LONDON — Opposition Leader Keir Starmer declared that Britain's policy toward China cannot continue to "blow hot and cold," calling for a new approach that is "robust and consistent" on security threats while acknowledging the need for pragmatic cooperation on global issues. The Labour leader's speech at a policy forum on Tuesday outlined a vision for a more predictable, long-term strategy, directly criticizing what he called the current Conservative government's vacillation between confrontation and conciliation. His remarks signal a potential reset in one of the U.K.'s most complex and consequential foreign relationships, should his party win the next general election.

Starmer's position attempts to navigate a difficult middle path, balancing the economic realities of China as a major trading partner with deep-seated security and ethical concerns. "We need an approach that is both strong and strategic, not one that swings with the political winds," Starmer said.

The Critique: Inconsistency Undermines Influence

A central pillar of Starmer's argument is that the U.K.'s current inconsistency has damaged its credibility and influence. He pointed to recent government actions, including the abrupt withdrawal of Chinese firm Huawei from Britain's 5G network and sharp criticism of Beijing's policies in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, followed by efforts to boost trade and investment.

"Businesses need certainty, our allies need reliability, and our adversaries need to know where we stand," Starmer argued. This perceived indecision, he suggested, leaves the U.K. without a clear voice on the world stage and makes it harder to build coalitions with allies who are pursuing their own calibrated approaches to China. Foreign policy analysts have noted that the U.S. seeks a mix of competition and limited cooperation, the European Union labels China a "systemic rival," and Australia has faced significant trade disputes with Beijing.

The Proposed Pillars of a Labour Policy

Starmer's proposed framework rests on several key principles he claims would provide the missing consistency. First is an unwavering commitment to "protect our national security," with a clear-eyed view of challenges like cyber threats, intellectual property theft, and strategic competition. This would involve sustained investment in intelligence capabilities and tighter scrutiny of foreign investments in critical national infrastructure.

Second is a pledge to "stand up for our values," including consistent diplomatic pressure on human rights. Starmer emphasized this would not be mere rhetoric but integrated into all diplomatic and trade engagements. Third is the recognition of "pragmatic engagement" where interests align, specifically citing climate change and global health as areas where cooperation with China is essential. "We cannot solve the climate crisis without engaging the world's largest emitter," he noted.

Context and Challenges Ahead

The speech comes at a delicate time in U.K.-China relations and domestic British politics. Economically, China remains a vital market, with bilateral trade worth over £100 billion annually. Politically, the Conservative government has grown increasingly hawkish, with some backbenchers pushing for a formal designation of China as a "threat." Starmer's Labour Party, while leading in opinion polls, must reconcile its progressive base—which is deeply concerned about human rights—with the practical demands of governing a nation in need of economic growth.

Reaction to the speech was mixed. Some business groups welcomed the call for stability. Security hawks, however, questioned whether the approach might be too soft, while human rights advocates worried it might prioritize commerce over principle. A spokesperson for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's government defended its record, stating its integrated review of foreign policy provides a clear framework for "addressing systemic challenges posed by China while pursuing trade opportunities."

Looking to a Strategic Future

Starmer's intervention is less about announcing dramatic new policies and more about advocating for a shift in tone and methodology. His goal appears to be positioning a future Labour government as a steady, predictable partner for both allies and Beijing—one that can manage competition without tipping into uncontrolled conflict and pursue cooperation without compromising core interests.

Whether this nuanced approach can withstand the pressures of great-power rivalry, domestic politics, and unexpected crises remains to be seen. As Starmer concluded, "A clear strategy is not a silver bullet, but the absence of one is a guaranteed path to failure." His challenge is to convince a skeptical public and a watchful international community that he can deliver the consistency he promises.