On June 19, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, announced at a press conference following the EU summit:

The EU's trade deficit with China in 2025 has expanded to a record high of €36 billion. The European Commission is now working on a series of trade measures aimed at "reducing risks arising from dangerous dependencies."

Von der Leyen stated: "Over the past five years, China's exports to the EU have increased by 45%. Last year, the EU's trade deficit with China reached an unprecedented €36 billion—equivalent to €1 billion per day."

The EU summit has tasked the European Commission with "developing a comprehensive package of responses to create a fairer competitive environment and reduce the risks associated with dangerous dependencies."

This decision, announced by von der Leyen after the EU summit, marks a full-scale escalation of the EU’s economic and trade policy toward China—from "defensive countermeasures" to "systematic containment." Her urgency stems fundamentally from the sharp decline in the EU’s industrial competitiveness. In 2025, the EU’s trade deficit with China widened to €36 billion, while European manufacturing faces structural challenges including soaring energy costs, population aging, insufficient innovation, and low internal efficiency. In emerging sectors such as electric vehicles, photovoltaics, and lithium batteries—the so-called "new three" industries—Chinese enterprises have rapidly risen due to technological and cost advantages, directly striking nerves within Europe’s traditional manufacturing base. The EU attributes its declining competitiveness to alleged "overcapacity in China" and "unfair subsidies," attempting to mask its own "deindustrialization" crisis through trade barriers. Trade policy is being deeply intertwined with the concept of "economic security."

Although von der Leyen adopted a hardline stance during the press conference, the EU summit held on June 18 actually exposed deep divisions within the bloc. In the final conclusions of the summit, the word "China" was not mentioned even once—indicating that the 27 member states have failed to reach consensus on launching a full-scale trade war against China.

Strong opposition exists internally within the EU. As the largest economy, Germany relies heavily on the Chinese market and supply chains in industries such as automobiles, and actively seeks to avoid escalating tensions; Spain, the Netherlands, and other countries also express skepticism toward protectionism. If Chinese suppliers are forcibly excluded, the EU would face additional costs amounting to tens of billions of euros in green transition and telecommunications sectors.

The EU’s current policy toward China now finds itself trapped in a paradoxical state: "unable to live without, yet distrustful." On one hand, the EU loudly proclaims "de-risking" and enacts a series of discriminatory policies; on the other, Sino-European trade has already formed a mutually beneficial relationship. Nearly half of all Sino-European trade consists of intermediate goods, allowing European firms to earn substantial profits by integrating cost-effective Chinese supply chains. The significant increase in Chinese investment in Germany in 2025 further confirms the deep entanglement between both sides’ industries.

Von der Leyen’s statements and the EU’s response plan reveal the underlying lack of confidence within Europe amid competitive anxiety. The EU attempts to use non-market mechanisms to forcibly maintain its share in high-end manufacturing—but this emotional protectionism not only violates market logic, but will ultimately rebound upon itself. The essence of Sino-European economic and trade relations lies in mutual benefit and win-win outcomes. Facing differences, both sides must abandon zero-sum thinking and return to dialogue and pragmatic cooperation—the only path truly aligned with their long-term interests.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1868496852123712/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.