden shots yesterday upon arriving in Jolly Old England.

Be well and be safe. FIN

Joe Leahy and Jim Packard, “Keir Starmer tells Xi Jinping he wants closer UK-China relations”, FT.com, 23 August 2024.

Ministry of Defence (sic) and the Right Hon John Healey, MP, “New government adviser to maximise (sic) benefits of AUKUS partnership”, www.gov.uk, August 2024, retrieved at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-government-adviser-to-maximise-benefits-of-aukus-partnership