The introduction on the article by Jian Junbo (简军波),
deputy Director of the Centre for China-Europe Relations, Fudan University
is extracted from
by Grzegorz Stec who is the head of the Mercator Institute for China Studies’ (MERICS) Brussels office.
Professor Jian's piece underscores a shift in EU-China relations. The "cold politics and hot economics" dynamic of the past years is changing, indicating that economic relations are also heading into a cooler period.
However, this change predates the EU’s adoption of its de-risking approach, which is a symptom of the challenges besieging these relations, not a cause. The EU’s policy towards China has evolved gradually from an embrace of win-win rhetoric through calls for a level-playing field and reciprocity, to developing a policy toolbox aimed at mitigating risks and market distortions as dialogue with Beijing failed to sufficiently address them. Criticism of the EU's de-risking strategy overlooks its underlying rationale: to isolate and address specific concerns without rupturing the broader relationship.
Yet, broader economic concerns persist for the EU, particularly regarding China’s state-led development now guided by its “new productive forces”. This has the potential to exacerbate uneven competition and market distortions in sectors strategic for the “fourth industrial revolution” and green transition such as electric vehicles, green tech, or semiconductors. This has prompted the EU to launch new trade investigations and deploy instruments like the Foreign Subsidies Regulation, much to Beijing's chagrin. While the two sides should search for ways to navigate ongoing frictions, they are unlikely to significantly compromise on fundamentals of their respective state-led and competition-based economic models.
The “true interdependence” described by Jian as a stabilizing measure, which has similarities with the mutually assured destruction doctrine, also faces challenges. It could only work if the two sides shared the practice of weaponizing dependencies. But while Beijing by now has a track record of such moves – as evidenced by its actions against Lithuania, Australia, and Norway or its leveraging of rare earth exports like gallium or germanium – the EU does not use leveraging dependencies as a political tool.
Also, separating politics from economics does not seem particularly plausible right now as EU-China relations lack strategic trust. China’s support of Russia’s military-industrial complex, including through dual-use exports, significantly undermines trust on the European side. All the while, Beijing likely interprets the EU’s de-risking policy moves as linked to China-US dynamics rather than as autonomous expressions of European concerns.
The fundamental challenge remains a difference in perspective towards the relationship. Beijing wants to extend the status quo of a “comprehensive strategic partnership”, while the EU takes actions to address its longstanding and increasingly pressing concerns. Although economic dynamics still provide a degree of stabilization, economic complementarity is giving way to competition.
This does not mean that the EU-China relationship is bound to morph into confrontation. But there are more economic and geopolitical friction points on the horizon. Jian’s proposal of competition-focused consultations is a start, but navigating the friction points will require concrete concessions and frank dialogue going beyond positive slogans. This will be necessary if the two sides are to go beyond simple damage control and try to develop a new constructive and realistic dynamic for the EU-China relationship.
Grzegorz Stec
Key Points
EU-China relations have entered an era of increasing economic competition.
They are currently faced with three main challenges: market access restrictions on both sides, the EU’s massive trade deficit with China and Brussels’ de-risking policy.
None are likely to be resolved for the foreseeable future.
In view of the growing tensions between Brussels and Beijing and the risks that these entail, both sides must find a way of stabilising their economic ties.
To this effect, five steps should be taken:
Positive list: Against a backdrop of growing protectionism, negative lists are no longer able to ensure the smooth development of economic relations. Both sides should consider drawing up a positive list that would help boost overall confidence and would not affect areas of cooperation that might fall outside this list. Beijing could even consider doing this unilaterally.
Judicial cooperation: To prevent competition from spiralling out of control, both sides should cooperate more closely in the formulation and/or enforcement of relevant economic rules and laws. More transparency on issues such as subsidies is also needed.
True interdependence: Making sure that the EU and Chinese markets remain strongly enmeshed in one another is essential if relations are to remain stable and conflicts avoided. True interdependence means that one side should not be overly dependent on the other, nor should one side overly dominate certain industries.
Reducing political interference: The EU should stop letting geopolitical considerations and ideological differences get in the way of its economic relationship with China. This will end up doing more harm than good.
Cooperation in third markets: The EU and China possess complementary advantages that should be combined if “win-win results” are to be achieved in third markets. Cooperation not competition should be emphasised.
Economic ties remain the cornerstone of EU-China relations and the key to stabilising this important relationship. Both sides must be more willing to consider each other’s demands and needs and not let politics get in the way of economic exchanges.
The Author
Name: Jian Junbo (简军波)
Position: Deputy director of the Centre for China-Europe Relations, Fudan University
Research focus: Politics of the European Union; EU-China relations; Chinese diplomacy
Education: BA Nankai University; MA-PhD Fudan University (2000-2006)
Experience abroad: Visiting scholar in the United Kingdom, Belgium and Denmark
RELATED essays in csloh.substack site: