New prime minister Andy Burnham’s to-do list just keeps growing. In many regards, he has wasted no time in setting out a vision for the government that puts clear distance between himself and his predecessor Keir Starmer. But despite this, amid a summer of record-breaking heat and devastating wildfires, he is still to say anything substantive on the climate issue.
Burnham has not articulated how this Labour government intends to achieve its climate objectives. The government’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) has repeatedly pointed out that the UK is not meeting the targets in the Climate Change Act 2008. Climate change has nonetheless demanded his attention – a Cobra meeting was recently called amid the extreme heat across the country.
But there is another issue on which Burnham has been quiet. And that is foreign policy, notably in relation to China. What might indeed be convenient, however, is that addressing one issue could help to tackle the other.
On climate policy, Burnham’s only meaningful pledge – to take a “pragmatic” approach to drilling in the North Sea – is a shift from the Labour position to stop issuing licences for exploration. And the perceived benefits of North Sea drilling remain contested – prices are set by international markets and so further exploration in the UK would be unlikely to ease the cost of living.
At the same time, the new prime minister inherits the outcomes of the government’s China audit, an evaluation of UK-China relations that has been ongoing since 2024. The previous year, the Intelligence and Security Committee described the UK’s approach to understanding the challenges presented by China as “completely inadequate”.
The audit has since informed the UK’s Strategic Defence Review, the National Security Strategy and its trade and industrial policies. At some point, Burnham will have to set out a diplomatic approach to China.
After the decline of the “golden age” between China and the UK (2015-2018), Starmer appeared to be attempting to rebuild relations. His visit to Beijing in January, the first for a UK prime minister since 2018, indicated a desire for a better trading relationship. Despite the obvious benefits, scepticism of the Communist Party of China (CPC) remains, as MPs demand a hawkish approach to any potential deal.
For the UK, strengthening ties with the world’s second largest economy and the largest producer of goods appears a no-brainer – even more so after leaving the EU single market. A comprehensive trade deal has not been forthcoming from the US, with greater tariffs on UK exports under Donald Trump.
Seeking the best terms with China, the world leader in advanced robotics, industrial machinery and mobile infrastructure, to say nothing of its cheap consumer goods, is the dilemma facing all countries now.
The political dilemma
The two policy areas unite around the technologies required to meet climate objectives. Increasingly, there is no alternative to working with China. Under what it calls the “new three” technologies of batteries, electric vehicles and solar, China now accounts for between 70% and 90% of global manufacturing.
The processing of the critical minerals and rare earth metals required for these technologies is also dominated by China. Its refining capacity accounts for upwards of 70% in many goods.
In our research, we argue that China is essentially subsiding global decarbonisation. But this is actually causing some negative outcomes for climate policy, particularly in the EU and the US. Rather than importing green technologies from China, many countries are seeking to build up tariff walls against them. Fears of becoming even more dependent on Chinese imports are prevailing over utilising green technologies that exist already to reach climate goals.
Burnham’s government faces the same dilemma over how to pursue a green transition and diplomatic relations with China. The UK, like other all nations, has four options.
1. Attempt to compete
This could be done by nationalising green technology manufacturing, diversifying supply chains, particularly critical minerals, or shaping the new iteration of green technology.
This option comes with potentially great economic opportunities, but equally there may be a high political cost due to the capital required.
2. Look to cooperate
In practice, this would entail limiting imports of Chinese green technologies through trade barriers. And then it would mean inviting investment from Chinese companies to produce these technologies domestically.
3. Surrender to China’s dominance
This means recognising that UK companies simply cannot compete. Instead, the UK would simply import clean tech goods manufactured in China.
4. Abandon the green transition
The government could simply opt to consolidate around fossil fuel industries. In some sectors, such as cars and renewable energy, clean tech companies would be opposed to this. However in others, including aviation, cement, chemical, plastics and steel, abandoning the green transition could reduce the need to invest in alternative technologies and free up capital to overhaul carbon-intensive processes.
Of these four options, we would suggest the UK abandons any idea of competing with China, but instead seeks to cooperate with it. Burnham’s government should indeed challenge China on areas such as human rights or security, but should also continue to seek closer trading relations for green technology.
How to approach China presents a political dilemma for governments across the world. Burnham, like others, cannot avoid the conclusion that to meet climate objectives he’s going to need a better relationship with China.
Comments are closed.