India or Bharat? | U.K. Spy Scandal | Energy Key to Strong U.S.-Vietnam Economic Partnership, and more

U.K. Spy Scandal Could Shift China Policy  (James Palmer, Foreign Policy)
News broke over the weekend that a U.K. parliamentary aide had been arrested in March, along with another individual, on charges of violating the Official Secrets Act on behalf of China. British lawmakers have reacted angrily, because of both the six-month delay in the announcement of the news and the intrusion into Parliament. The man, 28, was a parliamentary researcher for the Conservative Party, a position that allows access to some sensitive information. (The researcher was released on bail and has denied the charges.)
The scandal is the most notable public espionage case involving China and the United Kingdom in years, and it comes at a time when the ruling Conservative Party is trying to reset its relationship with China. The COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing’s aggressive diplomacy, and public pressure to act against China’s human rights abuses have strained bilateral relations. The end of free speech in Hong Kong, a former British colony, is also a sore spot, especially since the U.K. has acted as a refuge for democratic activists.
British leaders have been reluctant to give up on the dream of Chinese markets and investment, especially as the U.K. scrambles to navigate a post-Brexit future. The Tories appear set for a major loss in the next U.K. general election, which is expected to take place before January 2025, and they are desperate for any economic good news.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak took a more hawkish stance toward China during his first bid for the job last year—which he lost to short-lived leader Liz Truss. Sunak and his team have backed down from that position since the prime minister took office last October. British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, on a trip to Beijing last month, called isolating China a mistake, while Kemi Badenoch, the secretary of state for business and trade, insisted that China was a “challenge” and not a foe.
Late on Tuesday, the Times broke the news that two potential Conservative Party parliamentary candidates were dropped from candidate lists due to concerns over their ties to Chinese intelligence. The political mood in the U.K., both among members of Parliament and the public, is likely to swing sharply against China soon.

Hun Sen’s Successor Must Keep Up His Chess Game  (Lindsey Kennedy, Foreign Policy)
Within days of winning Cambodia’s general election in July, then-Prime Minister Hun Sen announced plans to hand the reins to his son Hun Manet. The succession plan was not a surprise. Hun Sen had deployed authoritarian tactics to hold on to power for 38 years, including banning the only legitimate political opposition to the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP). His West Point-educated son had served as the deputy commander in chief of the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces for five years before being fast-tracked to four-star general in April, paving the way for him to take power. It is clear Hun Sen will still pull some strings: He remains the head of the CPP and will remain in office as Senate president until 2033.
Nonetheless, the speed of the Hun Manet’s succession was unexpected. Just before the election, Hun Sen abruptly began to float the idea of making his son prime minister soon after the CPP’s win, and he was appointed on Aug. 22. Hun Manet immediately replaced a swath of ministers from Hun Sen’s generation with young blood. (His father had long suggested it would be “impossible” to install his 45-year-old son in a position above the old guard.) But politically, this won’t amount to much change. Many CPP stalwarts were replaced by their children, a compromise that allows Cambodia’s most powerful families to retain some influence while aiming to keep that influence contained.
Hun Manet has inherited not only his father’s position, but also the interparty factions and rivalries that he managed for decades. CPP leaders who had waited in the wings for years, namely longtime Cambodian Interior Minister Sar Kheng and Defense Minister Tea Banh, seem to be brought to heel; their own sons have taken their former positions in Hun Manet’s government. There are signs that Cambodia’s other influential families are focused on consolidating their power. But Hun Manet’s biggest challenge will be to replicate his father’s realpolitik in managing these families, giving them space to keep profiting from the country’s endemic corruption without granting them too much power.

Energy is the Key to a Strong U.S.-Vietnam Economic Partnership  (Kathryn Neville, National Interest)
Much is at stake now that the United States and Vietnam have embarked on a new diplomatic framework. For nearly a decade, Washington has worked to strengthen ties with Hanoi. Amid increased tensions between the United States and China, President Joe Biden traveled to Vietnam on September 10, upgrading bilateral relations to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. While much of the focus of U.S.-Vietnamese discussions has centered around defense ties—critical aspects of their economic cooperation have been overlooked. The current partnership fails to strengthen essential elements of Vietnam’s energy sector, primarily its ability to secure long-term LNG contracts amidst global price volatility that will be vital to supporting its industrial manufacturing base. As the Biden administration makes arrangements to launch a new strategic partnership, bridging the gap between Vietnam’s economic development and energy needs is central to building a resilient economic alliance between Washington and Hanoi.
For Vietnam to be a reliable strategic partner—continued economic growth is paramount. In order to sustain its current economic growth rate, primarily through its manufacturing sector that hosts companies like Samsung and Foxconn, access to steady, reliable, and affordable energy is essential. Vietnam is one of Asia’s most promising industrial and manufacturing powerhouses, but ongoing political and economic circumstances in its energy sector threaten to derail progress. Vietnam has significantly invested in LNG as a low-carbon baseload fuel to transition away from coal and meet net-zero targets. As early as 2012, it built two LNG import terminals—Hai Linh and Thi Vai. However, political uncertainty and supply chain delays led the Vietnamese government to postpone opening both projects and dramatically slowed future LNG infrastructure development.
One of Vietnam’s main challenges is its inability to secure long-term LNG contracts, which exposes it to global price fluctuations and forces it to purchase gas on the spot market. Vietnam is a price-sensitive buyer, meaning wild swings in global gas prices can quickly force it out of the market. When the Thi Vai broke ground in 2019, the Platts JKM LNG price benchmark price hovered around $5 per MMB. At the height of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in winter 2022, prices skyrocketed to $70.50 per MMB—a price that would have seemed unthinkable years earlier.
Without stability in Vietnam’s energy sector, Washington and Hanoi’s economic partnership will weaken. For better or worse, gas is essential to Vietnam’s long-term economic growth. If Vietnam fails to adequately incorporate LNG into its economy, its dependence on coal will grow, leading to failed climate targets and increased power shortages. Expensive gas infrastructure could also risk underutilization, jeopardizing future investments and hindering the development of other green technologies. 

India or Bharat?  (Akhil Ramesh, National Interest)
In boisterous democracies, there are heated debates over intangible and seemingly arbitrary issues such as names, titles, and identities. These arguments have a penchant for revisiting history. In the United States, discussions about gun rights, abortion, and race stem from different understandings of the nation’s past and, often, its very foundation.
The Indian government’s use of “Bharat” instead of “India” in the invitations for last week’s G20 meeting has unleashed such a discussion within the country and raised more questions about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s objectives abroad. The name Bharat was applied to the lands of modern India for over three thousand years. Ancient Sanskrit religious texts and epics, like the Vedas and the Mahabharata, reference the name. On the other hand, “India” was derived from the fifth-century BC Greek reckoning of the Persian corruption of the Sanskrit placename “Sindhu,” designating the Indus River.      
First, the timing is noteworthy.  India is using the G20 to position itself as the leader and voice of the Global South. Over the last few years, the Modi administration has consistently championed the voices of the developing world, referred to as the Global South. Not only was his government among the first to deliver vaccines at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, but it has also used every opportunity on the world stage to discuss reforms in the multilateral system that would make it more equitable for nations in the Global South. Modi has also advocated for including the African Union in the G20. Consequently, leaders such as the Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea, James Marape, have hailed him as the leader of the Global South for offering a third way in the tense climate under Cold War 2.0.
India’s goodwill in the Global South on various global platforms is not only a result of their delivery of public goods or recent advocacy efforts. There is also the underlying solidarity extending from a shared history as victims of imperialism. This renaming of the nation in an invitation sent out to global delegates is a product of that solidarity. It is increasingly seen as a decolonizing effort, at least by the supporters of the ruling government. Though, the partisan support is likely out of domestic concerns.
Interestingly, on the domestic front, the Modi administration hopes to convert nationalist fervor into votes for the 2024 parliamentary elections. Furthermore, the leader of the Hindu nationalist organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Mohan Bhagwat’s comments on Bharat prior to the news of the invitation have understandably raised concerns among the opposition parties in India on the domestic impacts of this supposed decolonizing initiative.