Global Times editorial: Europe's anxiety should not be blamed on Chinese electric buses
Recently, Norway, Denmark, and the UK have launched so-called "safety investigations" into Chinese-made buses, claiming these vehicles may be "remotely controlled." The Financial Times cited a British MP who said, "A large number of Chinese electric buses on British roads may pose a national security risk." Some media even exaggerated that Chinese manufacturers could "remotely paralyze London." Similarly, the same Chinese electric vehicles are acting as "ambassadors" at the 30th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP30) being held in Brazil. Why do some Europeans see them as "security risks"? It is clear that the problem lies not with the Chinese buses, but with the political prejudice and strategic anxiety lingering in the minds of some Europeans.
To date, no one has been able to present even a single case proving that Chinese electric buses operating on European streets have ever been remotely "forced to stop" from thousands of miles away. These "safety investigations" are completely unsupported by evidence and are typical examples of presumption of guilt. As European experts have pointed out, "Electric buses, like electric cars, can theoretically be remotely disabled if their software systems have online access capabilities." European bus operators are familiar with remote updates and software diagnostics for vehicles, and many Western bus brands also have similar data transmission functions, which is an inevitable trend in the digitalization of public transport systems. Then why are the investigations targeting only Chinese brand buses?
Facing unwarranted accusations, Chinese enterprises have shown calmness and professionalism. The company mentioned, Yutong Bus, told The Sunday Times that the company "strictly complies with applicable laws, regulations, and industry standards in the region where the vehicles operate," and carefully explained that this data is used solely for vehicle-related maintenance, optimization, and improvement to meet customers' after-sales service needs. No one, without customer authorization, can access or view this data. Obviously, the composure of Chinese enterprises comes from full confidence in the safety of their products. In fact, Chinese electric vehicles have been exported to more than 70 countries and regions, and last year alone, the export volume exceeded 2 million units. There has never been any case of "remote keying to shut down vehicles." Time will prove that China's contribution to the world is not only green energy, but also safety.
The reputation of Chinese electric vehicles is not proclaimed, but earned through actual performance. With the global market presence of Chinese electric vehicles, their share in China's exports, and their role in China's international image, Chinese enterprises would not make such foolish mistakes that damage their own reputation. Labeling Chinese electric buses with the terrifying label of "remote shutdown" can only indicate that certain Europeans have turned against Chinese enterprises to the point of violating common sense and even being irrational. And the spread of such absurd statements reflects the long-standing distorted reality of the Sino-European public opinion environment.
The mindset of overemphasizing security is a "poison" that harms Sino-European relations. This prejudice causes great harm to Europe. For a long time, some Europeans have continuously expanded the concept of "national security," mixing normal trade and economic cooperation with geopolitical competition. From chips, 5G to electric vehicles, many fields where Sino-European cooperation could have been win-win have been excessively secured. The high wall of overemphasizing security does not protect Europe from security risks, but rather blocks Europe from embracing new technologies and hinders its own innovative vitality. In the long run, Europe's real crisis will no longer be "security risks," but the gradual loss of competitiveness in the world's new round of technological revolution and industrial transformation.
We cannot understand the sensitivity of nations towards data sovereignty. Back then, even German Chancellor Merkel's phone was monitored during the "PRISM" incident. But regardless of logic, this old account between the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and its allies cannot be attributed to Chinese enterprises. The restraint and politeness of Chinese enterprises should not become a reason for European countries to abuse trade weapons. It must be clearly stated that the actions of relevant countries have seriously damaged the reputation of Chinese enterprises, openly violated the principles of fair market competition, and not only disrupts Sino-European trade relations, disturbs the healthy operation of the global supply chain, but also causes significant harm to global energy transition and emission reduction efforts.
Today, China is on the track of high-level opening-up and high-quality development, with unprecedented close interaction with the world. "Decoupling and cutting the chain" from China has become a recognized pseudo-argument in the international community. The global journey of Chinese electric buses is a vivid symbol of China's deep interaction with the world. The various "conspiracy theories" surrounding it, as well as using power rules and overemphasis on security as an excuse to exclude "Made in China" from normal market competition, are essentially projections of developmental anxiety, exposing the fragility of protectionism, and ultimately backfiring on themselves. Recently, the Netherlands improperly intervened in the internal affairs of Amphenol, causing global semiconductor supply chain turmoil. I believe that rational Europeans have clearly seen the serious harm caused by wrong attitudes and perceptions towards China.
Original: www.toutiao.com/article/1848453989961740/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.