Britain Needs to Pick a Side – and it’s Not China

While Britain teeters on the edge of economic exhaustion and strategic irrelevance, its Prime Minister has just returned from a trip to China.

Let that sink in.

At the very moment when the world is splitting into rival civilisational blocs, when supply chains are weaponised, when technology, energy and intelligence determine national survival, Britain’s answer appears to be a polite handshake with a one-party surveillance state whose interests are fundamentally hostile to our own.

This is not diplomacy. It is delusion.

China is not a misunderstood partner waiting to be charmed into good behaviour. It is a rival power with a radically different culture, values system and political philosophy. It is a country that blends state capitalism with authoritarian control. Exports dependency. Steals intellectual property at scale and runs mass detention camps to combat ‘extremism’.

Not content with inviting such a power into the centre of our economic life, along with a begging trip to Beijing, our Prime minister is apparently relaxed about allowing a vast Chinese state outpost to rise in the heart of London: the nerve centre of our history, politics and finance. Which is rather like permitting a foreign garrison to set up camp inside the city walls and then calling it hospitality. History is rarely kind to such acts of complacency.

That is the naïvety tax of flirting with authoritarian powers. You gain neither their loyalty nor your allies’ trust. Britain cannot afford to keep paying it.

Empire is Over. Drift is the Enemy

The old-world order is over. The post-war settlement has collapsed. Globalisation has fractured. Power has returned to hard economics, hard security and hard choices. Even Europe has begun to mutter the unsayable. At Davos this year, the German Chancellor openly conceded that the European project had “wasted its opportunities” and is no longer “fit for purpose”. When Germany finally says that out loud, the age of comforting illusion has ended.

Britain now stands at a strategic inflection point. To become a footnote in the history of great empires like Greece and the Ottomans, or to leverage our history and pedigree to become the Singapore of Europe.

We are no longer the leader of an empire. That chapter is closed. But nor are we condemned to be a second-rate European appendage or a supplicant wandering the world clutching a trade brochure. The danger we face is drift, the most lethal condition for any nation with a proud history and potentially promising future.

The economic facts are no longer debatable. They are disastrous. Public debt sits at levels last seen after the Second World War. Interest payments exceed our defence budget. Productivity has flatlined for over a decade. Real wages have stalled. Energy costs are punitive. The tax burden is crushing. The state grows larger as the economy weakens, the unmistakable symptom of a welfare system feeding on a shrinking host. Confidence in every critical agent of our socio-economic well-being is rock bottom: politics, civil service, health service, armed forces, police – you name it, ordinary men and women don’t trust it.

A proud nation can endure hardship. What it cannot endure indefinitely is stagnation combined with humiliation.

The Atlantic Umbilical Cords

Britain’s future will not be secured by flirting with authoritarian regimes that neither share our values nor wish us well. It will be secured by choosing, deliberately and without apology, to anchor ourselves to the civilisation that does. That civilisation is the liberal democratic West. Its enduring centre of gravity remains the United States: not because of or even in spite of any one president, but because its institutions endure, its constitution anchors authority and its power still moves the world.

This is not an ideological leap. It is the formal recognition of an existing reality.

Britain and America are already bound by multiple umbilical cords.

Britain sits between the United States and Russia, commanding the eastern Atlantic and anchoring NATO’s northern flank. In any serious confrontation with Russia, the North Atlantic is decisive, and Britain sits at its centre.

Britain is not a passenger in American intelligence. It is a producer, a trusted set of eyes and ears with intelligence cooperation that goes further than with any other ally.

Culturally, Britain does not orbit Europe. It orbits America. Our entertainment industries, media and creative talent integrate effortlessly with America and struggle far more on the continent.

Language matters more than policymakers like to admit. A shared language is not a courtesy, it is a strategic asset. It accelerates commerce, deepens trust, reduces friction and allows ideas to move at speed. Britain and America speak the same language legally, commercially, culturally and instinctively.

Then there is education and innovation.

Britain’s top universities already match America’s best, with research and talent moving easily between them. What Britain lacks is scale, capital and urgency, which America has in abundance.

Energy, trade and critical minerals complete the picture. Britain’s energy costs are economic self-harm. We are not energy-poor yet behave as if we are. The North Sea still holds vast gas potential. We retain nuclear expertise and our geography suits next-generation energy. Yet investment stalls and industry pays the price. What Britain lacks is not resources but scale, capital and certainty.

A deep Atlantic partnership supplies all three. American capital, technology and markets would unlock North Sea gas, stabilise energy costs and anchor industrial revival, while opening access to Central and South America’s fossil fuels and rare earths. No modern economy survives without cheap, reliable power.

Trade then locks the strategy in place. Britain’s natural role is not as a closed island but as an entrepôt. The Atlantic gateway for American capital, energy and critical minerals into Europe and the Middle East. A formal partnership gives Britain privileged access to the American continent’s resources, while offering the United States trusted markets, deep finance and a rules-based legal system. Where the continent hesitates and regulates, Britain can move and act.

The foundation of such a partnership must be explicit: shared Judeo-Christian cultural roots, liberal democratic values., rule of law, free enterprise, open commerce. This does not mean open borders without control. It means managed immigration schemes that serve national interest, student mobility, skilled labour pipelines and reciprocal access that strengthens rather than erodes social cohesion.

Why this Partnership Works

There is an uncomfortable truth that must also be acknowledged.

Britain has become, in large part, a welfare nation. America largely has not. Roughly one in five Britons now depends on some form of means-tested support. In the United States, the figure is significantly lower, and labour participation remains higher. That difference matters. It shapes culture, ambition and economic dynamism. A deeper partnership with America is not about importing cruelty: it is about rediscovering agency.

Put all this together and the conclusion becomes unavoidable.

Britain and America are not potential partners: they are natural ones.

The model for this partnership is not empire and it is not subordination. It is Singapore. Singapore did not prosper by dominating its region. It prospered by making itself indispensable to those who do. Fiercely sovereign, unapologetically patriotic, ruthlessly pragmatic, it aligned itself with American power while remaining unmistakably itself.

Britain must now do the same on the Atlantic.

This would mean a formalised Anglo-American partnership across defence, intelligence, energy, technology, trade, capital markets and education. Britain would become the front-line Atlantic platform through which Western economic and strategic power flows into Europe and the Middle East. Not a follower: a force multiplier.

The Transatlantic Generation

How do we sell it?

First, as a jobs and wages pact: cheaper energy, faster investment, higher productivity.

Second, we make the partnership real through a Trans-Atlantic Education and Work Pact. Any British or American citizen aged 18 to 25, legally resident in their home country, would have the automatic right to study and work for up to 10 years in the other, across any field. From universities and laboratories to agriculture, engineering, construction, healthcare and high technology.

This is not open-ended migration but managed, time-limited mobility in the national interest. If Erasmus was Europe’s soft power, this is a serious upgrade.

For the United States, the case is not emotional. It is strategic. Britain is the low-friction ally that multiplies American power with geographic reach spanning Europe, the Middle East and the Atlantic. This partnership once gave America the platform to win a world war and shape a new order. It can do so again, with Britain as its Atlantic hinterland and entrepôt, free of continental drag.

In an era of Chinese economic coercion and a European Union paralysed by regulation, demographics and indecision, a sovereign Britain offers the United States the one thing it cannot get from the continent: a proven, trusted, value-aligned partner capable of acting rather than convening.

The Hour of Decision

The idea that sovereign nations cannot be closely entwined with a larger democratic power is a fantasy indulged by those who mistake morals for strategy. Australia and New Zealand share defence, labour markets and culture without losing themselves. Canada and the United States run deeply integrated trade, intelligence and supply chains while remaining fiercely independent.

None of this is weakness: it is adulthood. Britain would remain independent yet interdependent, which is how serious nations survive in a dangerous world.

The alternative is the spectacle we have just endured: our Prime Minister genuflecting in Beijing, seeking relevance from a regime that regards Britain as a tired former power, useful for ceremony but not for respect. That is not diplomacy: it is strategic self-harm.

If we have the courage to choose our friends wisely, to anchor ourselves to our natural allies, to act with confidence rather than apology, Britain can yet play a great and honourable role.

 Yet history is unkind to nations that hesitate when clarity is required.

This is the hour to choose strength over sentiment. Partnership over pride. To place Britain, firmly and confidently on the Atlantic side of history.

Clive Pinder is a recovering global executive, former elected ornament and reluctant chronicler of institutional decay. Subscribe to his Substack.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

31 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Heretic
Heretic
2 months ago

Very good ideas by Clive Pinder! The trouble is that the British People have been indoctrinated by Closet Communists for half a century to HATE Americans and even the slightest mention of America. The Club of Rome map sticks the British Isles onto the Global Region including Europe, and the Communist Globalists want to make sure that the Americans never come to their ancestral homeland’s rescue again.

comment image

Heretic
Heretic
2 months ago
Reply to  Heretic

Book of Revelation 17:12-14

“And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with The Lamb, and The Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings; and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.”

Western Firebrand
Western Firebrand
2 months ago
Reply to  Heretic

Rather than seeking a fulfilment of that passage from Revelation, the Club of Rome could have seen it as a blueprint for them to arrogate dark spiritual power. There are plenty of other signs, such as modelling the EU parliament building on the Tower of Babel and the twelve stars from the throne of Charlemagne (Aachen Cathedral, c.f. Rev 12).

There’s a reason why Britain broke the shackles of EU membership – but also a reason why Islam is trying to destroy our Christian heritage. (Which doesn’t stem from Henry VIII or reside in the CofE).

For a fist full of roubles

You seem to be implying that UK should, in practice, become a further state of the USA. It would undoubtedly be a junior partner in any relationship.
Formal statehood would be preferable to give us a say in electing the boss. I am sure Ireland would welcome a similar fate.

Heretic
Heretic
2 months ago

I don’t think so. It’s more like the “Five Eyes” group of Anglo-sphere nations helping each other as a team, not as “juniors” to anybody: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Britain and the USA, because of their common ancestral homeland and heritage.

As for Catholic Southern Ireland, they have proven again & again to be a nation virulently hostile to Britain and especially to the Protestants who founded ALL of the Anglo-sphere nations.

And vast China is already best buddies with vast Russia and vast India, so they surely have no interest at all in the comparatively tiny UK, which is about the size of Oregon.

soundofreason
soundofreason
2 months ago

Starmer announces UK-China border security deal
It appears China has expanded significantly since my geography O-level.

Seriously? We can’t control our border without help from PRC?

Why would China want to sell fewer boats and engines any more than France wants to stop migrants trying to cross the Channel?

Jack the dog
Jack the dog
2 months ago
Reply to  soundofreason

That is Starmer announcing that he wasn’t wasting his time in China, it was really really useful and valuable not to say indispensable.

Arse.

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
2 months ago
Reply to  soundofreason

Starmer-the-Contemptible’s “thinking” is that although we shouldn’t control our own borders (because that would be “racist”) other countries will willingly take on the job of controlling our borders for us – e.g. France, the EU, the UN, and now China.

The madleft is completely deranged.

Heretic
Heretic
2 months ago
Reply to  Jeff Chambers

Yes, and now “Starmer-the-Contemptible”, along with Communist Traitor members of British Intelligence and Communist Traitor US officials, have actually talked Trump into yet another U-turn, so now he’s reportedly going to APPROVE GIVING THE CHAGOS, and the crucial Diego Garcia military base, TO COMMUNIST CHINA, via the Fake Mauritius claim !!!

No one except Communist Traitors could back this treasonous insanity.

Donald Trump set to APPROVE Labour’s Chagos surrender after latest U-turn

Jack the dog
Jack the dog
2 months ago

I suppose the real point is the Chinese don’t care about super injunctions.

Heretic
Heretic
2 months ago
Reply to  Jack the dog

They’re already rubbing their hands together with glee over Trump’s latest U-turn decision to gift them Diego Garcia and the Chagos, and make British Taxpayers pay for the “gift” !!!

It’s total madness!!!

Donald Trump set to APPROVE Labour’s Chagos surrender after latest U-turn

Art Simtotic
2 months ago

Britain Needs to Pick a Side…

…And stop scoring own goals.

Heretic
Heretic
2 months ago
Reply to  Art Simtotic

Yes, an own goal like this one, due to be finally announced this evening:

Donald Trump set to APPROVE Labour’s Chagos surrender after latest U-turn

PeterM
PeterM
2 months ago

It wouldn’t have worked with Biden in as he hated Britain. Maybe a trade agreement would just depend on the President of the time so an arrangement would be insecure!

transmissionofflame
2 months ago

“Britain’s future will not be secured by flirting with authoritarian regimes that neither share our values nor wish us well. It will be secured by choosing, deliberately and without apology, to anchor ourselves to the civilisation that does. That civilisation is the liberal democratic West. Its enduring centre of gravity remains the United States: not because of or even in spite of any one president, but because its institutions endure, its constitution anchors authority and its power still moves the world.” I’m no fan of “authoritarian regimes” though we’re already “flirting” with them – massive trade volumes with China, Middle East and others. The “liberal democratic West” is increasingly neither democratic nor liberal. As for the US, time will tell and they are in some ways less far down the road to ruin than we are, in other ways much further down (they seem to have invented “woke” and the US left and establishment was and is the source of an enormous amount of trouble in the world). But the US could easily become a basket case in a few decades. The conclusion I have come to is that we’re doomed, because that’s what the majority either actively want or… Read more »

clivepinder
clivepinder
2 months ago

I share your perspective but sometimes delaying the inevitable allows pathways to the possible to reveal themselves!

transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  clivepinder

Thanks – yes I would agree if there are things one can do to help improve matters then why not do them. Hope enough other people come to think the same.

GlassHalfFull
2 months ago

I totally disagree with Clive Pinder and think we should do the exact opposite starting by leaving NATO.
Most countries who are opposed to US hegemony and a US Unipolar world should bring forward a Multipolar world where every country is equal and will strengthen their ties with Russia, China and the rest of the BRICS+ and SCO+ countries for more peaceful times without US exploitation, interference and manufactured wars.
Well done the USA and their vassals particularly in Europe for their economic self-destruction by starting the Ukraine conflict and the beginning of the end of the dollar and euro and their own US and vassal states hegemony.
A self-inflicted decline by Europe mainly due to cutting themselves off from cheap Russian fossil fuels.
BRICS+/SCO+ are the future.
The US and Europe are toast and it is only a matter of time that the trillions of dollars in derivatives and national debts implode the West.

transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

I’m no fan of the direction “The West” has been going in and am sceptical about a lot of the US interventions which I was hoping Trump would dial back (certainly so far he hasn’t got them embroiled in that much). But I am equally sceptical about this multipolar world where every nation is equal. I don’t see any precedent in history or human nature for such a situation to exist.

GlassHalfFull
2 months ago

Trump has reneged on his election promises and has started conflicts all over the world because that is what the US does when it is controlled by a shadow government of neocons.

The multipolar world needs to exist but as you say “human nature” particularly greed by the US and its vassals gets in the way.

We can live in hope.

transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

I think the US is “greedy” because it can be, not because they are more horrible people than others. China is also greedy I would say, just in a different way, and it seems quite plausible that without the US to counterbalance it, they would misbehave more.

GlassHalfFull
2 months ago

If you would like to list China’s “misbehaviour” I will show that it is a misconception and just Western tropes to demonize China.

transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

Well for a start I find the “One China” policy distasteful to say the least. I doubt there’s much appetite in Taiwan for merging with the PRC. Also not clear why the aggressive attitude to Japan. But at present China has at least one rival that it can’t bully – the USA – so they are contained. In that sense it seems to me that it’s already a multipolar world. The USA certainly has limits of action where China is concerned.

GlassHalfFull
2 months ago

Today, only 12 countries (plus the Vatican) officially recognize Taiwan. “Taiwan has been an integral part of China. The governments of China, the US, and the United Kingdom unanimously issued the Cairo Declaration in 1943, which declared unequivocally that Taiwan, which Japan had taken from the Chinese, would be returned to China. “The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out” was reaffirmed in Article 8 of the 1945 Potsdam Declaration, which put an end to World War II.  Resolution 2758 of the United Nations General Assembly was another clear endorsement of the one-China policy. As a result, the Taiwan issue is solely a domestic Chinese subject, and the Chinese people living on either side of the Taiwan Strait should decide how to bring their country back together.”  https://www.the-star.co.ke/opinion/star-blogs/2024-05-13-why-there-is-no-doubt-that-taiwan-is-part-of-china Japan recently suggested their country could respond militarily if China were to move to take control of Taiwan by force. China has never forgiven Japan when Japanese troops killed more than 200,000 unarmed civilians during its occupation, and raped and tortured tens of thousands of women and girls, in what is known as the Nanjing Massacre, one of the most notorious wartime atrocities of the 20th century.  It’s the US… Read more »

transmissionofflame
2 months ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

At this point IMO history is irrelevant – if the majority of Taiwanese wanted to be part of the PRC, they would have made it happen. As for Japan, I can’t see why China would realistically feel threatened by Japan. The Japanese people who did whatever they did many years ago are all dead now and I don’t think Japanese people will be massacring Chinese people any time soon.

clivepinder
clivepinder
2 months ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

Thanks for reading and responding. I appreciate it but disagree. You want a “multipolar world where every country is equal” and your route to that is to hitch Britain to Russia and China. That is not multipolar. That is swapping one anchor for two authoritarians and calling it liberation. Leaving NATO does not make Britain independent. It makes Britain alone, and then dependent, because defence vacuums do not stay empty. They get filled. Usually by the nearest bully with the least paperwork. On Ukraine, the idea that “Europe started the conflict” is a neat inversion, but it requires us to believe Russia invaded itself and then blamed the West for the inconvenience. Whatever you think about NATO, a sovereign country was attacked. If the lesson we take is “invaders get rewarded,” you will get more invasions. That is not peace. That is a sales incentive. Yes, Europe’s energy policy has been economically self-harming. Cutting off cheap Russian gas without a serious replacement plan was brutal. But the solution is not crawling back to dependency on a regime that uses energy as a weapon. The answer is energy security, North Sea, nuclear, and reliable democratic supply chains, not a return to… Read more »

GlassHalfFull
2 months ago
Reply to  clivepinder

Westerners who have lived in China for decades say China in less authoritarian than the US. https://jerrygrey2002.substack.com/p/authoritarian-states-wont-like-this?publication_id=1744413&post_id=156989834&isFreemail=true&r=1ninci&triedRedirect=true The US and NATO are the biggest threat to world peace so leaving NATO and securing peace treaties with the rest of the world would lead to a more harmonious existence. Russia and China are no threat to anyone who doesn’t threaten them. The US laid the foundations to this war by pumping billions of dollars into Ukraine from 1991 onwards to poison Ukraine against Russia. It culminated in the US led Maidan coup of 2014 and the persecution, shelling and death of ethnic Russians, living in the east and south for decades and centuries, by Ukrainian Banderites, neo-Nazis, ultranationalist and paramilitaries. Russia had to intervene in 2022 when they were “legally” invited in by the LPR and DPR to protect its own people living in the east and south of Ukraine. Russia is convinced they acted within International Law. Russian diplomats have explicitly cited the 2010 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion allowing Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence to make their case for a Crimean and Donbass separation. Russia also used UN Article 51 and R2P (Responsibility to Protect) in the same… Read more »

wryobserver
wryobserver
2 months ago

A few years ago, while writing a novel in which a Labour government was planning a takeover by Russia, I had to change bits as reality stole my plot lines. A friend told me that my premise was so implausible. In my book the Russian scheme unravelled before it started. Now we have its resurrection except that the country has changed. Is this government flirting with treason, or simply incompetent?

RTSC
RTSC
2 months ago

It is obvious that we, along with Australia, Canada and NZ, must strengthen our relationship with the USA,

But the Establishment wants to be part of the Fascist EU and we’ve effectively got a Government made up of Communists who look at the Authoritarian State run by Xi and want to re-create it here.

Whomakesthisstuffup
Whomakesthisstuffup
2 months ago

Headline – “Air miles Andy relinquishes his crown, meet Air Miles Starmer”!

robj
robj
2 months ago

Systematic elimination of free speech in UK makes CCP a more aligned partnership.