[…]
While China’s agents ride roughshod over Britain’s national security interests on a daily basis, it is extremely rare for the damage they do to be publicly exposed. So the recent fiasco that prevented two Brits, accused of spying for China inside Parliament, from coming to trial is of grave concern. Both suspects are now able to assert their innocence in public, the case dropped on the basis of insufficient evidence.
This decision is reported to reflect last-minute sabotage by UK ministers.
[It is a] false assumption that Britain could deepen economic ties with China while remaining critical of its actions in areas such as human rights abuses and belligerence in the Asia-Pacific. We have prioritised expediency. In 2021, UK MPs of all parties passed a motion declaring China’s persecution of Uyghurs to be genocide; yet the present Government has since adopted a less critical position.
The 2025 Strategic Defence Review (SDR) highlights growing Chinese pressure on the rules-based international order, both unilaterally and in collusion with Russia and North Korea. It warns that Britain is likely to face increasing Chinese espionage, cyber and other risks to sensitive IP and other defence interests. Meanwhile China has developed nuclear and other missiles that can reach the UK and Europe, and is modernising its capabilities in areas including space warfare.
[…]
The risks of Chinese involvement in UK key national infrastructure – steel, nuclear, wind and solar energy amongst them – have been under-played. The risk of digital data capture and system sabotage are likewise minimised. But this complacency merely boosts China’s existing political influence, while leaving key social and military infrastructure vulnerable to hybrid warfare sabotage; a situation that Beijing has taken great pains to build up in many less well-governed client states.
So, given the ground truths of China’s geopolitical agenda, how do Britain’s security and other key interests benefit from the last-minute collapse of the case against alleged spies in Parliament? They don’t. The only beneficiary is a ruthless authoritarian state which wishes to become the global hegemon. It must not be repeated.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
Everything they say about China could also be said about the USA.
yakko@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
In both cases, it’s being called a “challenge” because they have already capitulated.
reddig33@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
However three lefts do.
Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
If so, then go to the posts critical of the US here and comment that “everything they say about the US could also be said about China.”
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
There are plenty of political figures saying we should call China the enemy, very few that openly say we should call the USA an enemy.
That’s not my point though, because you could also say it about other countries (Saudi Arabia, Israel, etc), the fact is dealing with countries that do things we consider shitty is a basic part of geopolitics, unless you want to start a war on twelve fronts.