If world hegemony is China’s aim, and the end justifies the means, how can the conflict with Democratic values ever be bridged?
- “Britain is under attack from a meddling and bullying China” – Times 4 July
- “…West unfit to challenge Xi’s bid for global hegemony…” – Observer 5 July
- “Polite but inflexible resistances is best response to China” – Daily Telegraph 9 July.
The above lines were quoted on 19 July 2020 with others in a Sherbhert article, CHINA’S RULERS ENDANGER WORLD FREEDOMS – THE FREE WORLD’S REACTION IS THE BIG GENERATIONAL ISSUE. They could just as easily come from the same papers in July 2021. The relationship between the Western and other democratic countries on the one hand and China on the other has not advanced in the last year, and perhaps it has gone backwards. The China and U.S. foreign ministers seemed to make no progress at their July meeting, and, if they remain at loggerheads and impasse, that sets the global tone. China continues on its path of military and commercial expansion globally, using its clout to buy particularly friendships with fringe countries outside the G20, which itself is relatively disorganised and unstrategic. The declared commitment of the Chinese Communist Party to overthrow democracy remains unrestrained, as the CCP celebrates its 100th anniversary. To make an impression on the CCP to adapt its approach and influence it to change still requires the “free” countries to show united determination not to be undermined or ignored – but that unity has not advanced materially, other than by the USA seeking closer cooperation with its allies, since Joe Biden became President, reversing the Trump approach.
THE BIG ISSUE
That China and the “free” democratic world, both in the West and East, need to build a relationship which is not adversarial but works constructively in cooperation for the benefit of global harmony and prosperity is perhaps the most important issue facing politicians today. Some will say that surely climate change is the ultimate global challenge, threatening global upheaval, peace and disasters of existential proportions. That may be true in one way and finding solutions to prevent catastrophe is fundamental: but those solutions are perhaps out of reach unless China, which means now the CCP, are a cooperative participant in reducing global warming and the changes needed in environmental behaviour. The efforts of other lesser nations, such as the UK, however admirable, may be fruitless and simply a costly waste, without Chinese commitment.
China, through the CCP, is a key to resolving so many global challenges, including pandemic risk, but it seems to be following a strategy designed solely to see itself becoming the global leading power, whatever that takes. To force the CCP, by military means, to change is simply not an option, which the CCP knows. Is it an option to apply moral and economic pressure from outside to produce real results? Is it possible that people within China will simply get fed up with the CCP communist requirement of individual subordination to the State, where human rights are of little value if the CCP feels any threat? Is it not the case that CCP power was bought in the second half of the 20th century with over 70 million killings? Where can persuasion lead against such a philosophy?
26 JULY 2021
This was a normal day in July, in so far as any day is normal in the pandemic. But even a cursory analysis of newspaper columns illustrates well the continuing daily relationship issues raised by China.
In the UK, the Times reports on the proposed sale of the UK’s Newport Water Fab to a Dutch company owned by the Chinese firm, Wingtech. The buyer of course denies that the CCP have any influence over it, but is it the case that any Chinese group can avoid influence by the CCP? That seems naïve. Newport is the largest remaining microchip manufacturer in the UK, but small in world terms. Microchips are industry critical and there is a world shortage. The UK has insufficient capacity and needs greater self-sufficiency. China too is not a leader in microchips, but Taiwan and South Korea are. Unbelievably the UK business Secretary of State was not going to review the acquisition. Security experts are up in arms. Ciaran Martin, ex-head of the National Cyber Security Centre, is reported to have said “the future of semiconductor supply is a first-order strategic issue. It goes to the heart of how we should be dealing with China.” Boris Johnson has ordered the change of ownership to be reviewed. Surely it will be stopped. This small corporate transaction embodies the dilemma of dealing with a country which is totally mistrusted.
In the same vein, a UK games tech company, Sumo, is due to be bought by Tencent of China. Surely this too will be examined, as China continues its strategy of acquiring foreign technology. It is to be remembered that there is no reciprocity – it is hard to imagine any Western company being able to acquire advanced technology through a Chinese acquisition!
All major newspapers on 26 July report that the UKGOV is seeking to end the involvement of the state-owned Chinese Nuclear company, CGN, in UK nuclear power projects. It had been brought in as a core financier and builder of new nuclear plants by David Cameron and George Osborne in their ill-judged dalliance with the CCP, misunderstanding their real strategy, in the search for any foreign money. It will be extraordinary if CGN is ultimately allowed to play any material role in UK strategic energy supply. The UK and other Western nations are paying a price for misunderstanding CCP intentions.
On 26 July, the FT also reported “Chinese education crackdown hits foreign investors”. Private education in China has attracted considerable Western investment in a market valued, before 26 July, at some $100 billion. The CCP is now making regulations banning companies which teach school curriculum from making a profit, raising capital or listing on stock exchanges, and will prevent foreign investment. JP Morgan comment “…in our view this makes these stocks virtually uninvestable”. The FT ran a large piece on the mysterious disappearance of Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba, majority owner of ANT, and an outspoken Chinese multi-billionaire. Undoubtedly, the CCP are reining him in, as his public appearances and words have been minimal in recent months, and the IPO of ANT was stopped by the CCP. Nobody in China will be allowed to be a threat. Meanwhile reports, including on 26 July, state that France is militarily committing to supporting its Polynesian islands in the Pacific, and the UK is stationing two Royal Navy ships in the region. There seems to be an accumulating series of unrelated actions by the West and China, demonstrating a real dissatisfaction with each other but falling short of declarations of hostility. But strong speeches are out there.
CYBER ATTACKS, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND THE WORLD AT RISK
In March 2021, Joe Biden delivered a speech reported as “I’ll save world from an overmighty China, vows Biden”- The Times 26 March 2021. He spelt out the CCP’s ambition to be the leading, wealthiest and most powerful country in the world, and he promised to stop that domination. However, the genocide of the Uighurs continues and even fellow Muslims around the world fail to jump to their defence, perhaps in fear of reprisal. The West bemoans CCP behaviour on human rights at least, applying continued diplomatic pressure, though this provides little relief to the Uighurs. Hong Kong is now a true satellite of China in breach of the 1995 treaty, and all resistance, verbal or demonstrative, is punished, whether it occurs in Hong Kong or by dissidents outside. Activists must leave or kowtow. In each of these cases, the CCP denies wrongdoing. And so, nothing needs to change, from a CCP perspective.
Chinese cyberattacks on Western entities are legion, if UK, U.S., and other Western security sources are correct. An article in the Economist of 24 July records that despite Presidents Obama and Xi pledging in 2015 to lay off cyber attacks on corporations and trade secrets of each other’s country, allegations continue of disruption and technology thefts by China. In July 2021, the U.S. revealed that the Chinese Ministry of State Security had attacked Microsoft’s Exchange giving access to Chinese hackers to tens of thousands of networks worldwide. The U.S. Government declared Chinese hacking to be a major threat to the security of the U.S. and its allies. Western allies such as the UK and EU, condemned the activity. Lots of words. Who knows what if any action is being taken, but no public sanctions are adopted. Is the CCP still organising cyberattacks?
Meanwhile, the CCP remains sworn to take back Taiwan: it must be almost certain that in the next few years, after its military build-up makes it feel secure against any forceful resistance by the U.S., it will seek to do so, hopefully peacefully. Not just because Mr. Xi has sworn to do so because it, the CCP says, belongs to China, but perhaps to make China world leader in microchips. Two birds? Hong Kong’s limited freedom has been stolen with impunity after all.
As the CCP celebrates its centenary, it presents the “free” world with massive challenges. An article by Edward Lucas on 3 July in the Times describes a version of the CCP’s and especially the Xi approach summarised by “there is no sign of time running out for the party-state that has set its sights on controlling every aspect of its people’s lives”. And abroad he describes how it makes huge efforts to control any discussion about China, where there may be criticism, and to persuade others that its political model of authoritarian state control is superior to that of the West. And with some success, including in the UK as many academics seem to be in thrall to their financial charms at least. In a Sunday Times article headlined “Fawning and complacent, the West has eased China’s path to power”, Matthew Syed states that Beijing has broken rules with impunity, and that we (the West) seem to have forgotten it is bent on destroying democracy.
The world needs a constructive China. Without seeking to beat it, it is necessary to show China it will be in its interests to befriend not alienate the developed democracies. Those democracies need to trade with China, on which they depend for many vital products. But this must not be at any cost, including a blind eye to morality where human rights are concerned, and ignoring out and out aggression and disruption deliberately designed by the CCP. That reliance also needs to be reduced to a level where it is no longer a strategic lever for China. It may be necessary to forego considerable Chinese money and prevent them taking over Western assets. The relationship is a minefield, and a few mines will have to be allowed to go off. First, the Western and Asian democracies need a combined strategy not to subdue China but to have the CCP come to its senses, and it will need implementation with steadfastness and unity. If the CCP can divide and rule, then democracies may only have themselves to blame for handing control to a regime they will come to regret. At the moment there is no unified whole to divide. Will the July headlines of 2022 differ from 2020?
