The Sun Never Sets: Seeing the Unity of the Anglosphere as a Solution to Chinese Aggression
I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
一 Ozymandias by Percy Bysshe Shelley
I recently began reading British historian Andrew Roberts’s voluminous new biography The Last King of America: The Misunderstood Reign of George III. The book is an unprecedentedly sympathetic account of George III (r. 1760-1820), who has traditionally been caricatured by Americans as an abject tyrant ever since the Declaration of Independence declared him to be “unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”
Roberts conducted an interview about the book with Peter Robinson at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. The conversation turned to the expansion, eventual decline, and legacy of the British Empire. During George III’s reign, James Cook claimed Australia and New Zealand for Britain. The empire also gained various island territories after winning the Napoleonic Wars. Britain’s “imperial century” began near the end of George III’s reign. At its zenith, the British Empire held dominion over twenty-five percent of the earth’s land and twenty percent of the global population. Besides direct control of its many colonies, Britain also effectively controlled the economies of many countries across Latin America, Asia, and the South Pacific, creating an “Informal Empire.”
Britain’s period of “splendid isolation” and status as a global hegemon gradually decayed, despite the empire reaching its greatest territorial extent after the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. After World War II, a rapid process of decolonization began. Most of Britain’s former colonies have either declared independence or become members of the Commonwealth of Nations, and the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong to China in 1997 is generally considered to be the end of the British Empire. As Andrew Roberts made clear in his interview, however, the empire’s influence has continued well beyond its official collapse. The former constituent nations of the empire still hold significant constitutional, legal, linguistic, historical, and economic ties. This informal group of nations, collectively known as the Anglosphere, is battling to maintain global supremacy.
As Roberts and Robinson discussed, China is widely considered to be an emerging superpower. China has been the largest exporter in the world for more than ten years. Last year, China experienced a 29.9 percent increase in exports as countries reopened from pandemic-driven lockdowns, and enjoyed a substantial trade surplus. An aggressive propaganda machine shapes the public and diplomatic perception of China. Through policies such as the Belt and Road Initiative, China seeks to expand its global reach by constructing a “unified large market” and making “full use of both international and domestic markets, through cultural exchange and integration, to enhance mutual understanding and trust of member nations, ending up in an innovative pattern with capital inflows, talent pool, and technology database.”
The Belt and Road Initiative has already seen the investment of billions of dollars in ambitious infrastructure projects in over 100 countries. The lucrative Chinese market has attracted many Western countries, including many in the Anglosphere. Dominant in the technology industry, corporations including Alibaba and Tencent Holdings loom large in the industry. China has eroded the cultural dominance of America and the Anglosphere by making inroads in social media and exerting influence on Hollywood to corrode freedom of expression. China even has the territorial ambitions of an aspiring empire. Under the mask of the COVID-19 pandemic, China essentially quashed what little remained of Hong Kong’s autonomy in 2020. The Chinese Communist Party has vowed to annex Taiwan even if military force is required. The Himalayan Sino-Indian border, along with various islands, reefs, and waters of the South China Sea also number among China’s territorial claims.
Despite internal obstacles such as an aging population, shrinking labor force, and unbalanced gender ratio, it has been theorized that China could one day develop into a superpower with which the United States could not hope to compete with alone. Cooperation within the Anglosphere is the world’s best chance to subvert Chinese ambitions. Through military collaboration, trade agreements, and economic and cultural ties, it is already doing just that. By combining influence, the Anglosphere can reject China’s repressive, authoritarian, communist brand of tyranny in favor of the continuation of the greatest civilization the world has ever known.
Defining the Anglosphere
The Anglosphere is not a clearly demarcated polity and does not have any cohesive governing body. There are multiple definitions of the Anglosphere. For example, Merriam-Webster defines the Anglosphere as “the countries of the world in which English language and cultural values predominate,” but this definition is too abstract. Yet if a country owes much of its institutional heritage to Britain or the British Empire, such as reliance on common law, usage of a parliamentary system, or emphasis on the Chicago school of economic thought, then it does not necessarily need to have English as its predominant language in order to be considered a part of the Anglosphere.
For instance, although English is listed as an additional official language in India, only about 30 percent of the population have some degree of fluency with the language. Nevertheless, British influence on India can be seen everywhere from its university system to its gothic architecture.
In response to this counterargument against the idea of an exclusively English-speaking Anglosphere, American businessman James C. Bennett provides a more complete definition of the Anglosphere:
To be part of the Anglosphere implies the sharing of fundamental customs and values at the core of English-speaking culture: individualism, rule of law, and honoring of covenants. . . The Anglosphere shares a narrative in which the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, trial by jury, “innocent until proven guilty,” “a man’s home is his castle,” and “a man’s word is his bond” are common themes. Two persons communicating in English but sharing the narrative and assumptions of a different civilization are not necessarily a part of the Anglosphere, unless their values have also been affected by the core values of English-speaking civilization.
The Anglosphere can best be considered as primarily referring to the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, and some other English-speaking parts of the Caribbean, Oceania, and Africa. Many of these countries maintain deep diplomatic ties. Public opinion polls have revealed that citizens of these countries tend to rank other Anglosphere nations as their most important allies. Indeed, the respective “special relationships” between the United States and United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, and the United States and Canada are among the most successful international partnerships in the world. The five highly developed countries that constitute the “core” of the Anglosphere (United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) combined account for almost one-third of global military spending and a substantial amount of the world’s wealth. By continuing to maintain close affinity with each other through international programs, these nations will be able to push back against Chinese aggrandizement. Strong cultural and economic unity within the Anglosphere, and particularly among those five countries, will be instrumental in preserving Britain’s legacy of free and unfettered elections, independent judiciaries, free markets, and so much more.
Balance of Power Through International Coalition
The balance of power theory in international relations holds that states must prevent a single nation from accumulating enough power that it can dominate the others. In response to a growing threat, such as that posed by China, nations must form a defensive coalition. In recent years, Anglosphere countries have done just that. Through formal and informal programs, these countries have enhanced their intelligence, military readiness, technology, and national security.
Such cooperation has taken place since World War II. The United Kingdom–United States of America Agreement (UKUSA), for instance, is a multilateral agreement between the five core Anglosphere nations under which they have agreed to share intelligence capabilities. This alliance of intelligence operations is also known as Five Eyes. The agreement originated during World War II as a treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom, who agreed to share resources and exchange information on China and the Soviet Union. Later, during the Cold War, the treaty was extended to include Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
More recently, the Five Eyes members have disagreed over how to move forward in response to China. In April 2021, New Zealand’s foreign minister Nanaia Mahuta said that Wellington was becoming increasingly reluctant to provoke China through the Five Eyes alliance. This represented a major concession to Chinese officials, who have been offended by the alliance’s members sharing intelligence on matters such as China’s increasing degree of control over Hong Kong and the alleged genocide and forced assimilation of Uyghurs in the Xinjiang region. Mahuta claimed that New Zealand had become increasingly “uncomfortable with expanding the remit of the Five Eyes,” and that they would seek other “multilateral opportunities to express our interests.” Australia rightly criticized the New Zealand government for its newfound squeamishness. Australian officials were reportedly “blindsided” by what they viewed as an insufficient response to Chinese aggression. The United Kingdom likewise criticized New Zealand for failing to present a necessary united front against China.
Meanwhile, the Global Times, a particularly malignant arm of the Chinese Communist Party’s propaganda apparatus, praised New Zealand for not showing intent to “follow the lead of the US at the expense of its own national interests.” This is exactly the sort of discord that the Anglosphere can scarcely afford. By favoring short-term economic growth and a veneer of good relations, New Zealand has kowtowed to China. Performative condemnations of China’s predations are not enough. Anglosphere countries must be willing to risk economic sanctions and the ire of Chinese diplomats in order to preserve their fading primacy on the world stage. No market is lucrative enough to justify contributing to the rise of an intolerable new world order.
The Anglosphere has taken further steps in the right direction. The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or the Quad, is an agreement between Australia, the United States, India, and Japan intended to counter growing Chinese influence by fostering strategic dialogue. While Japan is not a member of the Anglosphere, it is a key democratic ally in the Pacific region that has certainly been influenced by Western values. In 2017, the Quad leaders, including President Donald Trump and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, agreed to resume the alliance after it had been discontinued in 2010. In 2021, the Quad reaffirmed its commitment to a “free and open Indo-Pacific” that is “inclusive, healthy, anchored by democratic values, and unconstrained by coercion.” The Quad pledged to challenge China’s territorial claims by promoting “the rule of law, freedom of navigation and overflight, peaceful resolution of disputes, democratic values, and territorial integrity.” Despite making less meaningful paeans to lower priority issues such as climate change and international law, the Quad is a step in the right direction.
Also in 2021, Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom entered into a trilateral security pact under which the US and UK will help Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines. The pact, called AUKUS, is designed to increase the technological edge enjoyed by the allies, and will focus on “cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and additional undersea capabilities.” It represents a concerted effort to safeguard the shared values of the Anglosphere and promote security in the Pacific. The agreement is designed to complement Five Eyes, the Quad, and other partnerships of like-minded nations.
Chinese officials criticized AUKUS for displaying a “Cold War mentality” and “intensifying the arms race.” They are correct. Just like the Soviet Union, China represents a one-party authoritarian nuclear power of growing economic influence, and the Anglosphere is right to attempt to contain it. Members of the liberal internationalist foreign policy establishment complain about AUKUS being a “betrayal” of France’s previously established defense contract with Australia, but as William McKinley once said, “half-heartedness never won a battle.” Additional agreements that strengthen military and economic ties are the clear path forward for the Anglosphere.
Some detractors of an allied Anglosphere may argue that its countries, including the core ones, are too politically fractured to become unified in a sufficiently meaningful way. In addition, the very idea of the Anglosphere, some commentators argue, is nothing more than a right-wing political pipedream proffered by conservative Euroskeptics. It is true that many countries within the Anglosphere have had their disagreements with one another, and many are faced with significant internal turmoil, but their historical ties are stronger than any present-day discord. Anglosphere countries often have governments of different political ideologies in power. For example, the United Kingdom and Australia are currently governed by conservative-led coalitions, while Canada and New Zealand are led by their respective center-left parties. Despite these transient political differences, or even longer-term disparities such as vastly different responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Anglosphere nations are natural allies. The countries’ similar focus on economic liberalism and political freedom would allow them to form a very real bulwark against a predacious rising power that has a clear view of its future.
In Closing
Defenders of the European Union, along with those eager to benefit from Chinese markets, criticize calls for a unified Anglosphere as being little more than an idealized romantic illusion. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Anglosphere is more than an arbitrary collection of English-speaking nations, and it is certainly not bound together by some common race or ethnicity. Rather, it is bound together by common history, tradition, cultural ties, and the shared approbation of the values best suited to nourish human flourishing. The legacy that a united Anglosphere preserves in the world is a noble one, and it must do everything in its power to counter a rising China.