The fact that the relative distance between the US and Europe under Trump is increasing does not yet mean that the absolute distance between Europe and China has been reduced.
…
In recent years […] China changed internally, with an increasing concentration of power around Xi, and because China was externally more assertive, if not more aggressive. In Brussels and the capitals […] there was dialogue [on Europe-China cooperation] about anything and everything, but the effect, in the sense of policy adjustments or actual cooperation, was difficult to see.
As a result, the number of disagreements increased to an impressive laundry list. Europe complained about Chinese support to Russia in the war against Ukraine and repeatedly said that this seriously burdened relations with the EU. China responded with vague language that it was neutral and used commonplaces about the importance of territorial integrity. Meanwhile, exports of dual-use goods, which are used for both civilian and military purposes, increased, and Moscow can continue its aggression in part.
…
In Beijing, there is growing fear over a stagnant economy with sky-high debts in a country struggling with poor demographics …
[Europe] must now tell China that it wants to do business and will not follow Trump and his unilateral trade tariffs. But something really needs to change in China’s behaviour. We don’t want another charm offensive, but real steps – and Beijing knows very well what this entails.
This year marks the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the EU and China. A great opportunity to celebrate with a new summit. It is already a big deal that EU leaders will probably travel to Beijing for this, while it is actually Chinese leaders’ turn to come to Brussels. But this summit should yield more than a photo opportunity. That is why the message to China must now be: European leaders will only board the plane if China is ready to finally tackle the laundry list of problems. Not with empty words, but with tangible deeds. If China is not prepared to do so, we can better postpone that summit.
Amen to that. Decoupling was all the rage mere months ago and now some people act like China is some sort of savior. That couldn‘t be further from the truth as they have already proven to be unreliable and at times unpredictable.
As far as I know „made in Europe“ where it‘s feasible long term and divertifying other supply chains was the goal and I don‘t see how anything that‘s happening right now would give reason to change course. It will take a little longer, but that‘s no reason to throw the towel.