For Osborne, foreign policy is strictly business

Mr Osborne hoped to convince his Chinese hosts that his principal interests are business and commerce

There are few more precarious positions than prime minister-in-waiting.

Two good rules of life in general and politics in particular are that the frontrunner usually stumbles and the number two never gets the job.

But this may be George Osborne's week, and it will be well worth watching how he makes use of what his recent hosts might call "a period of strategic opportunity".

Indeed, his trip to China gives us a glimpse, perhaps not of "Osbornism" but of how he sees the world.

It suggests a clear-headed but not very exalted vision of Britain's place in the global reordering and a strategic sense of how to deal with this, tactically bold to the point of recklessness.

Above all, it confirms that, for Mr Osborne, economics trumps everything else, be that old alliances or any notion of a universalist, ethical foreign policy.

George Osborne

• chancellor of the exchequer since 2010, the youngest to hold the office in more than a century

• viewed as very close to David Cameron and a sharp political operator with a central role in election campaigns

• put cutting the deficit at the heart of the Conservative economic agenda; blamed Labour for Britain's economic woes

• admirer (like Mr Cameron) of former Prime Minister Tony Blair, believing elections are won from the centre ground

• his announcement of a national living wage has been described as "stealing Labour's clothes"

• but other economic policy preferences such as spending and welfare cuts would be viewed as to the right

He seemed unhindered by the sense of pride that undid diplomats of an earlier age, such as George Macartney who refused to kow-tow before the Chinese emperor.

Of course, the chancellor's head did not touch the ground at any point, but there was part of the trip that was just as important a symbol.

The chancellor surprised his hosts by asking to visit the country's most fraught region, Xinjiang.

Mr Osborne became the first serving British government minister to visit Xinjiang

This shows a fine understanding of Chinese sensitivities about lectures from outsiders, but left human rights campaigners aghast.

Hundreds of people have been killed in recent years, 50 in one incident this time last year.

The Chinese call this terrorism, but human rights groups suggest even peaceful dissent is dealt with very harshly.

The Uighurs are ethnically distinct from the Han Chinese, predominantly Islamic and speaking a Turkic language.

It is difficult to judge, but it seems separatist sentiment is strong - and the very thought of a part of China breaking away strikes at that nation's concept of itself.

Those who've been there recently report that many are resentful of Beijing and feel that their distinct heritage, and particularly their religion, is being disrespected.

Many seem to feel that massive development is plundering local natural resources without improving the local economy.

The Chinese government portrays this separatist sentiment as Islamic extremism and probably genuinely worries that this is a real and growing factor.

Rich pickings?

There's another thing you need to know about the region. It is on the old Silk Road - the connection between East and West.

One recent academic tome informs me a more accurate description of this ancient trade route would be "ammonium chloride shifting unmarked paths".

Many Uighurs are reported to be resentful of Beijing's economic activities in Xinjiang

But it doesn't quite have the romance and the lure.

Now the region is at the heart of the new Silk Road - the Chinese government's hugely ambitious plan for a series of road and rail links connecting the world's most important economy to Central Asia and Europe.

As "one belt, one road" (it sounds better in Chinese) grows, the region will continue to rise in importance and wealth and there could be very rich pickings for investors.

For Mr Osborne to go there, and be praised by the Chinese media for "pragmatism" in not confronting China over human rights, is hugely significant.

This was hardly a meeting of equals. Mr Osborne went to China as a supplicant, come rather late to the table in the hope of a few crumbs.

The UK is not among China's top 10 trading partners (Germany is number six), but Mr Osborne wants to raise awareness of the potential on both sides. And reassure his host he wants to make money, not trouble.

Brutal symbolism

The chancellor's trip to Xinjiang coincided with a much more important visit - that of President Xi Jinping to the US.

While President Barack Obama's "pivot to Asia" continues, the administration is more cautious about China than before - concerned by its maritime ambitions and allegations of cyber-attacks.

The US, which hosted President Xi recently, is increasingly suspicious of China

Mutual suspicion, always high, has grown recently and there is no real meeting of minds.

It is no wonder if some in the White House look askance at Mr Osborne's delight at the possibility of the Chinese running our nuclear power stations - something that is likely to be formally announced when President Xi comes to London in October.

They were already concerned that the Treasury ignored their pleas, and those of the Foreign Office, not to take part in the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank.

For years the guiding principle of British foreign policy has been to stick as close as possible to the US.

I don't think George Osborne is about to overturn that completely - but he has challenged it, suggesting that he believes the UK should hitch its wagon to the still-rising economic superpower.

His trip was almost brutal in its symbolism - not good news for those who want the UK to be a beacon for human rights.

If he does succeed David Cameron, he will have a very short time before he needs to call a general election - so any signs of what sort of a prime minister he would be deserve some divination.