Competitiveness: EU leaders explore new anti‑China tools (with no conclusions, and without mentioning Beijing)

Brussels – A firm response, but without causing a rift. Countermeasures, but not like Donald Trump’s knee-jerk tariffs. On international trade and competitiveness , the heads of state and government of EU countries are attempting to lay the groundwork for a European strategy that can place the Union in a more balanced economic and trade position – and thus a more competitive one – without compromising the functioning of the global rules-based system. This is no easy task; it is a delicate process, the complexity of which is reflected in the lack of conclusions from a European Council summit, even as it mandates the European Commission draw up measures and strategies going forward.

The sensitivity of an issue that is difficult to explain without making references is also a reason for the lack of “pieces of paper.” It should be borne in mind that the tariff agreement between the EU and the United States favours Washington more than Brussels and other European capitals, and not merely because of a 15 per cent levy on “Made in the EU” goods sold across the Atlantic, compared with the zero duty on US products sold on the Old Continent. There is an imbalance in industrial and investment policies with the United States that the EU has deliberately accepted, in the name of its much-vaunted competitiveness and strategic autonomy.

Then there is China, never mentioned even in the insiders’ accounts. According to well-informed sources, the leaders held a general discussion. The 27 acknowledged the existence of global macroeconomic imbalances that require a European response based on two pillars: European unity and dialogue with key economic partners.

 https://www.eunews.it/en/2024/10/28/ecb-china-influence-eurozone-increases/

No unilateral initiatives and, therefore, a policy that remains one of open multilateralism. For this reason, and on this point the leaders agreed, the EU as a whole must “continue to diversify trade, reduce risks, decrease dependencies, and strengthen its strategic autonomy.” This position of principle is also a vote of confidence in the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and her desire to conclude trade agreements with the EU’s global partners. 

The issue of China comes to the fore when heads of state and government insist that “fair global competition requires a level playing field.“ It is here that China is referred to without being explicitly named. After all, from ‘Made in China’ steel dating back ten years to electric cars and medical devices, bilateral relations between the EU and Beijing are full of practical examples of the Asian country’s way of doing business.