CHINA has become a central foreign policy issue in the Conservative leadership contest. Both Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have tried to position themselves as hawks – but do either offer different visions for the future of UK-China relations?

The Global Times, China’s English-language news outlet, published an opinion piece early in the leadership race praising Mr Sunak, for his “clear” and “pragmatic” foreign policy. The other candidates’ positions were deemed “tough” on China. The rhetorical gap has subsequently narrowed as Mr Sunak sought to regain the initiative from Ms Truss but the Chinese Government will probably retain hope that there is more scope for maintaining the status quo in relations if the former Chancellor wins. However, it will likely be preparing for relations to deteriorate further as Ms Truss’s victory looms.

Drawing on the lesson of Ukraine, Ms Truss has suggested that the UK should consider providing arms to Taiwan to support its defensive capabilities. Although stated as a personal position rather than signalling a change in UK policy, it was potentially incendiary all the same. If a Prime Minister countenanced arms sales to Taiwan, this would arguably constitute the most significant change in UK policy towards the PRC since 1989, essentially revising its effective "One China" policy.

Ms Truss has warned against the UK becoming strategically dependent on China and has proposed clamping down on the influence of Chinese-owned companies such as TikTok owner ByteDance, curtailing high-end technology exports, and advocating for a G7-led alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Originally a committed Remainer, she is now a hard-line Brexiter, so there should be no surprise that she has gone from advocating a “golden era” of bilateral relations to being one of China’s harshest critics. There are few votes to be won in the leadership race by being soft on China and elections are never going to be won or lost on this issue, so it’s a safe bet for her to stake out a hard-line position for now.

As post-Brexit Chancellor, Mr Sunak was forced to reckon with the reality of China’s economic influence. "Global Britain" was to be powered by deals with high-growth regions of the world, and Mr Sunak hinted at an openness to a new trading relationship with China. He has argued the UK “can pursue with confidence an economic relationship with China in a safe, mutually beneficial way without compromising our values or security” and reportedly warned Boris Johnson of the economic consequences of banning Huawei from involvement in 5G infrastructure.

As the leadership campaign has progressed, he identified China as the biggest long-term threat to Britain and criticised Western leaders for ignoring the PRC’s activities for too long. His proposals include closing PRC-funded Confucius Institutes and establishing an equivalent to NATO to counter China’s growing power.

China routinely retaliates to political criticism or perceived slights with economic means, making it increasingly hard to treat the relationship as though different policy domains are not inter-related. For those who advocate attempting to compartmentalise issues, the reality is that UK cannot push China on political issues without damaging economic relations. The real questions will be the extent to which relations would suffer and how far the UK Government would be willing to tolerate this. The UK-China relationship is interdependent, but clearly asymmetric, and the UK has less capacity to tolerate damage to economic ties. This could prove to be a test of the extent to which a Truss-led government is willing to put its proclaimed values ahead of economic interests.

Irrespective of which candidate wins the leadership race, the UK’s China policy is going to be very different from the "high point" during the David Cameron/George Osborne years when the UK was to be China’s “best partner in the West”. Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne received plenty of criticism for their approach, but even those who supported it at the time – including Ms Truss – have subsequently distanced themselves.

Looking ahead, while there is going to be a degree of change in the UK’s approach it won’t be as far-reaching as the leadership debate would suggest, particularly in a period of economic fragility for the UK likely to culminate in recession.

Ultimately, despite the apparent competition to determine who can be most hawkish on China policy, both Mr Sunak and Ms Truss are likely to rein their rhetoric in and propose less far-reaching, incremental policy changes instead.

After all, "have cake, eat cake" pronouncements made on the stump rarely age well when confronted with harsh political and economic reality.

Dr Scott Brown is a lecturer in politics at the University of Dundee

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald