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

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 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 More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

China's 'dual circulation' plan is bad news for others' exports

This opinion piece was originally published in Nikkei’s Asian Review. Minds in Beijing are focusing increasingly on the upcoming meeting of the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee next month. High on the body’s agenda will be sketching out a new official five-year plan for Asia’s largest economy. A freshly coined buzzword looks set to play […]

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: September 15, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

全球為數不多 台灣今年經濟有望正成長

台灣的貨幣政策和大多數國家相比仍屬相對緊縮,台幣升幅也是相對有限。總的來說,台灣第二季的GDP與其他國家相較算是非常優異,主因是行動管制少,所以衝擊也小得多。

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: August 28, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Relocating production from China to Central Europe? Not so fast!

Western European imports from central Europe have fallen dramatically, while imports from China fell much less, and had already recovered to pre-COVID level by April 2020. Central European governments should instigate new measures to foster the transition towards knowledge-intensive economic activities.

By: Zsolt Darvas Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: August 20, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Coronavirus recovery: invest rainy day savings to boost Hong Kong’s economy

The Hong Kong government might want to consider diversifying its economy by using part of the savings earmarked for rainy days. Beyond cushioning the negative impact of Covid-19 on SMEs and households, it is one more reason to spend.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: August 6, 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

China's targeted corporate shopping spree to continue, especially in Europe

Expect small, below the radar deals to continue to flourish and, by the same token, Europe to lose part of its edge in industrial technology and other strategic sectors.

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Jianwei Xu Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 17, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Debt relief for Sub-Saharan Africa: what now?

When G20 finance heads meet on 18 July, Europe will again need to lead on the group’s flagship COVID-19 initiative to postpone low-income countries’ debt service payments. For the first time, China has agreed to participate as an official creditor alongside members of the Paris Club. However, continuing lack of clarity on which Chinese creditors will participate, coupled with resistance from private sector creditors to voluntary participation, suggest that actual relief will be much less than originally planned.

By: Suman Bery, Sybrand Brekelmans and Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 14, 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
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Toward a smart Indian response to China

Rather than risking its soldiers' lives on the border, India should join 'middle power' economic coalitions to address China's behavior.

By: Suman Bery and Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: June 23, 2020
Read article Download PDF More on this topic
 

External Publication

EU-China trade and investment relations in challenging times

In this report, we have focused on trade and investment relations and have not attempted to define the many other policy instruments that the EU can and should pursue to increase its leverage towards China, and to protect its domestic economy while boosting domestic investment and trade.

By: Alicia García-Herrero, Guntram B. Wolff, Jianwei Xu, Niclas Poitiers, Gabriel Felbermayr, Rolf J. Langhammer, Wan-Hsin Liu and Alexander Sandkamp Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: June 4, 2020
Load more posts