MPs Report: Britain Should Officially Designate China as ‘Threat’

A view of The Houses of Parliament in early morning sunshine. (John Walton/PA)

Britain should officially designate China as a “threat” instead of a “systemic competitor,” according to a report by members of Parliament (MPs), which says this must be done in tandem with fading out reliance on Beijing.

The UK Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC)—an influential cross-party group of MPs—on Dec. 18 published a report into the UK’s official foreign policy and strategy policy.

“The UK’s economic dependence on China poses a significant and delicate challenge to the UK’s foreign policy,” FAC Chair Alicia Kearns said in a statement. “The more reliant we are on others, the less resilient we are as a nation.

Undated file photo of Conservative MP Alicia Kearns. (UK Parliament/Jessica Taylor/PA)

“The Government must tread a fine line—explicitly acknowledging the UK’s national security interests, and shoring up our nation’s resilience, while also continuing to deal with China as an economic partner.”

Whether China will be officially redesignated as a “threat”—along with the broader question of whether Britain will toughen its stance toward Beijing—has been up in the air since Boris Johnson’s departure as prime minister.

‘Golden Era Is Over’

Liz Truss had signalled a more hardline approach on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) during her tenure as foreign secretary and during the campaign for what was to be her short-lived premiership. But she was out of office before the widely expected adoption of “threat” was officially enacted.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak notably fell short of using the word “threat” during his first foreign policy speech at the end of November, instead saying that the regime posed “a systemic challenge to our values and interests.”

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak during his visit to RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire, England, on Dec. 9, 2022. (Joe Giddens/PA Media)

“Let’s be clear. The so-called golden era is over, along with a naive idea that trade would automatically lead to social and political reform,” Sunak said. “But nor should we rely on simplistic Cold War rhetoric.”

He said the UK will “make an evolutionary leap” in its approach, including strengthening defence of its values and the openness on which its prosperity depends and the economy at home, and standing up to competitors “not with grand rhetoric, but with robust pragmatism.”

The blueprint for current British security and foreign policy is a document called the Integrated Review. Published in March 2021, it was billed at the time as the greatest revamp of defence, diplomacy, and global economic direction since the Cold War.

The report by the committee of MPs was a critique of the Integrated Review, noting that “following the Russian invasion of Ukraine and other geopolitical developments there is a case for an update.”

Action, Not Words

The committee report states that unless the government matches words with actions, any amped-up rhetoric toward Beijing may prompt a backlash that Britain would be ill-equipped to handle.

“The debate over whether China is a friend or foe does little to settle the practical questions ahead of us,” Kearns said. “Any re-designation of China risks amounting to little more than semantics—particularly if a change in language isn’t coupled with substantial new policies and action.”

The report says: “If the UK is to take a meaningful stand against the Chinese government, we need to wean ourselves off our dependence on China.

“If we are more resilient to the PRC’s [People’s Republic of China’s] weaponisation of supply chains, we can be more effective on the world stage as a global player. Britain should stand absolute against interference in our own country by the PRC and this should be expressed within the IR [Integrated Review].”

The influence of the CCP in Britain has been brought to the fore by several issues in recent months, including revelations that Chinese police stations have been set up in London and Glasgow, the beating of protesters outside of a Chinese Consulate, and the blocking of various tech company takeovers by CCP-backed investors.

Diplomats Withdrawn Over Consulate Beating

Last week, the government all but expelled six Chinese diplomats who were wanted by police for questioning over the assault of a Hong Kong pro-democracy protester at the Chinese Consulate in Manchester.

The foreign secretary announced on Dec. 14 that Beijing was withdrawing its diplomats after the government had requested that they waive diplomatic immunity and submit to police questioning.

Several lawmakers had previously called on the government to expel the diplomats over the incident.

On Oct. 19, Zheng Xiyuan, consul general of the Chinese Communist Party in Manchester, was interviewed by Sky News and said it was his "duty" to drag a Hong Kong protester into consulate grounds, where he beat him. (Screenshot of Hong Kong Indigenous Defense Force/Sky News)

The government stopped short of officially expelling the diplomats. A government minister, however, told MPs on Dec. 15 that they effectively told the Chinese regime to either waive immunity and submit the diplomats to police questioning or withdraw them.

Kearns was one of several MPs who called on the government to go further, saying that the victim of the assault has been denied justice by the diplomats’ escape, and called on the government to declare them persona non grata.

Boost Reliance on Critical Infrastructure

Last week, the UK also imposed restrictions on the Chinese takeover of a shell company in relation to the security of an important UK electricity asset and the security of services provided to the UK National Grid.

Since the UK’s National Security and Investment Act came into effect, the UK has issued a dozen such notices, with seven of them targeting Chinese takeovers.

The FAC report said that ministers should simultaneously boost the UK’s resilience, cutting reliance on its economic partner for critical national infrastructure, energy security, consumer goods, and technologies.

The MPs also called for clarification on the UK’s security relationship with key European partners, saying they will be exploring further how this could be “formalised or institutionalised.”

They said the IR is right to highlight the UK’s “increasing interest” in the Indo-Pacific but criticised the government’s use of the word “tilt” in this context, arguing it “sent the wrong message to the international community.”

“The Government cannot afford to be seen to tilt away from the Euro-Atlantic,” the report stated.

“The Government should explain if, and how, it expects the UK to contribute to European security while maintaining the Indo-Pacific tilt, particularly at a time of considerably constrained resources.”

A government spokesman said: “We recognise China poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests—but as the FAC’s report acknowledges, we cannot simply ignore China’s significance in world affairs.

“We are evolving our approach to China into one of robust pragmatism—something which is also recognised and understood by our allies and partners.

“We continue to speak out to defend human rights, and with our allies and partners we’re managing this sharpening competition by improving our resilience, and in particular our economic security.”

The government insisted the UK’s Euro-Atlantic security bonds are “stronger than ever,” stressing the country is “evolving” its wider post-Brexit relations with Europe while demonstrating its “long-term commitment” to the Indo-Pacific.

PA Media and Lily Zhou contributed to this report.