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: Date: September 16, 2020 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

This opinion piece was originally pulished in Asia Times.

Ahead of the 14 September 2020 EU-China leaders’ meeting, anxiety had been growing for some time. First, the eruption of COVID-19 was reason enough to cancel the physical summit – the so-called Leipzig Summit – and to opt for a videoconference. The reality, though, was that there was not much to agree on anyway.

Since the EU-China High Level Trade and Economic Dialogue ended in July 2019 without any relevant agreement and not even a communiqué, it has become clear that China’s economic policies are diverging further from the European Union’s expectations. Still, the Leipzig Summit was important for Chancellor Angela Merkel; not only was it to take place under the German presidency of the EU, it would probably be the last EU-China Summit she would chair, having been a tenacious China fan within the EU.

The Leipzig Summit, bringing together the 27 heads of state of the EU, could not have been a better platform to sign a deal on the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) between the EU and China, after seven long years of negotiations – even more so given that the agreed target for the CAI’s completion was 2020.

The reality, though, is that the CAI was not ready for the EU and Chinese heads of state to seal, nor were there any other relevant agreements at hand, either on climate change, standards, or COVID-19 cooperation – nothing concrete worth calling this videoconference an EU-China Summit.

As if this were not enough of an embarrassment for Merkel as its digital host, EU institutions, both through the president of the European Council, Charles Michel, and the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, referred in their introductory statements to the thorny issues of Hong Kong and Xinjiang, risking embarrassment for Chinese President Xi Jinping.

With such a political and highly contentious flavor for a digital summit, it has become obvious that EU-China relations have reached a new low. Very clear proof of the distancing of the two parties is that, regarding the CAI, Xi insisted on the 2020 deadline remaining intact, but von der Leyen made it very clear that a good deal was more important than a speedy deal from the European perspective.

Few concessions were made by China, or at least not those that the European leaders were expecting. Promises of more imports from Europe were made, in line with what Chinese negotiators offered US counterparts in order to reach an agreement for the Phase 1 trade deal, but there was no agreement on further market access, and even less was said about a reform of China’s economic model, which the Europeans continue to describe as state-led capitalism.

With such a mercantilist offer – imports instead of market access or reform – and a reminder that the EU should not meddle on China’s internal issues, whether it is Xinjiang, Hong Kong or its particular economic model, the meeting ended without any notable conclusion.

I really wonder why this EU-China digital summit had to be held, knowing that positions were so far apart. It’s likely that only the US administration is rejoicing about the outcome.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint.

Due to copyright agreements we ask that you kindly email request to republish opinions that have appeared in print to [email protected].

Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

An EU - China investment deal: a second look

For the moment, it does not look like we have the basis for greater and deeper economic relations with China. However, dismissing China and the opportunities that it creates for global cooperation would also be a mistake.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 19, 2021
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Europe's disappointing investment deal with China

Why rush a deal that is so inherently complex?

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 4, 2021
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

When and how should the European Union conclude an investment agreement with China?

A look into the potential Comprehensive Agreement on Investment between China and the European Union.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: December 17, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Europe should promote a Climate Club after the US elections

Time has come for Europe, the US and possibly China to create a global “Climate Club”.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Energy & Climate Date: December 10, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Towards post-pandemic green multilateralism?

How could we achieve a trilateral relationship between China, the EU and the US and consolidate it with climate goals?

Speakers: Huiyao Wang and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: December 10, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

A silver lining for ageing Asia

An ageing population is generally bad news for growth prospects, but Japan and Taiwan offer important lessons.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: December 8, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Grading the big pandemic test

COVID-19 almost one year on, it is time to assess who passed the test, and who failed.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 27, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Europe is losing competitiveness in global value chains while China surges

The European Union owes much of its economic weight to its regional value chain and integration into the global value chain. But the EU’s global value chain role is shrinking, and while EU trade integration with China is increasing, it is mainly to China’s benefit, undermining the EU’s external competitiveness.

By: Alicia García-Herrero and David Martínez Turégano Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 27, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

The impact of the new Asian trade mega-deal on the European Union

Although the economic implications of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) for the EU are modest, the geopolitical and strategic implications are not. With the arrival of a new US administration and the central role of China in the bloc, the EU needs to outline an Asian commercial strategy that reconciles the importance of China and the transatlantic relationship.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 19, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

How to keep a competitive environment while engaging with non market economies?

How can we ensure fair competition between European firms and Chinese state-backed players?

Speakers: Julia Anderson, Helge Berger, Michiel Boots, Alicia García-Herrero, Carles Esteva Mosso, Frédéric Jenny, Georgios Petropoulos, Cian Ruane, Hylke Vandenbussche and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: November 19, 2020
Read article More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Sizing up the world's largest trade deal

What should be Europe's strategy towards the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)?

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 18, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

RCEP might not stop reshuffling of Asian value chains

China is no doubt bound to benefit, but other members of the regional trade pact may benefit even more

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 17, 2020
Load more posts