Based on the EU Foreign Subsidies Regulation that took effect in January, the EU started to investigate subsidies for Chinese electric vehicle (EV) companies. The investigation was launched 10 days before the EU-China High-level Economic and Trade Dialogue. Although Chinese and European vice presidents would continue to communicate with one another, the EU has insisted on carrying out the investigation.
Tesla’s EVs made in China and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co, which owns Volvo Cars Corp, might also be investigated. It looks like the EU has become more high-handed. Would the bloc be able to stop relying on China?
In addition to a growing trade deficit with China, the EU realized that China has become a strong competitor. EU officials decided to confront China directly, indicating that Beijing could either collaborate or go its own way. As EU experts suggested, European nations share a large enough market and they should be fine without China.
China has expressed its concerns about the investigation, but at the same time, the EU confirmed that it would not entirely decouple itself from China. Instead, it would try to lower the risk while demanding that China “do more” to mitigate concerns about the risk it poses.
The EU described how European corporations were not satisfied with China’s lack of fair competition and its politicized business climate. Neither were they happy about China’s relationship with Russia amid the war in Ukraine. They also said that Beijing’s new Foreign Relations Act, Counterespionage Law and the Measures for the Security Assessment of Outbound Data Transfer would all increase the danger of investing in China.
Meanwhile, after Japan experienced the 2008 global financial crisis, the 2011 Tohuku earthquake and tsunami, collisions with Chinese ships in 2012, the disruption of supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic and a recent dispute over the release of wastewater from a nuclear plant, Tokyo has continued to reduce its dependence on China.
Likewise, due to the trade conflict between Washington and Beijing, 48 percent of US corporations said that they would decrease investment in China or postpone plans.
However, the EU, after having evaluated the risk, still desires access to the Chinese market and wants Beijing to be a good player. Perhaps the EU sees China as a dear friend and believes it would not experience what happened to Japan and the US.
The EU has deliberated over its dependence on China and seems to believe that the situation would not change until 2035. The EU needs rare earth minerals, solar panels, EV batteries and other key items from China. Most likely, its automaking industry would be destroyed because of China’s cheap EVs.
Confronted by the danger of national security and economic threat, the US and Japan have already turned to investment in Southeast Asia, enhancing trade ties with ASEAN and India. The EU must diversify its investments and reduce dependence on China through legislation and innovation. It also needs to reassess its subsidies strategy.
However, the EU — and Germany in particular — is still fond of big markets such as China and has failed to recognize the instability of such markets. It should remember the lesson of relying too much on Russia.
The greatest risk is that the EU might empower a rival that will one day destroy it.
The EU should recognize the truth as soon as possible.
Chang Meng-jen is chair of Fu Jen Catholic University’s Department of Italian Language and Culture, and coordinator of the university’s diplomacy and international affairs program.
Translated by Emma Liu
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS