Sir Keir Starmer’s meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro has drawn considerable attention, not only for its significance as the first meeting between a UK prime minister and the Chinese leader since 2018 but also for the tone and substance of Starmer’s remarks.
Emphasising a “strong UK-China relationship” and calling for “predictable, consistent, and durable” ties, Starmer’s statements have raised eyebrows and sparked concerns that he may be underestimating the complexities—and risks—of engaging with China under Xi’s leadership.
The encounter, framed as an effort to stabilise bilateral relations, highlights a recurring theme in Starmer’s approach: a tendency to embrace an idealistic vision of international diplomacy that overlooks the geopolitical realities of dealing with authoritarian regimes.
In his eagerness to reset ties, Starmer may have exposed himself as overly trusting, even gullible, in his assumptions about China’s intentions and behavior on the world stage.
The Context of the Meeting
Starmer’s comments come at a time when UK-China relations remain fraught. The two nations are entangled in disputes over human rights, espionage allegations, trade imbalances, and Beijing’s increasing assertiveness in global affairs.
Against this backdrop, Starmer’s emphasis on “avoiding surprises” and fostering “respectful” ties could be interpreted as an attempt to smooth over tensions. Yet this approach risks being perceived as naive, given China’s track record of leveraging diplomatic engagements to advance its strategic interests while sidestepping meaningful reform or accountability.
By pledging that the UK will act as a “predictable, consistent, sovereign actor committed to the rule of law,” Starmer projects an image of stability and reliability. However, such declarations ring hollow when juxtaposed with Beijing’s repeated violations of international norms, from the erosion of freedoms in Hong Kong to its aggression in the South China Sea and its disregard for global human rights standards.
If anything, Starmer’s words may embolden Xi, signaling that the UK is more focused on maintaining appearances than holding China to account.
A Misjudgment of Intentions?
Starmer’s vision for a “durable” UK-China relationship is rooted in the belief that dialogue and mutual respect can yield positive outcomes. Yet this perspective overlooks the fundamental differences in values and governance between the two nations. China under Xi has shown little interest in compromise, instead pursuing an agenda that prioritises domestic control and global influence at the expense of liberal democratic principles.
Critics argue that Starmer’s comments reveal a lack of critical engagement with China’s recent actions. His failure to address key issues—such as the repression of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang, the crackdown on dissent in Hong Kong, and Beijing’s surveillance practices—raises questions about whether he is willing to challenge Xi on substantive matters.
By focusing on abstract ideals like “consistency” and “respect,” Starmer risks appearing as though he is turning a blind eye to China’s authoritarian tendencies.
A Pattern of Naivety?
This is not the first time that Starmer’s diplomatic instincts have been questioned. His rhetoric often leans toward broad platitudes rather than hard-nosed realism, leading some to view him as overly optimistic about the potential for cooperation with regimes that operate on fundamentally different principles. In the case of China, such optimism may translate into missed opportunities to assert the UK’s values and interests.
Starmer’s approach stands in contrast to the growing chorus of Western leaders who have adopted a more cautious, if not confrontational, stance toward Beijing.
The United States, for instance, has prioritised measures to counter China’s influence, including technological decoupling and military partnerships in the Indo-Pacific. Even within Europe, countries like Germany and France have expressed increasing wariness of China’s economic and political ambitions. Against this backdrop, Starmer’s remarks appear out of step, if not outright naive.
The Risk of Appeasement
While diplomacy is undoubtedly a vital tool in managing international relations, it must be paired with a clear-eyed understanding of the challenges at hand. Starmer’s statements, devoid of specific demands or red lines, risk being interpreted as appeasement—a willingness to prioritize economic ties or diplomatic niceties over holding China accountable for its actions.
This perception could undermine the UK’s credibility and influence, both with its allies and in its dealings with Beijing.
Furthermore, Starmer’s call for a “strong UK-China relationship” may alienate domestic audiences who are increasingly skeptical of China’s role in the world.
Public opinion in the UK has shifted markedly in recent years, with growing concern over issues such as Chinese espionage, unfair trade practices, and the risks associated with critical infrastructure investments. By appearing overly accommodating, Starmer risks being seen as out of touch with the concerns of the British public.
Sir Keir Starmer’s meeting with Xi Jinping at the G20 summit was an opportunity to engage with one of the world’s most influential leaders.
However, rather than demonstrating strength, his comments risk projecting weakness—an openness to influence that may embolden authoritarian actors.
For a leader who aspires to guide the UK through an increasingly complex global landscape, Starmer’s performance at the G20 serves as a cautionary tale about the perils of idealism in the face of geopolitical realities.
