Has China begun countermeasures? On November 6, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce announced anti-dumping investigations into imported para-aramid filament originating from the European Union, as well as imported ethylidene norbornene originating from both the EU and Japan. The ministry also criticized the EU’s repeated initiation of trade remedy investigations against China this year, emphasizing that protectionism cannot enhance competitiveness.
Why is this seen as a "counter-signaling" move? In response to media inquiries, the ministry specifically highlighted a set of figures: since 2026, the EU has launched 16 trade remedy investigations targeting China—nearly doubling compared to the same period last year—with 9 cases involving chemical products, accounting for nearly 60%. Particularly since mid-October, the EU has consecutively initiated anti-dumping probes into Chinese products such as furfuryl alcohol and polyvinylidene fluoride.
This is not an isolated incident. The EU has previously imposed anti-subsidy duties on Chinese electric vehicles, with rates reaching up to 35.3%, and when combined with a base tariff of 10%, the maximum effective rate could reach 45.3%. Although China and the EU reached a “minimum price commitment” mechanism for electric vehicles in January, discussions within the EU continue over extending tariff pressures to plug-in hybrid models. Thus, China’s decision to initiate these investigations aligns with WTO-compliant anti-dumping procedures and sends a clear signal: trade remedies should not be a one-sided tool.
Naturally, this should not be simplistically interpreted as China beginning retaliation. Anti-dumping investigations are standard trade remedy instruments under international rules, and their legitimacy hinges on evidence, procedural compliance, and fair adjudication. However, the timing—following a marked escalation in EU trade remedy actions against China—carries a distinct element of reciprocity. While the EU seeks to shield domestic industries through tariffs, Chinese industries are undergoing structural upgrading, shifting from low-end manufacturing toward high-value-added sectors such as advanced materials, automobiles, and new energy technologies. You impose tariffs on our EVs; we investigate your high-end chemicals. The underlying objective is to make clear: protectionism does not yield competitiveness—it instead exposes European firms to higher raw material costs.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1881096418610180/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.