Blindly following the United States to curb China, Britain will enter a dead end

Author: Li Jiabao

Former British Commerce Secretary Cable recently said publicly that the British government's decision to ban the use of Huawei's 5G services and equipment is "not related to national security", but is forced by US pressure; during his tenure as Commerce Secretary, intelligence and security services have repeatedly assured that the use of Huawei services will not pose any risk. Ma Kaiser, a former Singapore diplomat, also revealed that a British company executive said that the British side had installed intelligence personnel inside Huawei to conduct a "comprehensive inspection" to confirm that Huawei did not pose any threat.

In fact, Huawei has been in the UK for nearly 20 years, making important contributions to the UK's telecommunications industry and economic and social development. According to a survey by the Oxford Research Institute in the United Kingdom, restricting the entry of key equipment suppliers such as Huawei into the UK 5G infrastructure construction market will lead to a 9%-29% increase in the cost of related network deployment in the UK in the next 10 years. However, some people on the British side have blindfolded and plugged their ears, refused to admit the facts in front of them, and even preferred to let their own interests suffer, and they also had to run blindly with Washington's baton, and they followed the example of the US politicians' tricks of generalizing the concept of "national security" and suppressing Chinese enterprises.

For some time now, following the unreliable "big brother" of the United States, Britain has gone farther and farther down the crooked road of harming others and harming itself: sending a naval ship formation led by the "Elizabeth" aircraft carrier to the Asia-Pacific region to frantically brush up its sense of military presence; joining the so-called "US-Britain-Australia Trilateral Security Partnership" (AUKUS) to aggravate the risk of regional nuclear proliferation; and repeatedly maliciously hyping up Xinjiang-related and Hong Kong-related issues and pointing fingers at China's internal affairs. It has to be said that britain is indeed a "close comrade-in-arms" of the United States in engaging in group politics, disrupting the situation in the Asia-Pacific region, and poisoning international relations.

Why did Britain, which had just left the European Union and assumed an independent posture, tie itself to the anti-China chariot of the United States? In recent years, in the face of China's increasing comprehensive national strength, some British politicians have embraced the arrogant mentality of Western-centrism and suffered from the same "China anxiety disorder" as American politicians. Coupled with the rise in british insecurity after Brexit, it is urgent to find a new strategic positioning, so it is trying to achieve the development goal of "global Britain" by strengthening the so-called "special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom". In addition, there are still a small number of people in Britain, who are still immersed in the colonial myth of "the sun never sets on the empire", and clamor for the absurd remark of "being responsible for Hong Kong," in order to achieve the purpose of smearing China and curbing China's development.

However, the short-sighted diplomacy of British politicians, which is kidnapped by political self-interest, is doomed to be an empty basket. Not to mention that the Epidemic in the United States is out of control and its own governance is full of crises, and it has long been unable to take care of itself, let alone help the United Kingdom. Looking at the consistent attitude of the United States toward its allies, Britain should understand that this superpower that often pays lip service to the "alliance of values" is not a good friend. In the past few decades, well-known companies such as Japan's Toshiba and France's Alstom have become targets of the United States. In contrast, for Chinese technology companies, although the excuses made by the United States are more ideological and political, their real background is still a "profit" word. In recent years, the United States and the United Kingdom have also been in constant disagreement on free trade negotiations, multilateral governance, and regional hotspot issues. In order to safeguard its own hegemony, the United States often does not hesitate to betray the interests of its allies and show its true color of "losing friends." British international relations scholar Tom Foddy pointed out that "the United States has overly influenced British foreign policy, and some of these moves are incredible interference in British interests." ”

Today, when the epidemic continues to rage and the economy urgently needs to recover, the degree of interconnection and interdependence of all countries has never been deepened, and peaceful development and win-win cooperation are the irresistible trend of the times. Engaging in "small circles" and provoking confrontation between countries is unpopular. Britain, which takes "global Britain" as its development goal, can only achieve great development if it integrates into the tide of globalization and strengthens multilateral cooperation with countries around the world, including China. Since the establishment of the comprehensive strategic partnership in 2004, China-UK bilateral relations have achieved many fruitful results, and people of insight between the two countries have made unremitting efforts for China and the UK to enter the "golden decade". Today, China is Britain's third-largest trading partner. Faced with the urgent task of reviving the economy in the post-epidemic era, Perry, chairman of the British Club of 48 Groups, called on the government to "not follow the United States in everything", pointing out that China-UK trade has very good prospects, and cooperation is the way out of China-UK relations.

Ignoring the interests of one's own development and shouting for others will only drag oneself into a dead end. Having entered the poor alley, it is reasonable to turn around in time. How to go, it is time for the UK to make the right choice!

Source: People's Daily Overseas Edition