Based on the EU Foreign Subsidies Regulation that took effect in January, the EU started to investigate subsidies for Chinese electric vehicle (EV) companies. The investigation was launched 10 days before the EU-China High-level Economic and Trade Dialogue. Although Chinese and European vice presidents would continue to communicate with one another, the EU has insisted on carrying out the investigation.
Tesla’s EVs made in China and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co, which owns Volvo Cars Corp, might also be investigated. It looks like the EU has become more high-handed. Would the bloc be able to stop relying on China?
In addition to a growing trade deficit with China, the EU realized that China has become a strong competitor. EU officials decided to confront China directly, indicating that Beijing could either collaborate or go its own way. As EU experts suggested, European nations share a large enough market and they should be fine without China.
China has expressed its concerns about the investigation, but at the same time, the EU confirmed that it would not entirely decouple itself from China. Instead, it would try to lower the risk while demanding that China “do more” to mitigate concerns about the risk it poses.
The EU described how European corporations were not satisfied with China’s lack of fair competition and its politicized business climate. Neither were they happy about China’s relationship with Russia amid the war in Ukraine. They also said that Beijing’s new Foreign Relations Act, Counterespionage Law and the Measures for the Security Assessment of Outbound Data Transfer would all increase the danger of investing in China.
Meanwhile, after Japan experienced the 2008 global financial crisis, the 2011 Tohuku earthquake and tsunami, collisions with Chinese ships in 2012, the disruption of supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic and a recent dispute over the release of wastewater from a nuclear plant, Tokyo has continued to reduce its dependence on China.
Likewise, due to the trade conflict between Washington and Beijing, 48 percent of US corporations said that they would decrease investment in China or postpone plans.
However, the EU, after having evaluated the risk, still desires access to the Chinese market and wants Beijing to be a good player. Perhaps the EU sees China as a dear friend and believes it would not experience what happened to Japan and the US.
The EU has deliberated over its dependence on China and seems to believe that the situation would not change until 2035. The EU needs rare earth minerals, solar panels, EV batteries and other key items from China. Most likely, its automaking industry would be destroyed because of China’s cheap EVs.
Confronted by the danger of national security and economic threat, the US and Japan have already turned to investment in Southeast Asia, enhancing trade ties with ASEAN and India. The EU must diversify its investments and reduce dependence on China through legislation and innovation. It also needs to reassess its subsidies strategy.
However, the EU — and Germany in particular — is still fond of big markets such as China and has failed to recognize the instability of such markets. It should remember the lesson of relying too much on Russia.
The greatest risk is that the EU might empower a rival that will one day destroy it.
The EU should recognize the truth as soon as possible.
Chang Meng-jen is chair of Fu Jen Catholic University’s Department of Italian Language and Culture, and coordinator of the university’s diplomacy and international affairs program.
Translated by Emma Liu
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) was on Monday last week invited to give a talk to students of Soochow University, but her responses to questions raised by students and lecturers became a controversial incident and sparked public discussion over the following days. The student association of the university’s Department of Political Science, which hosted the event, on Saturday issued a statement urging people to stop “doxxing,” harassing and attacking the students who raised questions at the event, and called for rational discussion of the talk. Criticism should be directed at viewpoints, opinions or policies, not students, they said, adding
RSS