UK extends visa rights to 3 million Hong Kongers

[Maladict]

Someone semi-seriously suggested building a new Hong Kong in Lincolnshire. It's not the worst idea doing the rounds.

"Building a new HK" wasn't a new idea.  It was mentioned back in the 80s, during the negotiations between the UK and Mainland China over HK's future.  Some released UK government documents also talked about it.  Even now, some of the rioters daydream about it. 

This is all pie in the sky.  These people all conveniently overlook the fact that Hong Kong's location is key.

The UK could build some artificial islands off the Chinese coast.
That would be some magnificent trolling.

[Syt]

It is extraordinary how much the sort of "elite" consensus on China is moving from the days of Cameron's "Golden century" or Osborne visiting Xinjiang to promote business opportunities - which was just 5 years ago.

Not only there. German poll figures:

"Which political course should German take with regards to China?"
Dark Blue: combined "leaning towards rapproachement" and "significant rapproachement"
Red: combined "leaning towards distancing" and "significant distancing"
Light Blue: Continue as is.

[Sheilbh]

Not only there. German poll figures:

"Which political course should German take with regards to China?"
Dark Blue: combined "leaning towards rapproachement" and "significant rapproachement"
Red: combined "leaning towards distancing" and "significant distancing"
Light Blue: Continue as is.

Interesting - and promising. Berlin is still notably more reluctant to really do much against China (I understand it's very much in the Italian camp in EU debates), hopefully now public opinion is moving there will be a change in approach.

It feels like at least one thing we should be doing in democracies is international investigations into supply chains because I imagine all of us are consuming goods and products that have some element of the Uyghur camps in their supply chain.

Edit: It is fascinating how much this has moved and how quickly. I mean here there was never a broad base of support for deep engagement with China - it was very much a Cameron-Osborne project. And, as I say, I can't think of a government that's been more quickly discredited than the coalition.

[Tonitrus]

Is there a similar chart for Russia?

[Josquius]

Someone semi-seriously suggested building a new Hong Kong in Lincolnshire. It's not the worst idea doing the rounds.

"Building a new HK" wasn't a new idea.  It was mentioned back in the 80s, during the negotiations between the UK and Mainland China over HK's future.  Some released UK government documents also talked about it.  Even now, some of the rioters daydream about it. 

This is all pie in the sky.  These people all conveniently overlook the fact that Hong Kong's location is key.

The UK could build some artificial islands off the Chinese coast.
That would be some magnificent trolling.

The Diamond Age

[Sheilbh]

It feels like at least one thing we should be doing in democracies is international investigations into supply chains because I imagine all of us are consuming goods and products that have some element of the Uyghur camps in their supply chain.

Eg: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jul/23/virtually-entire-fashion-industry-complicit-in-uighur-forced-labour-say-rights-groups-china

[Tamas]

It is extraordinary how much the sort of "elite" consensus on China is moving from the days of Cameron's "Golden century" or Osborne visiting Xinjiang to promote business opportunities - which was just 5 years ago.

Calls to consider banning Tik Tok, in part this is about security fears. But it's also about children's data and revelations that that company has been receiving complaints about individuals grooming children through TikTok, but then only banning those accounts for one week.

Labour have called for sanctions (including individual sanctions) over treatment of Uyghurs. The government haven't ruled it, out but said you need to build the case through evidence to justify individual sanctions.

The Chinese ambassador to the UK had a pretty dreadful interview on UK TV this weekend. He was shown that footage of Uyghurs blindfolded, heads shaved transferring to trains and responded, after a long pause, by talking about how Xinjiang is one of the most beautiful parts of China. He also said he couldn't guarantee no individual has been sterilised in a Chinese prison in Xinjiang. And, which I think indicates the Chinese view, compared the UK now to the Qianlong emperor.

I am very happy about this turn of events as well but what I think happening is not a principled stand (although I am sure being in the right makes it easier for our policy makers), but rather the US asserting itself over UK policy to proactively prevent China from doing so in the future.

[Sheilbh]

I mean I query what we mean by the US asserting itself over UK policy. I mean how would that be different from the norm - from the Blair-Bush years, for example?

I think there's definitely a part of that around Huawei especially - but I would note that the May government had reviewed and approved Huawei multiple times and the Johnson government did so in January. I also think there has been a general mood-shift in Western countries - the French Foreign Minister made a fairly strong statement yesterday. I don't think Britain is entirely unique in the shift of attitudes on China, but I think it's somewhat ahead of the curve in measures it's taking.

I think it's the combination of annoyance at covid-19 and the perception that China wasn't as open as it should have been, plus the supply chain issues that exposed. Then there's Hong Kong and increasing information/footage coming out of Xinjiang. And, on a personal level, Dominic Raab's dad came to Britain on the kindertransport and I imagine some of the footage from Xinjiang would have really hit home with him.

The other point is the UK did threaten to veto inviting Putin to the G7, which Trump wanted to do. There was no need to do that publicly we could have let another country make that statement (unless no-one else wanted to) - and I get that wasn't an "action" but we know Trump's attitudes to people who publicly disagree with him even if they don't do anything about it (see, for example, multiple Republican Senators ). To be honest I think part of it is we're just seeing a foreign policy again which we haven't really had since 2010 (or maybe since Bush left office). On 5G, on Hong Kong, on human rights, on collaborating with other democracies the UK is engaging again after a fairly insular decade.

The other point I'd like to see us move aggressively on is the stuff that's been exposed in the Russia report - the reputation laundering that happens in the UK. I hope we start to see more aggressive enforcement around money laundering, KYC stuff etc, because that is part of foreign policy now. We know, or we should know, that Russian oligarchs weren't just putting their money in London because it's a nice place to live. And what we saw with Russia I think we're increasingly seeing with the rich and connected from other countries. I won't hold my breath on this one (though would note that the Democrats apparently want stricter AML laws in any trade deal which would be a good thing).

[Josquius]

One particularly interesting point about it I find is that the left has always been highly critical of China.
Since Trump the hard right has also found China bashing an easy way to build support.
Liberals have traditionally been more middling and hoping by engaging with China they will somehow realise the error of their ways.
Johnson has found himself in quite a difficult place; inheriting the previously liberal Tory policy towards China, being on a path of brexit which had one of its main arguments engaging more with China...yet trying to build his power base on hard right populist lines, right at a time when the liberal approach is becoming less viable.

[Tamas]

One particularly interesting point about it I find is that the left has always been highly critical of China.

[Josquius]

One particularly interesting point about it I find is that the left has always been highly critical of China.

no

[Tonitrus]

As in US politics, that part of the left definitely exists...but usually as the left moves more to the center (and on well into the right), the humanitarian focus become more of an empty lip-service that also goes hand-in-hand with eagerly hoping to cash in on Chinese money/economic benefits (both personal and political).

[Sheilbh]

One particularly interesting point about it I find is that the left has always been highly critical of China.

Yeah - I mean it's very much variable depending on your stream of the left.

Bits of the left have a good record on China, the bit of the left that has a sort of hegemonic/imperialist vision of the world (i.e. the US is an imperial, hegemonic power, any power operating against the US is an anti-imperialist power, as an anti-imperialist I should support or not oppose those powers) has a less good record. So I like Diane Abbott a lot, but I disagree with her that Chairman Mao did more good than harm. Similarly Seumas Milne had written several times about the positives of China as a model challenging the US. I think both of those examples reflect that anti-imperialist/hegemonic interpretation of the world. It's the same as struggling to oppose Russia or Assad on big issues because they are anti-imperialist powers. And there's always a sop: you might criticise Russia over its record on gay rights, but struggle with criticising them for killing people with chemical and nuclear agents in the UK or for backing Assad.

I actually think the most impressive foreign policy in the last few years has been the SNP. This needs to be qualified that it is only since Sturgeon took over (Alex Salmond after all had his own show on Russia Today - and that crank wing still exists), but in the last 5 years I think they've been really good on Russia, on China, on various human rights issues. Stewart McDonald, their defence spokesman, in particular is great.

[Tonitrus]

Sometimes I think it is true that there are elements on the far end of both the left, and the right, that will always be against whomever is in power or "on top"...even if that means sympathy with the Putins/Assads/ISISs of the world.  And also seem to transform into the worst elements, or the always obvious worst elements of those sides take the lead...in the cases they actually do stumble into taking power.  Then they go back to opposing the "new" power as a betrayal of the old resistance.   

[Crazy_Ivan80]

One particularly interesting point about it I find is that the left has always been highly critical of China.

don't worry: they left was also very critical of the USSR...