Written by Dr Andreas Fulda
Both the EU’s trifecta (“The EU sees China as a partner for cooperation, an economic competitor and a systemic rival”) and the UK’s 3Cs (“We will co-operate where we can, compete where we need to, and challenge where we must”) now feel outdated. The UK’s current China policy rests on three principles: protect national security, align with core allies and partners, and engage with China bilaterally and in international fora. Although the ‘Protect-Align-Engage’ framework sounds pragmatic on the surface, it suffers from the same fundamental flaw as the EU trifecta: there is still no explicit hierarchy of objectives.
Let’s take recent developments in the UK as an example: how can the Labour government appear poised to approve the controversial planned Chinese super-embassy near the Tower of London whilst a high-profile case against two alleged Chinese spies collapsed amid ongoing espionage concerns? This would amount to a vote of confidence despite increasing evidence that Beijing is not a reliable partner. In British politics we call this a ‘fudge’.
Here we need to be mindful that in the past few years interest groups with a stake in China have time and again opposed the systemic rival framing. This in itself is quite telling: risks in the relationship are being downplayed to protect existing investments and prevent sunk costs. In policy practice this leads to a reordering of priorities, where a supposed ‘partnership’ with China overrides other concerns.
This leads to the following paradox: Those who would like to continue to cooperate with China can point to the partner / cooperation dimension. Others who would like to de-risk from China will point to the systemic rival facet. This way Western China policy becomes a free-for-all, with no clear set of priorities. While cooperation in areas like climate remains possible, security threats must take precedence.
It is my contention that we cannot carry on with such a contradictory China policy. If stakeholders can pick and choose from the three dimensions we will not only get a cacophony of voices. Such an approach also invites rapid back and forth policy shifts and a lack of consistency.
Instead we need a strategic approach in our China engagement which allows us to better weigh opportunities and risks. It is time for a new framework — the 3Rs: Realise opportunities. Reduce dependencies. Resist threats. Note the deliberate ordering: we realise opportunities only after we have reduced dangerous dependencies and actively resisted threats. These three axioms hold a better chance for a consistent and coherent approach towards China. They would move the needle of our China policy from strategic ambiguity to strategic clarity.
While the rhetoric of the 3Rs may resemble in parts the former EU’s trifecta and the UK’s 3Cs, in fact the difference could not be starker: in this new framework resisting threats takes on paramount importance. Anyone uncomfortable with the word ‘threats’ should remember: China’s material support for Russia’s war of aggression is already undermining Europe’s security.
The 3Rs biggest advantage is the built-in realism. Let us take the economic dimension of the relationship as an example: China’s brute-force economics, massive state subsidies, closed markets, forced technology transfer and systematic IP extraction, have already shattered the ‘level playing field’ illusion and accelerated Europe’s de-industrialisation.
Those who still subscribe to the notion of influencing China through commercial ties seem unaware of the failure of Germany’s ‘change through trade’ policy. Not learning from policy failure would not only ignore bitter lessons after more than forty years of constructive European China engagement. It would also amount to a form of magical thinking.
Furthermore Europeans need to be mindful that we are increasingly subjected to transnational repression: critics of the party-state, whether diaspora members or Western voices, face intimidation and retaliation. These are direct threats to our open societies. Time to resist.
Implementing the 3Rs would provide the clarity needed to navigate ongoing challenges, from embassy decisions to supply-chain vulnerabilities. It is long overdue that we adopt a clearer, more honest China strategy. The era of turning a blind eye is over. The question is: do we now have the courage to act on what we know?
So remember the 3Rs: Realise opportunities · Reduce dependencies · Resist threats.