Keir Starmer’s reported visit to China marks a significant moment in British foreign policy. It will be the first visit by a UK prime minister since Theresa May’s trip to Beijing in 2018, and it comes at a time when relations between London and Beijing are more strained, complex, and politically sensitive than at any point in recent decades. Security concerns, economic dependence, and shifting global power structures have created an uneasy balancing act that Starmer will be forced to confront directly. How he handles this visit may not define his premiership, but it will offer a revealing glimpse into how he understands Britain’s place in a rapidly changing world.
Since 2018, the relationship between the UK and China has deteriorated markedly. Allegations of espionage, influence operations, and cyber-attacks have hardened attitudes across the British political spectrum. In December, the Foreign Office confirmed it had been the target of a sustained cyber-attack believed to be linked to a Chinese group, reinforcing long-standing warnings from security agencies about technology transfer, data exposure, and vulnerability in sensitive industries. These concerns are no longer abstract. They are grounded in recent experience and increasingly shape public debate, as seen in protests over the approval of a new Chinese embassy in London. Yet despite rising suspicion, disengagement from China is not a realistic option. The UK remains deeply embedded in global supply chains in which China plays a central role. Trade, manufacturing inputs, consumer goods, and technologies essential to the energy transition are all linked, directly or indirectly, to Chinese production. As a result, British policymakers must weigh decisions on security, human rights, and technology not only against moral or strategic considerations, but also against the potential economic costs of retaliation, disrupted trade, and higher prices for consumers and businesses.
Starmer approaches Beijing from a position that is weaker than Britain’s past self-image might suggest, but stronger than current pessimism often allows. The UK remains a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a nuclear power, and a G7 country. Even if it lags behind peers in investment and growth, it retains diplomatic, military, and institutional influence. At the same time, China arrives at the table with formidable leverage of its own. As the world’s second-largest economy and a dominant hub in global manufacturing, Beijing exerts influence over everything from climate policy and financial stability to infrastructure development and technological standards.
China’s objectives are clear and pragmatic. It seeks a more predictable and less confrontational relationship with the UK and Europe, reduced criticism of its domestic and regional policies, continued access to British financial markets, and expanded cooperation in areas such as education, research, green technology, and investment.
These goals align with a broader strategy that China has pursued for over three decades: systematically building global networks of influence through infrastructure, energy, transport, and development finance, particularly in regions where Western capital has been hesitant to engage.
In Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean, China has paired investment with diplomacy, presenting itself as a partner focused on growth rather than governance or political reform. Over time, this approach has translated into access to markets and resources, diplomatic support in international forums, and a stronger voice across much of the global south. While history alone does not guarantee influence, China has been effective in crafting a narrative of cooperation, development, and shared futures that resonates with many countries.
This strategic clarity contrasts sharply with Britain’s more hesitant approach. While the UK has long debated its energy strategy and struggled with dependence on volatile global markets, China moved decisively to reduce its reliance on imported oil and gas.
By building a cradle-to-grave ecosystem for renewable technologies, it has established near-dominance in photovoltaic cells, wind turbines, and batteries. Although these advances contribute to global decarbonisation, they were also driven by a desire for self-sufficiency in an era of anticipated geopolitical turbulence.
Similar strategies have been applied across sectors such as rare earths, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and data analytics. By promoting open-source models and scaling rapidly, Chinese firms have embedded themselves deeply in global supply chains. For countries like the UK, this creates a structural imbalance: Chinese companies are now integral to systems underpinning the energy transition, manufacturing, digital infrastructure, and consumer markets. In many cases, others need China more than China needs them.
Recent trade data underscores this reality. China is on track to post a trade surplus exceeding one trillion dollars, despite tariffs and export restrictions imposed by the United States. These measures have often been bypassed through rerouting trade via third countries or by flooding alternative markets with low-cost goods. Beijing has also shown a willingness to use economic coercion, as demonstrated by its recent tariffs on EU dairy products in response to European protection of domestic car manufacturers. For Britain, this dependency constrains policy choices. Every decision carries economic consequences, making clarity of purpose essential. Starmer must therefore use his visit to articulate what the UK wants from China and what it is prepared to offer in return. More fundamentally, he must address a deeper question: how does Britain see itself in the emerging global order? Is it a bridge to Europe, a junior partner to the United States, or a country resigned to managed decline?
The Beijing trip offers no easy answers, but it does provide an opportunity. At a time when Britain’s national security feels more fragile than at any point since the second world war, foreign policy cannot be reduced to slogans or reactive measures. Starmer’s challenge is to define a coherent vision – one that acknowledges constraints without surrendering agency.
Comments