- Tuesday, March 11, 2025
By: Shubham Ghosh
THE high-voltage race for the post of the British prime minister seems to have been hit by the China factor even though the respective camps of Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss in the ruling Conservative Party did not want a hard stance on countries such as China and Russia to steal the limelight.
But after Sunak posted a series of aggressive posts on China, a country it called the “largest threat” to Britain, one would assume that the former exchequer of the treasury is now desperate to beat his opponent who has taken a considerable lead over him in the race to 10 Downing.
ALSO READ: Rishi Sunak calls China ‘largest threat’ to Britain
But did the 42-year-old man of Indian origin take the hardline stance on China (he even said in one tweet that he would close all 30 of China’s Confucius Institutes in the UK) to avoid the trap that the Chinese laid for him by means of indirectly praising him over Truss as “pragmatic”?
2/ I would close all 30 of China’s Confucius Institutes in the UK – the highest number in the world.
Almost all UK government spending on Mandarin language teaching at school is channelled through university-based Confucius Institutes, thereby promoting Chinese soft power. pic.twitter.com/RAWf0WsKRS
— Rishi Sunak (@RishiSunak) July 25, 2022
On Friday (22), China’s state-owned Global Times, which is known for its belligerent takes, said in an opinion piece titled ‘Hyping ‘China threat,’ UK politicians as sensational and low-class as the country’s tabloids’ cited an expert from China as saying, “The two front-runners represent the two forces within UK political circles – the relatively pragmatic side which advocates cooperation with China, and the typical hawkish side which views China as a rival and threat.”
This endorsement was not something that Sunak would love at this crucial juncture of his political career.
His camp’s fear came to be true as former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, who is among the British parliamentarians sanctioned by Beijing for speaking out on its human rights abuses, expressed surprise over Sunak’s tough talks on China. Sir Smith, who backs Truss in this contest, said it was nothing short of hypocrisy on Sunak’s part to say those words as under him, the treasury pushed hard to secure an economic deal with Beijing.
Even Sunak’s criticism of Truss who he accused of ignoring China’s “nefarious activity and ambition” was slammed by Sir Smith. “Where have you been over the last two years,” the latter asked Sunak, the Daily Mail reported.
The former exchequer’s tough stance on China is perhaps motivated by the sole fact that he is trailing Truss at the moment. Two factors might work in his strategic thinking to turn the tables on her opponent.
First of all, Sunak cannot afford to have the image of a leader who is preferred by China, something which the Global Times has suggested. At a time when the West is fighting two key foes, namely, Russia and China, Sunak’s camp might consider it risky that the man looks pro-China. So as an election stance, he had to have a tough take on Beijing and cede an electoral advantage to Truss. Afterall, nationalism sells like hot cake in these times and particularly during elections. Sunak’s targeting the Confucius Institutes was a particular move against Truss who had played a key role in setting them up in the UK as an education secretary.
Ahead of their first head-to-head debate, this was a well-calculated move made by Sunak.
Secondly, by talking tough on international relations, Sunak is also trying to drag Truss into a territory where she has been mocked in the past, despite the fact that she is the foreign secretary. There are certain sections in the British political circles that believe that Truss is prone to making blunders in foreign policy issues and that could hurt her prospects in the ongoing contest.
It is still remembered how Truss’s gaffe during a meeting with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov on the eve of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February saw the world mocking her. The Russian diplomat described the meeting with his British counterpart as a talk between a mute and deaf person after the latter confused Russian territories for Ukrainian and challenged Moscow’s sovereignty over those areas.
Truss had said on that occasion that she misheard but foreign policy experts said her response could cause more damage. As a prime minister, Truss’s past records in foreign policy affairs could be a major challenge and the Sunak camp just wants that to happen and hence wants him to fight Truss on a turf that it feels could be slippery for her.
However, the Truss camp gives her credit for “almost single-handedly” dragging the British government to take a tougher position on China and hence Sunak was playing a catch-up game so that Truss’s hard stance on China did not see her take a decisive lead.
The heat is getting intense out there, just like the British climate, and Sunak certainly has taken a big risk. Will the return be worth it?
