This is the second part - 5-minute read - of a two-part series; the first part is HERE.
Female author: Sun Ru (孙茹) – Researcher at, and former deputy director of, the Institute of World Political Studies, China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR)
Male author: Wang Lei (王磊) – Associate researcher at CICIR’s Institute of World Political Studies
Published: 24 May 2023 (8 June 2023 in English)
Source: China-US Focus
“The American edition of de-risking is similar to the European one in advocating economic and industrial security, the diversification of the supply chain, the protection of basic technologies and sensitive high tech via a “small courtyard with high walls” and collaboration with allies and partners.”
“There are arguably multiple drivers behind the de-risking strategy proposed in Europe and the United States:”
“First, decoupling is not achievable. Although the voice for decoupling has been loud in recent years and relations between China and the West have been challenged in many fields, their economic and trade ties are complementary, mutually beneficial and hard to sever.”
“Second, … Europe and the U.S. want to use China's strength in addressing major regional hot spots such as the Ukraine crisis … Europe and the U.S. cannot bypass China in dealing with global challenges.”
“The third element is China’s remarkable achievements in diplomatic good offices. It has published a position paper on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, set up a phone conversation between its President and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and sent the special representative for Eurasian affairs on a European tour. It has also actively brokered the resumption of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran and championed a series of initiatives such as the trilateral dialogue between China, Afghanistan and Pakistan, giving a steady push to international and regional peace and stability. All of these things have forced Europe and the United States to face up to China’s role as a responsible and constructive major country.”
“The shift from decoupling to de-risking reflects some positive adjustments in the European and American attitudes toward China … [and is] conducive to bringing Europe’s and America’s China policies back on track.”
“Furthermore, Europe and the U.S. have demonstrated an inclination to engage and have dialogue with China … America and Europe are both increasing communication and dialogue with China and shifting their emphasis from competition and confrontation to dialogue and cooperation.”
“However, we must also see that de-risking does not mean any fundamental change in the European and American China strategies. The EU still sees China as a partner, a competitor and a systemic rival, with increased competitiveness in their relations. It continues to regard China as its No. 1 competitor and has not changed its strategy to contain, encircle and suppress China.”
“The de-risking proposition in Europe and the U.S. represents the latest development in their strategic adjustment and is an improvement … It is, however, not enough.”
1. Zhao Minghao (赵明昊), professor at the Institute of International Studies, Fudan University, on the US’s plan ‘de-risk’ from China.
“Although the Biden administration intends to appease the US business community and allies by toning down the rhetoric of its ‘decoupling’ policy, the ‘securitisation’ of its economic and trade policy towards China is in fact still increasing. In practice, US policies reveal a pattern of ‘selective and managed decoupling’."
Source: The Paper (26.06.2023)
2. Wu Huiping (伍慧萍), deputy director of the Centre for German Studies at Tongji University, discussing Germany’s national security strategy, ‘de-risking’ and the Franco-German tandem:
“The existence of different standpoints and different voices within Europe can provide us with a handhold [抓手] to win over more China-friendly forces. In a similar vein, Germany's China strategy has been delayed due to considerable internal disagreements. This outcome is not a bad thing for us.”
Source: Guancha.cn (27.06.2023)
3. Zhao Yongsheng (赵永升), director of the Centre for French Economic Studies at the University of International Business and Economics (UIBE), on the EU’s ‘de-risking’ plan and EU-China relations:
“Regarding [Josep] Borrell's claim that 'derisking cannot be a slogan. It has to translate into policies’, I believe that this will be extremely difficult to put into practice. After all, slogans are easy to chant, but policies are difficult to formulate. The question is, what kind of products from what kind of companies belonging to what type of industries can be put under the ‘de-risking’ category without falling into the predicament of ‘decoupling’?”
Source: Global Times, 26.06.2023