Now that the UK is facing the threat of a serious retaliatory move by China to open its doors to Hong Kong’s 30 million citizens, calling the British announcement an interference in its internal affairs, the crisis in Hong Kong It has become a major test for diplomacy as the global epidemic has diverted attention from every issue.
So what is China’s position on the world stage in the new world order in the context of this drama?
There is also the question of how important this issue will be in the post-Bridget context in the British government’s new and optimistic foreign policy efforts under the banner of ‘Global Britain’.
First of all, we need to understand whether this crisis was inevitable. Circumstances may have been very different. More than two decades ago, Western policymakers believed that China would present itself in a certain way. It was said at the time that China would emerge as a “responsible power” in the international community. In other words, it will abide by international law and values because being part of the global system will benefit it as much as it benefits others.
In this kind of world, the kind of agreement that China and Britain had in Hong Kong could have survived.
But that did not happen. China grew rapidly and moved in the same direction. It has emerged as a military power in the region, even a power like the United States thinks before it gets embarrassing.
But China’s rise came at a time when the West, and especially the United States, was embroiled in other issues. On the one hand, the war on terror was going on at that time and there was a crisis in Syria. Europe’s focus was on Bridget.
And then came the Trump administration in the United States, which had no permanent policy on China. In fact, the administration lacked an understanding of the strategic sensitivities of foreign policy.
Over the past five years, not only has China’s rise come at a time when US influence in the global arena has diminished, but it has plummeted, leading to crises in US allies in Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. I drowned.
Now that the number of problems between China and the West is increasing, there was no reaction to them at a time when they were emerging one by one. Trade tensions, technological conflicts, strategic issues, and so on, were not seen as a “China issue” at the time that required a solid and coherent policy.
It was a time when the world was on the brink of the Crowd-19 crisis, a drama that originated in China and for a while it was a headache for China, but it was clear that it was also for its own benefit. Was determined to use.
It is no coincidence that this has resulted in a hoarse voice of Chinese nationalism, ranging from tensions with the United States and Australia to fighting in border disputes with India, and beyond. The issue is the Chinese decision to completely change the basic structure of the agreement with the UK on Hong Kong.
Undoubtedly, Quad-19 gave China a chance to raise the issue of Hong Kong.
However, as long as this epidemic continues, one of its effects is obvious. China’s more aggressive policy path is unlikely to change unless real and concrete pressure is put on it. And no amount of condemnation of China’s actions to crush liberties in Hong Kong will have any effect.
The current situation has put the British government in a big dilemma. In the midst of the epidemic, when Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government, which has been criticized for failing to tackle the epidemic properly, called for a new aggressive British foreign policy, known as ‘Global Britain’. The first big challenge.
No one currently knows what ‘Global British’ is.
Opponents of Bridget sarcastically say it means “something better than the worst.” And to put it bluntly, in a situation where the Quid-19 government is taking too much time, it would be too early to make sense of the ‘Global British’ policy with an example from Hong Kong. what’s this.
But the dispute with China has exposed Britain’s current diplomatic weakness and strength. The point is to put aside loud claims and understand the ground realities.
Hong Kong is part of China. Britain is a former colonial power that has no influence over Beijing. China has been accused of pursuing a variety of unpopular domestic security policies and deviating from the agreement on Hong Kong. But China is a superpower in away, and it is now clear that Britain is not a superpower.
So what is left with Boris Johnson? Many may praise him for making a morally good decision by offering asylum to 30 million Hong Kong citizens in the UK. This is an offer for a very large number of people, and especially for a party that has a large number of supporters who are very sensitive about immigration.
The fact that China may not allow a lot of people to leave the country or that a lot of people prefer to stay in Hong Kong, and even if some people leave Hong Kong, they would still want to go to another part of the world, anyway. Whatever the case may be, it should not be forgotten that Johnson displayed high moral values in the face of Chinese pressure.
However, there are many other important things in diplomacy. The principle position (which many experts would say is less of a role in global affairs) is one thing, achieving foreign policy goals is a whole team game. It has to do with gaining the trust of our allies, and then formulating a joint strategy and implementing it jointly.
Here, despite the overwhelming support from the UK for rhetoric about Hong Kong, nothing happened but rhetoric. The United States is withdrawing trade concessions to the Hong Kong region, but at the same time, it is an election year, and President Trump wants to be seen taking a tougher stance with China, which he wants to re-elect. Understand an important strategy for