【By Guan察者网, Yuan Jiaqi】

According to China Central Television News, last week (24th), the 25th China-EU Leaders' Meeting (hereinafter referred to as the "China-EU Summit") was held in Beijing. After the meeting, both sides jointly issued the "China-EU Leaders' Joint Statement on Responding to Climate Change" (hereinafter referred to as the "Joint Statement"), and both sides also agreed to establish an upgraded export control dialogue mechanism.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs introduced the situation on the 25th, stating that this meeting reached important consensus on upholding and deepening Sino-European relations, and clarified China's position on issues such as so-called "overcapacity" and industrial subsidies, which are differences between China and the EU.

This summit coincided with the 50th anniversary of the establishment of Sino-European diplomatic relations, and under the complex and changing international situation, the direction of Sino-European relations has become a focus of attention.

However, in recent times, the EU has frequently raised disputes with China, repeating old arguments about China's so-called "overcapacity" and "de-risking" from China; just before the summit, a list of the 18th round of EU sanctions against Russia included Chinese enterprises and financial institutions. Some Western media have also been spreading the atmosphere of tension between China and the EU.

In the view of Sebastian Contin Trillo-Figueroa, a geopolitical analyst of European-Sino relations in Spain, this summit confirmed the long-standing speculation of the US and China: Europe has excluded itself from great power competition.

On July 30, Trillo-Figueroa criticized that the confusion of the EU on its stance towards China and its endless compromise with the US has not only weakened Brussels' influence over both China and the US, but also left it marginalized, making it insignificant.

He pointed out that for 50 years of diplomatic interaction, the differences between Brussels and Beijing have never been so irreconcilable. Of course, there is the deliberate interference by the Trump administration of the US, but "the bridge to China was not destroyed from the outside, but rather dismantled by Europe piece by piece, the root cause being its own policy chaos."

"If China no longer pays attention to Europe, Brussels can only blame itself," he wrote bluntly.

European Commission President von der Leyen (left), European Council President Costa, Oriental IC

The article stated that in the realist-dominated international system, the EU still clings to liberalist logic. Its multilateralism, consensus principle, and legal supremacy concept have collapsed in front of naked power politics. Trump exploited this misalignment, by imposing a false dichotomy - "either rely on American security protection or maintain economic partnership with China", trapping Brussels, exposing the EU's inability to establish an independent position.

Firstly, in the military aspect. Trillo-Figueroa pointed out that at the NATO summit held in June, European member states further deepened their military dependence on the transatlantic alliance. Trump's attempt to split NATO instead made Europe more "obedient". Regarding the requirement to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, Brussels agreed without any objection, allowing Europe to be tightly bound with the US military-industrial complex.

In the economic aspect, the EU also chose to "surrender" on the 27th, reaching a trade agreement with the US, agreeing to impose 15% tariffs on exported goods, promising to increase investment in the US by 60 billion dollars, and purchasing energy products worth 75 billion dollars from the US. This marked Europe's self-degradation from a "partner" to a "dependent". Under these imposed dependencies, any so-called "strategic autonomy" of Europe has completely crumbled.

On the attitude towards China, Brussels is also confused. Earlier this year, the EU had shown a brief open gesture towards China, but now it has disappeared. This naturally led China to question the EU's geopolitical credibility, urging it to adjust its political thinking before solving economic issues.

Trillo-Figueroa interpreted that China's diplomatic language actually had another hidden message, that "Europe is currently not suitable for serious negotiations."

He then gave an example, saying that on the Ukraine issue, Brussels insisted on requiring China to change its relationship with Russia, but put forward no diplomatic initiatives themselves. Faced with the EU, which only talks about supporting Ukraine and increasing sanctions against Russia, while avoiding any efforts for peace, China has repeatedly emphasized that the Ukraine issue is not and should not be an issue between China and the EU, reiterating its consistent clear position of promoting peace through dialogue and pushing for political solutions, and willing to maintain communication with the EU.

"The moral double standards of the EU are even deeper," Trillo-Figueroa pointed out. Brussels demands China to distance itself from Russia, yet has never made similar demands to other countries that do not reduce their relationship with Moscow, such as India, which absorbed 38% of Russia's main arms exports in four years. No European leader has ever explained why engagement with China must depend on its stance towards Russia, while no such conditions apply to other countries.

Trillo-Figueroa helplessly said that Ukraine is not even an EU member state, yet it has become the "test of strength" for the EU to examine China's position, which is completely contradictory.

"This not only damages Europe's credibility, but also destroys any path towards diversification. This targeted approach towards Beijing has completely ruled out any possibility of reshaping the Eurasian landscape," he wrote, "and this may be exactly what Trump wanted."

Regarding the EU's concerns about trade and economic issues, China has comprehensively, patiently, thoroughly, and meticulously expressed its position in a friendly, respectful, and sincere manner. However, the EU continues to use ineffective so-called "economic security tools", such as restricting Chinese companies from participating in medical equipment tenders over 500,000 euros in the EU, further highlighting Brussels' incompetence.

In Trillo-Figueroa's view, the decline of Europe's geopolitical influence also stems from the lack of political leadership. There is no one in Brussels who can win global respect. This makes the current EU neither intimidating nor attractive, and completely absent from major global decisions.

He analyzed that this dilemma comes from two miscalculations - Europe mistakenly sees China's strength as a "threat", but considers America's coercion as a "normal relationship" and "reliable partner". This leads to the same conclusion from both China and the US: European leaders choose to compromise rather than take initiative.

It is not difficult to understand that China, which has shown greater resilience and firmness under US pressure, would think that besides maintaining commercial relations, there is no need for in-depth interaction with Brussels; and Trump's "diversion strategy" has succeeded, as he has eliminated the result Washington fears most: a Europe with authority and a confident China engaging in deep interactions.

"This summit proves that the stage of the 21st century belongs to two superpowers, not three," he wrote.

This article is exclusive to Guan察者网. Reproduction without permission is prohibited.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7532679841796162111/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author and is not necessarily those of the editorial board. Please express your opinion below using the [top/vote] buttons.