(Opinion The United States has repeatedly resorted to manipulation, fighting with Europe for leadership in the industry, writes the Chinese newspaper Huanqiu Shibao.
This has been repeated now – Washington is intimidating it with the “Chinese threat” to tighten control. But the EU does not want to be an American “install” in the system.
By Dong Yifan*
According to US media reports, the US and the European Union will hold a high-level meeting in Washington next month.
They called it a response to China’s so-called “non-market policies.”
Also Read: Check out our coverage of the new multipolar world order
It is not the first time that the United States is trying to block and suppress the normal technological, economic and commercial development of the PRC (People’s Republic of China) under various pretexts.
However, what is worth noting now is that Europe, which has been the most vocal in its support for globalization, also seems to have fallen into the trap of American brainwashing and is in danger of anti-globalization.
From the point of view of some European politicians, as long as some products are not independently produced, sold or bought by Western allies, the problems will not disappear.
The production and supply chain in which Europe is deeply embedded is also “tainted” by the universal security narrative.
First, the changes in the geopolitical situation have brought with them “new spaces for imagination”.
After the outbreak of conflict in Ukraine, some Europeans began to compare the close economic and trade ties between China and their region to energy relations with Russia, arguing that the EU should learn from the current situation and take precautions to prevent a repetition of “possible”. supply disruption crises.”
Second, differences in values are increasingly equated with “economic threats”.
The promotion of the theme of “preventing excessive dependence on China” in European public opinion is based on the logic that the political and social systems of the Heavenly Empire are very different from those located on the mainland, so relying on Chinese supplies is dangerous.
Third, “everything is becoming a security threat.”
Whether Chinese companies are investing in building European infrastructure or buying up the region’s manufacturing and technology enterprises that produce everything from chips to clean energy and rare minerals, or European companies are expanding production, investment and business in China, it all goes through. through some “ideological” filters.
Therefore, even apparent actions to deepen cooperation and achieve mutually beneficial results can be used as evidence that “China’s expanding influence in a certain area poses a threat to EU security” instead of being evaluated objectively. rational the real needs of both parties and perspectives. for partnership.
In fact, this politicization of economic issues, turning “everything” into a security threat and filtering every ideological narrative and political events (to the point that “interdependence must be reversed”) may force Europe, which has always been a staunch proponent of economic globalization, to unwittingly become an anti-globalization force that builds walls and opens canals.
For decades, all countries have benefited most from the process of economic integration by increasing openness and facilitating the free flow of resources such as markets, technology and talent.
Thanks to the complementarity of economic and natural structure, industry, science and technology have formed a comprehensive global pattern.
Regardless of why “reduction of dependence” and economic “geopoliticization” is promoted, all this means that the country, through coercive intervention, unilateral rules and the creation of exclusive alliances in industry and technology, will destroy normal trade, economic, scientific , and technical links.
As a result, international trade, investment and personnel exchange will inevitably fall, and companies from all over the world, including European ones, will face negative consequences – narrowing of markets, reduced innovation and increased additional costs.
For the European Union, whose economy is highly dependent on the international market and productive resources and deeply integrated in the globalization process, and has close trade ties with the great powers, this will create the potential risk of another shock, so he must remain vigilant. .
At the same time, the EU has always claimed to be the flagship of free trade and globalization.
I fear that this image will be questioned.
As the association increasingly seeks to cooperate with so-called “like-minded partners,” if its economic vitality and market attractiveness are weakened by “anti-globalization” rhetoric and actions, it will reduce the willingness of other economies to deepen the ties with the eurozone.
In addition, the United States, a “safe haven” that some countries and politicians in the region are increasingly eager to seek, is trying to tighten its grip on vital lines of industry, including European ones.
By trading on “fear of security threats”, the US is trying to turn the EU countries into “details”, subservient vassals of the industrial technology system, at the core of which is America.
Be it the chip law that, in the name of “supply chain cooperation,” forced other countries to shift the vital arteries of the semiconductor industry to the United States.
Or an anti-inflation law that used large-scale subsidies to “dig up” and outsource other people’s “green” industries, like clean energy and electric vehicles.
Or using dual leverage on energy costs and government subsidies to promote the “vampire re-industrialization” of the United States.
All these manifestations of “industry cooperation” were carried out to “ensure security together with allies”.
In fact, they actually undermined the industrial foundations of the partners.
Looking at the industrial and trade disputes between Europe and the United States since World War II, it can be seen that this was and is a war of interests for the leading countries in industry.
The US often uses tariffs and threatens to limit security cooperation to gain more.
If the EU this time embraces Washington’s “common security” rhetoric and weakens its mutually beneficial trade and economic relations with China, hitting itself, what will be left of its industrial security, market support and support for competition in the future?
Will the role of “yellow” in the American economic and technological mechanism strengthen or weaken the continent’s economic security and autonomy?
It is encouraging that some European countries and politicians have started the process of rethinking, trying to take a more pragmatic and balanced look at the relationship between economic security and “interdependence”.
Dutch lithography company ASML recently announced that it would not comply with a US ban on Chinese technology and chip-making equipment.
According to another report, Josep Borrell, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, said the EU would “close the gap” with the US ban on the export of high-tech chips.
Not long ago, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz led a large business delegation that paid a visit to China, which also became a strong signal from Europe to further deepen mutually beneficial economic and trade relations with China.
Beijing believes that the EU will make a rational choice and proceed from its interests, global responsibility and current development trends.
* Dong Yifan (董一凡) – Researcher at the Institute of European Studies of the Chinese Academy of Contemporary International Relations
Join us on Telegram: t.me/theriotimes
