The
Observer view on post-Brexit Britain’s position in the world
A
vulnerable Britain faces fearsome predators such as China and Russia
Observer editorial
Sunday 14 August
2016 00.03 BST
China’s senior
diplomat in Britain, Liu Xiaoming, has a reputation for undiplomatic
remarks. The ambassador’s infamous likening of Japanese prime
minister Shinzo Abe’s government to Lord Voldemort, Harry Potter’s
threatening nemesis, did little to ease historical bilateral tensions
between the two countries. His blunt remarks last week about the
delay to the Hinkley Point nuclear power station project ordered by
Theresa May also jarred badly.
Liu put the
government on notice that cancellation of the troubled £18bn scheme,
in which the state-owned company, China General Nuclear Power (CGN),
has (or would have) a 33% stake, could have serious, negative
consequences for wider trade, investment and political relations
between Britain and China. His warnings about damaged “mutual
trust” and a “critical juncture” sounded less like the counsel
of a friend, more like the threats of a bully.
There was a time,
not so long ago, when ill-considered public comments by a senior
Chinese official might have been safely ignored. Britain was often
the target of vituperative abuse in the period leading up to the Hong
Kong handover in 1997. Chris Patten, the last British governor, still
bears the scars. The pressure did not discernibly affect government
policy. But times change and so, too, does the balance of power,
which has swung decisively in China’s favour in the succeeding two
decades. Britain needs China now in ways it did not in the past.
This does not mean
insulting or threatening behaviour is any more acceptable. But it
does mean that May will feel obliged to give serious weight to
China’s concerns over Hinkley when a final decision is made next
month. Similar pragmatic calculations lay behind the ingratiating
welcome afforded Xi Jinping, China’s unelected Communist leader, in
London last autumn, and the former chancellor George Osborne’s
myopic championing of a lucrative new “golden era” in
Sino-British ties. If it is to prosper in a globalised 21st century
prospectively dominated by China and other emerging powers such as
India, Britain must, to some degree, kowtow to Beijing.
In recent years,
China has invested more capital in Britain than in any other EU
country. As an export market, its potential is unmatched. Britain,
meanwhile, despite all Osborne’s austerity, is deeply in debt and
living beyond its means. As Stephen King of HSBC put it: “If the
Chinese turn their backs on us, then we’ll have to tighten our
belts even further, particularly if we’re given a frosty reception
by the Chinese-sponsored Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank,
reducing the opportunities for British business to operate within the
world’s most dynamic region.”
But this changed
reality is also partly the product of choices freely entered into. By
voting to leave the EU, Britain has made an additional rod for its
back. Brexit will exacerbate Britain’s vulnerability, both economic
and political, in a dangerous world where, as Mark Carney, the Bank
of England governor, rightly says, it depends increasingly on the
kindness of strangers. As we have argued in the past, it may be time,
as American and west European power fades, for countries such as
China to shape a new world order. Who knows, they may eventually do a
better job. It would not be difficult.
Yet it is also true
that China’s one-party system, its huge democratic deficit, its
lack of transparency, its disregard for human rights, religious
freedoms and international legal norms, and yes, its leaders’
tendency towards bullying are sharply at odds with British values,
standards and policy aims. The Hinkley decision has suddenly been
rendered more fraught by US allegations of industrial espionage
involving CGN and by Australia’s refusal, on grounds of security,
to allow Chinese control of a key energy asset.
This tension between
who we are and who we do business with has always been present. A
good example in recent decades has been Britain’s close and
controversial collaboration with oil-rich Saudi Arabia. But
corrupting though the alliance with Riyadh was, it did not
fundamentally change Britain’s worldview. The case is altered now.
Our wilful undermining of our key European alliances means that over
time, Britain, alone, may struggle to stand up to the likes of China,
defend its values and maintain relationships based on mutual respect.
There will be more Hinkleys. The effect could be highly corrosive.
In the big, bad,
lonely world beyond Brexit, predators of many varieties roam. Last
week saw a reminder from the incorrigible Vladimir Putin, Russia’s
president, that the Crimea crisis of 2014 is far from over and that
the war in Ukraine could reignite at any moment. The particulars of
the latest flare-up are less significant than the fact that Putin
again appears ready to place European security at hazard, just as his
actions regularly challenge Nato, his bombers and helicopter gunships
murder civilians in Aleppo and his sports officials blithely ignore
international doping rules.
Surely nobody is
sensibly suggesting Britain, in a fit of panicky, post-Brexit
international outreach, should try to bury its differences with the
reckless, lawless regime in Moscow, notwithstanding last week’s
embarrassing telephone calls to the Kremlin by May and Boris Johnson,
the foreign secretary. Putin, after all, stands accused by an
official British inquiry of direct complicity in the murder of
Alexander Litvinenko, the former KGB agent poisoned with polonium in
London. If Putin were an African leader, there would be calls for him
to be investigated by now by the International Criminal Court for
possible war crimes in Syria, Ukraine and Chechnya.
Yet the question
nevertheless arises: how does Britain, no longer working in close
concert with France, Germany and Poland, propose to manage the
Russian problem? Will Moscow, like China sensing weakness and
uncertainty, be tempted to pressure and bully May’s untested
government, even as armed forces chiefs warn they are outgunned by
the Russians? Will May try to win Putin round or will she confront
him? Her first test comes next month at the G20 summit in China. One
thing is already certain: the hapless Johnson is no match for Sergei
Lavrov, his veteran counterpart. A Lavrov-Johnson summit would be
like inviting a wolf to take tea with a tethered goat.
Brexit’s champions
promised to forge a range of post-Brussels international
relationships, thereby creating a more vibrant, prosperous Britain.
China and Russia show just how perilous and problematic this project
is. History suggests Britain can look to the US for succour and
support. But with American confidence failing, and a weird Trumpian
dystopia taking root, even that fall-back seems in jeopardy.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário