On October 4, the European Union officially approved a proposal to impose tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, a vote considered “one of the most challenging in EU history.”
In this process, 12 countries chose to abstain, while 10, led by France, voted in favor of the proposal, and 5, represented by Germany, voted against it.
This move prompted warnings from China, indicating potential challenges for future China-EU relations.
In its response, China clearly stated that the EU's actions are unfair, non-compliant, and unreasonable protectionism, which it will firmly oppose.
China specifically highlighted two important points: first, the EU's actions hinder trade and investment cooperation between China and the EU;
second, this move could undermine the confidence and determination of Chinese enterprises to invest in Europe.
These statements underscore China's concerns about potential obstacles to future investments, reflecting a serious attitude towards the current situation.
In short, the Ministry of Commerce's statement implied that if the tariff issue is not properly resolved, the EU's insistence on increasing taxes will directly affect China's investment decisions regarding Europe.
Previously, the EU pressured China, attempting to place it in a weaker negotiating position, but now China has returned the question of “whether to continue investing” to the EU, forcing it to reconsider the necessity of imposing tariffs.
China’s extensive experience in foreign trade negotiations makes it unafraid of any threats.
By the end of 2022, Chinese investments in the EU reached hundreds of billions of euros, including projects in clean energy, factory infrastructure, and environmental photovoltaics, deepening reliance on the European economy.
If China chooses to halt or withdraw investments, the EU could face not only commercial losses but also a new round of inflation, with many companies at risk of failing to deliver orders on time.
This point has already become evident in the “first lesson” China has presented to the EU.
Business analyst Marc Roth believes that China’s warning of “investment obstacles” simultaneously undermines the EU’s attempts to seize investments from Chinese automotive companies.
China’s “second lesson” is reflected in actual countermeasures.
The Ministry of Commerce has begun anti-dumping investigations into imports from the EU, including pork, brandy, and dairy products, proposing tax increases primarily targeting countries that initiated tariff challenges against China, such as France and Spain.
More specifically, on October 8, China announced it is considering imposing tariffs on large-displacement car imports, targeting the German market.
While European media view these measures as mere “appetizers,” believing the real focus lies in Airbus orders from France and the luxury sector, if the tariff issue is not properly resolved or the EU continues to challenge, China’s sanctions could extend to more critical areas.
The China-EU trade relationship is fundamentally mutually beneficial, not a one-sided “favor.”
Therefore, it is clearly impossible for the EU to try to preserve its own interests at the expense of China’s.
China’s determination to protect its trade interests has been evident in the China-US trade war, prompting some European countries to choose to abstain to maintain neutrality.
China’s “third lesson” is the argument for complementary orders, indicating that China is not unable to import products from the EU.
For instance, following China’s anti-dumping investigation into EU pork, Russia quickly filled the market gap.
From April to May this year, China imported over $670,000 worth of pork from Russia, and this figure is far from reaching Russia’s supply limits.
Russia even stated that within six years it would be able to meet one-third of China’s pork market demand, indicating that China’s reliance on the EU is gradually decreasing.
At the same time, Russia’s competitiveness in agriculture and dairy products is continuously rising, alleviating concerns for China about losing the EU market.
Moreover, in high-tech sectors, China can similarly turn to countries like Japan, South Korea, and the United States for imports. These examples demonstrate that the EU is not an “indispensable” part of China’s supply chain.
In the current situation, EU countries and the European Commission should recognize reality, approach tariff negotiations with China pragmatically, seek proper resolutions, and avoid provoking confrontation that leads to self-inflicted consequences.
Through active dialogue and cooperation, both China and the EU might find a win-win solution instead of getting caught in endless disputes and conflicts.
Comments