These are troubling times for the EU's top policymakers. Competition from China and India is on the rise, jobs remain in short supply and outrage in many Muslim countries over the publication of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed has strained Europe's once warm relations with the Islamic world.
But as EU leaders prepared for summit talks in Brussels on Thursday and yesterday, EU officials focused on another priority: halting the wave of economic protectionism sweeping across many countries in the 25-nation bloc.
Few can deny that Europe's single market is under its most serious threat since 1992, when governments boldly moved to abolish national frontiers, allowing the free movement of people, goods and services across the bloc.
illustration: mountain people
Concerns about a resurgence of economic nationalism center on Italian claims that the French government engineered a merger between state-controlled Gaz de France (GDF) and utilities group Suez to thwart a rival bid for the latter from Italian energy group Enel.
Other recent deals have also triggered concern in Brussels.
Madrid is currently studying ways to keep German energy giant E.ON from buying Spanish group Endesa. France, Luxembourg and Spain are exploring ways of keeping Mittal Steel from acquiring rival Arcelor, a deal they deeply oppose.
And EU policymakers are also entangled in an acrimonious struggle with Warsaw over Polish government moves to block the merger of Pekao and BPH, two local affiliates of the Italian banking group UniCredit.
Ringing the anti-protection alarm bells loudest is ardent free-marketeer Jose Manuel Barroso whose job as head of the commission -- the EU's executive arm -- puts him at the center of the economic storm raging across the bloc.
Barroso is set to warn the upcoming EU summit that government meddling in corporate takeover battles is not just threatening the EU's single market but also jeopardizing Europe's ability to compete on the global stage.
"This is not the time for economic nationalism ... in a globalized world, no member state can go it alone," the commission chief warned recently.
"Defending national champions in the short-term usually ends up relegating them to the second division in the long-term," Barroso cautioned, adding: "More efficient companies that have been subjected to the full rigor of competition leave national champions behind as they move into international markets."
Barroso appears to have found an ally in German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who said in a recent interview: "Above all, I am against walling off and protectionism."
EU anti-trust regulators, led by the bloc's competition chief Neelie Kroes, say they are determined to vet each energy merger and acquisition and will take legal action against governments and companies accused of breaching EU single market rules.
Even more is at stake, according to other EU commissioners.
EU monetary affairs chief Joaquin Almunia told the bloc's finance ministers recently that the protectionist furor is putting the bloc's fragile economic recovery at risk.
Energy experts say mergers in the sector will help consolidate the bloc's fragmented energy market, thereby lowering energy costs and boosting EU energy security.
European trade commissioner Peter Mandelson, for his part, has warned that "simplistic solutions of economic nationalism" are threatening the EU's global reputation as a defender of free markets.
It's not just about the economy or global standing, however. The debate has also triggered a damaging political rift among EU governments.
While French politicians often rage against the commission's "ultra liberal" policies, free-market Nordic nations and many central and eastern European states -- excluding Poland -- say the EU executive must take a tougher stance against nationalist rhetoric and policies.
The concern is shared by many in the European Parliament. Graham Watson MEP, leader of the assembly's liberal democrats, says the bloc's governments are on a slippery slope which could end up destroying the single market.
"The commission must remain vigilant and act forcefully ... to prevent member states from rolling back the progress in European integration that has brought Europe so far together," Watson cautions.
Stopping the protectionist tide will not be easy however. But EU officials say they are confident that if political pressure does not produce results, lawsuits and court action certainly will.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS