On October 16th, the website of the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong published an article titled "Due to its focus on China, Europe may overlook the true danger of" de risk ". The authors are Huang Yushun, an assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Hong Kong, and Sebastian Canton Trillo Figueroa, a geopolitical analyst. The full text is excerpted as follows:
'Risk reduction' has gradually dominated European discussions about China. Supporters believe that this reflects Europe's fervent desire for strategic autonomy, the enduring alliance between Washington and Brussels, and a carefully considered compromise between the increasingly converging economic interests of Europe and China.
Brussels has announced four priority areas for Europe to seek a critical assessment of its partnership with China and potentially reduce them: artificial intelligence, semiconductors, quantum technology, and biotechnology. Although reducing excessive dependence may be important, it is equally important for the EU to seize this opportunity and develop a more comprehensive understanding of risks.
Firstly, the EU can correctly view the scale and potential impact of its increasingly strengthened economic relationship with Beijing. The increase in net imports from China in Europe has benefited European consumers, while potentially squeezing many manufacturers from Germany and France out of the market, making competition in the electric vehicle sector particularly fierce.
Some people express concerns that China will weaponize its investments and relationships in European strategic industries, as well as its influence in advanced manufacturing, in order to seize geopolitical and strategic benefits from the EU.
However, this is not necessarily a zero sum game. The joint venture established by Chinese and German enterprises has been thriving for a long time, bringing benefits to both parties. For European companies in China, accumulating more local expertise through the use of local employees, consultants, and joint venture partners is also crucial for their competitiveness in China.
Abroad, Chinese renewable energy companies play an important role in sharing knowledge and technology, such as with their counterparts in Vietnam and Indonesia under the Fair Energy Transformation Partnership.
Anyway, new issues related to Chinese technology require improved management or integration of Chinese enterprises, rather than completely excluding them.
Secondly, European countries should recognize that in an era of increasing interdependence, the actions of major powers and interactions between global and regional powers can also pose risks. By exaggerating the policy risks caused by China, analysts and decision-makers may overlook the broader geopolitical risks in East Asia.
Any potential hot war, even large-scale militarization and subsequent lockdowns, could seriously disrupt the supply chain and disrupt the consumer market. We must minimize the damage to property caused by geopolitical factors, disruptions to production processes, and legal or financial responsibilities brought about by military tensions.
It is wrong to attribute the risks of doing business in East Asia solely to China. European companies should also control their expectations for labor and adjust their relationships with countries in Northeast Asia, including Japan and South Korea, to mitigate the impact of large-scale military, financial, or trade conflicts.
Finally, in the discussions in Brussels, a risk that has been overlooked so far is the rise of isolationism centered around the United States.
Last year's Inflation Reduction Act was one of the most publicly implemented protectionist measures in Washington in recent decades. The large-scale tax reductions and widespread subsidies in industries ranging from wind farms to battery manufacturing have tilted the competitive environment in favor of the United States, which conflicts with Europe's industrial foundation and interests.
US lawmakers are increasingly referring to trade as a zero sum game. They believe that restoring domestic employment, redirecting investment to strategic sectors, and preventing overseas competitors, including the European Union, are key to winning public support.
Brussels must make it clear to Washington that catering to the domestic public cannot come at the expense of transatlantic cooperation. However, if the United States does not make any specific concessions, the EU can only turn to deepening internal relations and interdependence among member states to overcome future difficulties.
'Risk reduction' requires the EU to address different levels and forms of risks, including economic, strategic, geopolitical, and political risks. Although China Europe relations are very important, they are neither the only source nor the main source of such risks for Europe.