Blog Post

Competing Globally: Europe’s Debate Over Trade and Sovereignty

This blog is part of a series following the 2019 Bruegel annual meetings, which brought together nearly 1,000 participants for two days of policy debate and discussion.

By: and Date: September 12, 2019 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

Europe faces a global test of its resolve to work together while protecting its sovereignty. Global economic relations reflect new tensions between the U.S. and China, poles that increasingly define the international agenda. The European Union, home to the world’s largest single market, has a duty to chart a new course that harnesses the potential of cooperation in support of growth and prosperity.

In June, Bruegel and the European Centre for Foreign Relations published a blueprint for harnessing Europe’s economic power to ensure it can determine its own economic destiny. Recommendations cover a wide range of areas, including how to respond to trade- and investment-distorting government subsidies; priorities for foreign direct investment into the EU; and European merger control policy. The paper makes the case that each of those areas offers a new opportunity to acknowledge the increasing overlap of economic and geopolitical strategy, and to help the EU position itself effectively on the world stage. In terms of trade distortions, it calls for using the European Commission’s existing state-aid toolbox to evaluate the extent of subsidies, even though non-EU countries are of course not subject to European single-market restrictions on such aid. For foreign investment, it raises the possibility that the EU might be able to take decisions by qualified majority voting when member states fear that a certain investment, while beneficial from a national standpoint, raises concerns for the EU as a whole. And it calls for the possibility for the High Representative for Foreign Affairs to evoke a security clause and weigh in on merger decisions with geopolitical ramifications.

The EU also needs to assess how to respond to the new geopolitics of development assistance and especially to decide whether to maintain total policy control of its development institutions and instruments, or whether it might benefit from leveraging its investment. An example of this second model is the Asian Investment Bank, an international financial institution based in Beijing, while the first model is the benchmark for the EU’s core institutions such as the European Investment Bank.

Bruegel’s 2019 annual meeting offered a strong venue to revisit these proposals with policymakers who will be key participants in shaping Europe’s response: Sabine Weyand, the European Commission’s new Director-General for Trade; Member of the European Parliament Maria Spyraki, part of the European People’s Party group; and Pierre Heilbronn, vice president for policy and partnerships at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. They were joined by two of the paper’s co-authors, Jean Pisani-Ferry of Bruegel and ECFR director Mark Leonard.

The Commission’s Weyand cautiously endorsed the paper’s concept and the approach, provided it is not used as a fig leaf for protectionist urges and nationalism. The paper’s authors made clear that it is not. As Leonard said, the process would require “very specific and clear criteria” that the Commission could use in making any related decisions. Weyand urged the EU to avoid aligning itself with either the U.S. or Chinese approach, instead aiming to hold its own and chart a new course on its own terms. Heilbronn concurred that the EU needs to work together to address the fragmentation that threatens to erode its influence.

A further concern was the tendency of institutional discussions to derail pragmatic policy responses. Weyand cautioned against triggering the sort of “navel-gazing” debate that could interfere with handling the very real policy challenges before us. Instead, the EU might benefit from further discussion about the relationship between policies in each member state, policies within the EU as a whole, and policies aimed at the outside world. Europe also needs to reinforce the existing multilateral order, so working within the World Trade Organisation – “painful and slow and difficult” as it is – remains the best option.

MEP Spyraki invoked Mario Draghi’s definition of economic sovereignty, which is reflected not in lawmaking power but the ability to control outcomes so that they respond to the fundamental needs of citizens. “The ability to make independent decisions does not guarantee countries such control. In other words, independence does not guarantee sovereignty,” she said. Another concern is the potential for lobbying and special interests to capture any new instruments for geopolitical decision-making, a concern also raised by Weyand. Without great care and attention to detail, the process could become subjective and easily swayed.

When raising the importance of security policy in trade and investment decisions, the EU must confront the potential for conflict between perceived national and EU-wide interests. Spyraki noted that the EU was simultaneously asking Greece to privatise its state-owned assets, raising concerns about Chinese investment in the Piraeus Port Authority, and not coming forward with EU-based investor teams. Furthermore, the port has become increasingly competitive since the Chinese took over its management, providing economic benefit to Greece and Europe as a whole.

The authors of the Bruegel and ECFR study take the position that it is possible to account for these concerns while also elevating security to a more prominent role in decision-making. Any investment in a European company gives access to the entire EU internal market, so there should be a procedure that makes it possible for a majority of member states to decide a certain investment is against the interest of the union as a whole. At the same time, to make this work there will need to be an instrument for helping the member state who would benefit from such foreign investment, and therefore has the most to lose if the project is blocked.

As the study makes clear, the current juxtaposition of geopolitics and economics is a particular conundrum for the EU. Until now, European policy has largely reasoned as if the economic sphere could be completely isolated and completely separated most of the time. The world order has moved on and the EU must take steps accordingly.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Trump’s International Economic Legacy

If Donald Trump loses the United States presidential election in November, he will ultimately be seen to have left little mark in many areas. But in the US's relationship with China, the decoupling of economic links could continue, and that could force Europe into hard choices.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: September 29, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

From playing field to player: Europe’s strategic autonomy as our generation’s goal

At this online event Charles Michel spoke about the importance of Europe's strategic autonomy.

Speakers: Charles Michel and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: September 28, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

Common eurobonds should become Europe’s safe asset – but they don’t need to be green

The plan to fund the European Union’s recovery programme via debt issuance has raised hopes that a new type of euro-denominated safe asset could emerge. As a priority, the European Commission needs a strategy to create a liquid and transparent market in EU bonds. For now, funding through EU green bonds would complicate that effort.

By: Alexander Lehmann Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: September 28, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

中歐峰會名不副實,未來之路漸行漸遠

視訊會議的討論充滿政治性和爭議性,很明顯繼2019年新的中歐戰略承認系統性對手的關係後,中歐之交再次降到新低。

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: September 22, 2020
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

External Publication

Diversification and the world trading system

Diversification is important because it is associated with economic growth and reduced volatility.

By: Uri Dadush, Niclas Poitiers, Abdelaaziz Ait Ali, Mohammed Al Doghan, Muhammad Bhatti, Carlos Braga and Anabel González Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: September 16, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Non-summit shows EU-China ties at new low

There was nothing concrete to justify calling this video conference an EU-China Summit.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: September 16, 2020
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Bruegel Annual Meetings 2020 - Day 3

Third day of Bruegel Annual Meetings.

Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: September 3, 2020
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Bruegel Annual Meetings 2020 - Day 2

Second day of Bruegel Annual Meetings.

Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: September 2, 2020
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Bruegel Annual Meetings 2020 - Day 1

The Annual Meetings are Bruegel's flagship event which gathers high-level speakers to discuss the economic topics that affect Europe and the world.

Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: September 1, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

China Has an Unfair Advantage in the EU Market. What Can Be Done to Level the Playing Field?

This article has originally been published in Brink News. The dominance of Chinese state-owned enterprises in China’s domestic market is giving them unfair advantages in the European Union single market as well. The EU Commission recently released a series of recommendations for leveling the playing field regarding foreign subsidies. Unfortunately, while useful, these ideas are unlikely to […]

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 28, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Ukraine: trade reorientation from Russia to the EU

Over the past five years conflict has led to a deterioration of Russo-Ukrainian economic relations while ties with the EU have been deepened. This shift is evident in trade flows: the European Union has become Ukraine’s biggest trading partner, while China is poised to overtake Russia as its second. Natural gas imports from Russia, Ukraine’s prior Achilles heel, have been partially replaced by reverse deliveries from the EU and reduced as result of reform of the gas sector.

By: Marek Dabrowski, Marta Domínguez-Jiménez and Georg Zachmann Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: July 13, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Europe’s China problem: investment screening and state aid

China’s state capitalist economy poses a challenge to EU openness to foreign investment. In response, the European Commission 17 June published a White Paper on “levelling the playing field with regard to state aid”, contemplating sensible and balanced policies to protect the integrity of the European single market from subsidised foreign acquisitions. However, against the backdrop of collapsing global capital flows and limited existing FDI from China, there is little risk of excessive exposure, indeed a deepening of bilateral investment flows would be beneficial for both economies.

By: Marta Domínguez-Jiménez and Niclas Poitiers Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 2, 2020
Load more posts