So much for a common EU policy and strategy toward China.
Off goes French President Emmanuel Macron to Beijing on November 4, just two months after Angela Merkel made her twelfth visit to the country since becoming German chancellor back in 2005.
There had been hopes about a future joint visit by the French and German leaders. That would have sent a strong signal to Beijing about the common stance of the EU’s biggest economies toward China. Such hopes have come to naught.
Instead, the two successive visits are a far cry from the quasi-unanimity that presided over the announcement of a new EU China strategy in March 2019 (which referred to China as a “systemic rival”), following an unprecedented meeting hosted by Macron in Paris, where he invited Merkel and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker to join his talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Berlin and Paris appeared to be on the same page on China, but, since then, they have ploughed their own separate paths. When it comes to China, national interests still prevail.
Take France. As a guest of honor of the China International Import Expo in Shanghai, Macron will be joined by French meat exporters, bankers, and aerospace executives and do his best to bring back domestic benefits from his China visit. But he will also try to score personal points on multilateralism, climate, and culture—the latter with the long-awaited opening of the Pompidou Centre in Shanghai.
As for Germany, Merkel’s visit in September was accompanied by a delegation of senior businesspeople such as the CEOs of Siemens and Volkswagen—two large German investors and exporters to China. She carefully avoided raising (at least publicly) the EU’s list of grievances, which includes risks in technology transfers, market access, or the role of Chinese state subsidies. These are precisely the issues that the Federation of German Industries want to have a discussion about.
At the end of the day, Merkel’s main interest is to protect German business interests in China. After all, Germany’s trade deficit with China (€13 billion in 2018) is the smallest among the large European economies, meaning the German economy relies heavily on its exports.
Macron’s main interest is different, because France’s situation is different.
With a €29 billion trade deficit, its economy is not as dependent as Germany’s on exports to China. Many French defense-related high-tech industries remain bound by the 1989 arms embargo, and, because of the difficult operating circumstances on the Chinese market, several French industrial groups, including Alstom, Auchan, and Carrefour, have left China or vastly reduced their business presence there over the past years.
Macron is a highly ambitious, risk-taking president at the peak of his term. He is keen to be pictured in an international leadership role. Unlike Merkel, who is reaching the final years of her political career, Macron intends to run again at the presidential election in 2022. And as in his first presidential campaign, the European agenda will be central, including relations with China.
Indeed, Macron played a key role in drafting the EU’s new China strategy and delivered a powerful speech in the city of Xian during his 2018 visit, insisting that market access to Europe through the Belt and Road Initiative “cannot be one-way.” This also means Macron’s visit is not all Sino-French-centric. There will be a European element.
But like Merkel, Macron will be visiting China as his country’s top leader rather than as a key EU representative. He will promote French interests, whether in the economic or diplomatic spheres. Opposing U.S. President Donald Trump’s unilateralism, France and China will publicly promote multilateralism, including the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, and the Paris climate agreement.
France and China are permanent members of the UN Security Council, which is currently chaired by non-permanent member Germany. It should have been a good opportunity for the two European nations to work together on behalf of the EU, for example on a long-term economic partnership with China, but, so far, France and Germany are not fully aligned on their objectives.
Even progress on the EU’s Comprehensive Agreement on Investment with China, which is to be completed in 2020, has been slow. On this topic, which is in the interest of both their economies and the EU’s in general, Macron and Merkel are not singing the same tune.
And then there’s the controversial issue of allowing Chinese telecoms companies Huawei and ZTE to bid for the next-generation 5G networks. While Paris remains silent on the topic, it appears Berlin is about to allow Huawei to take part in the 5G competition in Germany.
Even with the recent publication of a thoughtful EU coordinated risk assessment of 5G networks security, the EU’s two main powers do not see eye-to-eye on this issue either.
The final year of the Juncker commission showed a European shift in dealing with China. But the incoming commission under President-elect Ursula von der Leyen, Merkel’s former defense minister, will have to be hard-nosed if she wants a coherent EU policy toward China.
That means convincing Berlin and Paris that a united stance is necessary if Europe is to exert any meaningful political and economic influence in its relations with Beijing.
Merkel might become amenable; she will have her China moment in September 2020, when she hosts a new type of EU-China summit in Leipzig, which will be attended by all twenty-seven EU member states and Xi Jinping.
Berlin and Paris could well use the intervening months to decide if they really do want a common, European policy toward China.
Comments(11)
Germany does not need to export more to China, but to preserve its high level , while France, with a weaker industrial basis does need to increase its exports, whether aerospace or agriculture: China does now well by itself for nuclear power and cars. There is nothing wrong with the two countries having different emphasis. The Huawei story is artificially blown by the US who just want to catch up when they are lagging: they are spying on the Internet on a world scale, not the chinese, and want to keep doing it.
I read your reply for its foresight and inclusiveness. I don't read writers with slanted language manipulations and biased intention like the op. The whole idea of Xi JinPIng's Silk road, BRI, SCO etc is about a 'community with shared values' . It's amazing how the old school still keeps on harbouring ideas of competition, power grabbing and always that greed for acquisitions. If only we can understand our true human values instead of worshipping the gods of lust, avarice and destruction. But I take your point about competitive robustness when countries with the right philosophy, politics, education, training and most of all, wisdom and right thinking can work together to continuously improve the standard and quality of life for our poor toiling humans... then we can begin to have the proper humanity. What is 'human rights' is really about the right for every child to be loved, fed, educated, protected and grow up freely with the guarantee of fulfilling his personal dreams in a safe and caring society or nation. We should always strive for inclusiveness , co-operation and peace among all nations but we must always check the human moral criteria and be willing to forgive and forget, willing to be intelligent and get on with positive win wins.
First and foremost, the EU needs to understand that it is China and India, the axis mundi has returned where it was for millennia, people, wealth, and strategic nuclear triads. In the particulars of China, as Brexit is now certain, both Germany and France will have to look for new markets. China’s GDP PPP is larger than the EU’s, and it is also a gigantic e-commerce laboratory, where Auchan and Carrefour have ceded the control to the local partners, it is just business. Alstom, as well as Siemens, Bombardier Inc and KHI Ltd agreed to hand over their most advanced technology to China CNR Corp. VW, for example, didn’t. However, we get now to the most critical point, the inability of the West to always have the next technology on the drawing board, ready to go to production, more advanced than whatever was transferred to China or India. TMD+X+DJI are in China, not the EU. 5G should be a Sputnik moment, as Huawei raced past everybody, with brand new technology, turnkey systems, patents. Technology transfer is one thing, innovation is another. Bell Labs, the legendary technological and scientific leader, fell victim to US incompetent management, always chasing short terms profits. This is now Nokia, after Alcatel-Lucent takeover, sic transit gloria mundi. France didn’t ask for EU’s OK when Dassault agreed to transfer high end manufacturing and technology to India, the large Rafale deal, at a high cost. The Airbus deal with China includes technology transfer, as well as manufacturing parts (wings and soon more) in China. Sooner than later COMAC’s airplanes will compete on the aviation market. The reality is that it is difficult to believe that the EU can have a common policy on China and India. Both are huge markets and the EU needs them. The UK will join the race soon as a competitor. There is a Brexit mirage, Singapore upon Thames, a former colonial master trying to emulate a former colony. The first indicator should be Pisa scores, where the UK needs serious progress. GPD per capita, probably never, and Singapore is no unregulated paradise anyway. The tense economic relations with the US will further complicate EU’s positions. Tariffs on auto parts and automobiles, not to mention the Airbus-Boeing competition (if Boeing manages to get the planes flying again) and WTO arbitrage. “Systemic rival”, what exactly does that mean? China rose through hard work, but it was the Western race to the bottom that transferred know-how, technology and so on. Make in India is next.
Thanks for providing a well of information and a fair and balanced account. The whole idea about Xi Jin Ping's Silk road, BRI, SCO etc is to create a ' community with shared values, meaning we transcend the little selfish personal, racial and territorial egos to reach for a truly humanitarian world. Must our writers always hinge on race, greed and sense of superiority??? Are they ready to rise above the small minds of 'national leaders' to embrace and grow a world class humanitarian leaders? I've enjoyed reading your response and it gives me hope.
It is to me not understandable that France and Germany do not really work on the same line - not only with regard to their relations with China. How can national egoisms still prevail in a world where only a strong and united Europe will have a say in future?
The political disunity among European heads of state is well illustrated in your article, if not outright dispiriting for multi-cultural Europeans.
Now that the EU has common law, justice, law enforcement, market and currency it is time to consolidate foreign policy including defense in Brussels.
But the EU (not Europe) is simply a vehicle for French national policy and objectives (at someone elses expense). Aleays has been. Always will be.
WHY SHOULD western countries put 'pressure' on China? This smacks of old imperialism. Aren't you ashamed to write like this.? Readers are well aware of the fake excuses accusing China to all kinds of cooked up tricks couched in economic terms to make China seem unfair and your typical European greed to want more from China. HOW DARE YOU EVEN WRITE - "if Europe is to exert any meaningful political and economic influence in its relations with Beijing.'??? PLEASE DON'T INSULT YOURSELF BUT RESPECT THE SOVEREIGNTY OF OTHER COUNTRIES, ESPECIALLY China's. This article is disgracefully arrogant in many ares.
Given the difference in industrial power, which the article points out, wishing a 'unified' EU stance in China seems an extremely remote prospect. France must first boost its industry, which will take a long time, if even nit can pull it off.
I love France for its advances into' equality, liberty and fraternity... and it's sad to read from people disillusioned by the vagaries of current politics.Human beings having a collective intelligence or godliness, will dream of Xi Jin Ping's 'community of shared values,' whatever, the age, the name or the leader. Dare we dream of a golden age when civilisations come together to lead us into a peaceful world where everyone has the support of their communities to be what they want to be? We need to differentiate between inclusive and progressive competitions and exclusive and regressive non-competitions.
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.