Daily News and Analysis.
We keep you informed and inspired.
This is World Today.
Hello and welcome to the panel discussion of World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
China and the European Union have pledged to promote cooperation on trade and investment at the 25th China -EU summit.
The two sides have also issued a joint declaration reaffirming policy continuity and stability to step up efforts in tackling climate change.
Meeting European Council President Antonio Costa and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Beijing, President Xi Jinping called for providing more certainty for the world through steady and sound China -EU ties.
eyes. The EU leaders said the bloc is committed to advancing cooperation with China based on balance, reciprocity, and mutual benefit.
So why does the current international landscape require the two sides to deepen trust?
How can the two sides focus on pragmatic cooperation despite their differences?
These questions and much more in this edition of the program.
To listen to this episode again, or to catch up on our previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today.
So joining us now on the line are Dr. Zhou Mi, Senior Research Fellow with Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, Sultan Khali, a Chinese foreign policy analyst and retired Air Force officer in Pakistan, and Dr. George Zagopoulos, Director of EU -China Program at CIFE, a European Research Organization.
So thank you very much for joining us today, gentlemen.
Dr. George Zagopoulos, to start with you, China has been sending a consistent message to the EU that, OK, let's focus on pragmatic cooperation.
Let's focus on where we agree and accommodate where we disagree.
agree. Do you think this message has been received well on the European Union side?
And do you believe pragmatic cooperation is the best choice for the two sides?
Well, to start with, the fact that China and the EU organized a summit in Beijing is indicative of the will of both sides to continue with the dialogue.
And this is what We are at matters at this current stage.
So certainly pragmatic cooperation is important.
And I believe this is why both sides are still interested, despite problems which are existing, to foster as much as possible cooperation in different formats.
But obviously, dialogue at the highest political level is the first step in order also for sideline format dialogues to continue.
So you are right in your question.
Pragmatic cooperation is a key in order for China and the EU to set a joint way forward. This does not mean that problems don't exist, but it's better if they talk to each other in order as much as possible to deal together with global challenges which are increasing in today's world.
Hmm. So, Dr. Zhongmi, let's talk about a specific dimension of pragmatic cooperation.
I mean, in the face of Washington's current trade protectionism, its current trade policy or tariff policy, both the European Union and China have positioned themselves as supporters of free trade and globalization.
So do you think a stronger partnership between Beijing and Brussels is going to be helpful in terms of fulfilling a common obligation of the two sides to safeguard a multilateral trading system and free trade, globalization, etc.?
Well, definitely, in both sides of China and the EU, we are the commitment about the multilateral system, and we have learned so many lessons, you know, before the WWII, there were a lot of conflicts about the trade and also a higher tariff, which is a very important reason to cause this war.
So I would say that for both sides of China and the European Union, we are very firmly, I mean, no matter which member country of the EU, they are really committed to stick to the principles of free trade and also the collaboration based on the multilateral system.
So for both sides, I think that we benefit a lot, I mean all the countries in the world benefit a lot from this free trade and the better abilities for allocating the resources and have a better demand for the global wide market.
So it's a really important time for the countries and the members of WTO to try to stick to our commitment.
Without that, I think that the world will become in chaos order and the problems will be found everywhere.
So for China and the EU, I think the best way for us is trying to make the enterprises of both sides to believe that they can stick to what they have been taking for the past decades and trying to follow that suit.
And this is a very important thing because from the experiences of the history, when we're trying to develop a certain industry like for the semiconductors and automobiles, I mean, the enterprises, they are spending decades of time to trying to improve their quality and also the efficiencies and trying to address the problems of consumers so gradually they can reach their status.
They are only able to make the decision based on one year, two years or even shorter.
I don't think that would be enough time for them to accumulate the experiences and lessons and it's not even impossible for the companies trying to find the best way to serve the customers.
So this is really our right away for both sides to address because both economies are so huge.
We have so many diversified demand and supply.
We can try to improve that by better understanding of each other's position and also to work together targeting our same direction.
Hmm. Sultan, going to you, from the perspective of a third party observer against the backdrop of Washington's policy unpredictability at the moment, do you believe a stronger partnership with China could somehow help the EU enhance its own strategic autonomy?
that's a wish, that's an ambition elaborated by certain EU leaders or European politicians for quite some time.
For example, do you think forging closer ties with China would mean that Brussels will have stronger leverage in terms of its own negotiation with Washington?
Why or why not? Oh, absolutely.
You see, closer ties with China can enhance the European Union's strategic autonomy.
But the leverage that Brussels gains from such a relationship is nuanced and it is conditional.
It is less about confrontation and more about diversification.
The European Union's concept of strategic autonomy revolves around being less dependent on any single actor, especially the U .S., when navigating global affairs.
But you see, at the same time, a stronger economic, diplomatic and technological cooperation with China allows Brussels to chart more independent courses in areas, for example, climate policy, digital regulation and global infrastructure, for example, the Global Gateway versus the Belt and initiative.
With a robust China and European Union engagement, Brussels gains negotiating power by showing Washington that it has options.
Now, this does not mean aligning with Beijing on sensitive issues.
It just means expanding its toolkit.
And on technological standards, trade rules, and digital sovereignty, European Union can counterbalance U .S. extra -territorial policies with alternatives drawn from its cooperation with China.
But please remember, this is a tightrope walking because leaning too hard on China might trigger a skepticism from transatlantic allies, especially if strategic dependencies, for example, green tech, electronic vehicles, rare earths, if they aren't managed prudently.
Also make it clear that the european union doesn't seek alignment with china per se it seeks to maintain maneuverability while defending its own values and interests so therefore the european union isn't just negotiating trade it is performing geopolitical choreography and the script must reassure domestic audiences international partners and markets that autonomy isn't isolation and engagement with china isn't endorsement.
It is a pragmatic move in a fragmented world.
Okay. So, Dr. George Zagopoulos, going back to you, how would you respond to the points made by Mr. Sultan Khalil?
And what do you make of the fundamental reason why China says it supports the EU to pursue its own strategic autonomy?
Well, the strategic autonomy concept itself was first developed by the current president of France, Emmanuel Macron.
At least Emmanuel Macron is a European leader who attempts to advance this term in European politics.
What it means is that the European Union seeks to become more robust and powerful in the international system in order not to rely on others as much as possible in today's fragmented world.
And this requires for the EU to make steps toward this direction in order to enhance its industry, in order to safeguard its defense, and so on.
So within this context, what the European European Union is trying to do is to talk to others in order to build relationships which are harmonious, and which can meet the objective of this strategic autonomy concept.
However, I should say that right now, it is the priority of both China and the European Union to solve problems with the American administration.
So, the Chinese administration already did so with a trade agreement and the European Union remains hopeful of doing so before the deadline of the 1st of August. So the United States remains a critical actor for both sides.
So from a Chinese perspective, this strategic autonomy concept of Europe means that the European Union can act independently in the international system meaning that it can as much as possible possible navigate between the United States and China.
From a European perspective, it rather means that the European Union will become more powerful in order to set itself the conditions for relations with both China and the United States.
I would say that this is a very interesting and good concept for the European Union to act strategically or to advance a strategic autonomy concept, but I'm quite pragmatic in raising expectations as there is a still long way to go in order for the European Union to act strategically autonomously in the international system, taking into account the challenges which exist, which include wars in its neighborhoods like the Middle East and Ukraine.
Indeed. So, Dr. Zhongmi, I mean, in the eyes of the Chinese government or Chinese leaders, the world is increasingly becoming a multi -polarized world nowadays.
Do you think such a concept is a fundamental reason why China says it supports the strategic autonomy of the EU?
Well, the EU is facing many challenges.
The challenges are coming from the geopolitical tensions, from the technology inabilities to dealing with the digital issues with climate change, some of the problems and also from the trade and investment.
So for the EU, I think the most important thing is that whether they still have the same commitments and the belief as before, as they believe that we can do something together to benefit the world.
quote. So I think they still have this belief they can try to do more to improve their position in such kind of dilemma and trying to deal with the difficulties by cooperation with other countries.
So I think that is still possible, because if we are looking at the world, we are seeing the improvement of the technology, giving the people more abilities to deal with the challenges like for the EVs, the new energy vehicles.
China is one of the the providers of this kind of new kinds of transportation methods.
And that is also opportunities for coping with our partners from the EU side.
So we can do more to improve the efficiency and trying to meet the criteria or standards to do with the environment and the climate change.
And on the other hand, I think the supply chains are under the pressures.
So the global supply chains are under reconstruction.
So in this process, many companies are coming from from EU to go to United States to invest their, to enjoy the subsidies or they are afraid of this tariff pressures by United States.
But in China, we are doing on the country.
We are open our markets.
We are position, our commitments in our lower tariffs.
We are having a much better market access.
So in this regard, I think that China, the EU, we can find some, another space for dealing with such kind of difficulties.
difficulties. So for the decision makers of the EU, I don't think that it is impossible for them to find some alternative way to look at the world because the world is changing.
Maybe sometimes in the past, most of this consensus across the Atlantic Ocean is based on the ideology and beliefs.
But now I think that maybe we should look more pragmatically genetically on the economics side and the market side, and also about the willingness of the governments.
So we can do more to improve the mutual trust by China and the EU.
And that is definitely the base for them to address the challenges.
And I understand there are some disagreements between China and the EU.
It is very natural, because such two big economies, We definitely have so many different opinions on the way of doing businesses.
There must be a lot of things that are not so smoothly incorporated by the mechanism.
But the way we are dealing with the difficulty is we should try to do something to improve the communications and try to improve the efficiency of exchanging the opinions and information instead of just trying to say that we won't stop that, we won't block the market, we won't protect the enterprises of our side.
Hmm. So, Sultan Khalil, with regard to the trade disputes between the European Union and China ongoing right now, do you think Beijing and Brussels can resolve these disputes in a way that is consistent with the free trade spirits or the globalization spirits that the both sides endorse?
wars? Well, one thing is very clear, that the European Union's perception of asymmetry in its economic ties with China, they stem from a blend of structural imbalances, access disparities, and strategic anxieties, not just hard metrics.
Whether this view perfectly matches business reality depends on which sectors and actors you are asking.
Many Europeans, their firms are are arguing that they are facing more hurdles while entering China's market, while Chinese firms operate more freely in Europe.
Then trade deficit optics.
The European Union consistently runs a goods trade deficit in China.
Those services and investment flows, they add nuance, but deficit figures shape policy narratives.
Now there is geopolitical filtering.
Brussels increasingly views China not just as a partner, but sometimes also as a systemic rival, especially in technical standards, critical infrastructure, and global influence.
This affects trust in economic interdependence, but mutual benefit does exist. Despite tensions, countless European companies thrive in China, luxury brands, car makers, engineering firms, and SMEs.
China remains a top destination for the European Union exports and investments and the benefits I mean if you think that they are unevenly distributed but gains are concentrated in certain sectors or large firms and SMEs and startups may find China market complex but they are definitely not restrictive there are report signals from Beijing now let us look at the recent moves like curbing electronic vehicle price wars promoting high level opening streamlining foreign investment procedures suggesting that efforts to recalibrate and appeal to global investors is very much there on the cards now this is where perception and reality
begins to diverge policy makers amplify asymmetry concerns to justify strategic recalibration while many business actors they quietly navigate and benefit from the relationship.
So in a nutshell, my view is that Europe sees asymmetry, but maybe the challenge is how the value is measured and who gets to define mutual benefit.
I see. So Dr. George Zagopoulos, what do you think has really caused this this perception on the EU side that the bloc's economic or trade ties with China are not mutually beneficial enough.
Is this perception in line with the business reality?
Well, in the last 10 years, I would say, or so, we have experienced in Europe a rise in the number of Chinese investments.
And this has obviously changed the economic landscape as far as European economic and business interests are concerned.
So I would say that discussions concerning the business environment and the so -called reciprocity started to be on the agenda more or less 10 years ago in the years of the European debt crisis.
Now, beyond this, there are some complaints in Europe concerning the so -called trade deficit that the European Union is suffering.
But so far, I have seen no progress on both sides in successfully managing this deficit.
And obviously, in the last two years, more or less, there is much debate about tariffs on certain European or Chinese products which are exported either to the EU or to China.
So I would say that these are the main areas where negotiations are focusing.
And obviously, from a European perspective, as you asked, the main reason why policymakers focus on these issues is obviously that they see a risk about the success and profitability of European companies and the European business sector because of the rise of Chinese investments or because of the success of Chinese companies which are producing high quality products.
And obviously, in today's world, especially taking into account the new trade policy of the American administration, there are additional concerns that China could ship its own products to other markets via Europe and this might also have negative effects.
As I said before, however, the most important thing is that despite the problems which we all know right now, the two sides, China and the EU, are prepared to continue dialogue.
So I would say that this is the most positive thing of our conversation, despite misunderstandings and despite the different positions which are still existing in the conversations that are taking place, even at the highest political level.
Hmm. So, Dr. Zhongmi, I think it's probably true that between the European Union and China, certain sectors, certain industries may be more competitive on one side than the other.
So do you think it is possible for China and the EU to have both free trade and fair trade at the same time?
yeah in understanding that is possible so i think that we have to find out what are the definition of the both of the words like the free trade and the fair trade so what is the fairness in my understanding the fairness means that we can try to involve all the related stakeholders and they can try to give their best and they can enjoy the achievement about the cooperation so the fair trade should based on the abilities instead of just the about the share of this collaboration along the supply chain.
So I think that for China and EU like in the past, in the 1980s and 1990s, we have imported many vehicles from EU sites, from Germany they have exported a lot of cars to China.
But we didn't argue that it's not fair because we enjoy the benefits of importing those cars and also trying to have a better supply chains to support these investors from the EU.
So, I think that now the time has changed.
We are trying to move on to the next stage and we are trying to make the better use of the resources we have. So, we want to use more renewable energy.
I think that is the idea.
If both sides can, based on this presuppose and try to do the things based on their own requirement by the society, like you know, for Chinese people, many Chinese companies are really want to be quicker, to be faster, to be more efficient on dealing with resources, but for EU, maybe many of these companies are just trying to be more resilient.
They want to do more to keep the jobs and also to have less impact on the environment.
So if we can do more based on the complementary advantages and also trying to take care of their own understanding and the requirement.
I think it's possible for both sides to have a fair trade.
So in this regard, I think that we can still improve the free trade based on this kind of collaboration between us.
These two concepts can be reached together.
But they are only a condition that we should try to define these problems in a proper ways by some kind of mechanism like the free trade agreements or other kind of mechanism mechanism to ensure that companies can follow these principles.
I see. Let's take a very short break here.
And coming back, our discussion will continue.
Stay tuned. You are back with World Today.
I am Ding Hen in Beijing.
Today we are talking about how China and the European Union can focus on cooperation despite their differences.
Joining our discussion, Dr. Zhou Mi, Senior Research Fellow with Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, Sultan Ali, a Chinese foreign policy analyst and a retired Air Force officer in Pakistan, Dr. George Zagopoulos, director of EU -China program at CIFE, a European research organization.
Dr. George Zagopoulos, going back to you, earlier before the break, we were talking about the trade disputes between China and the European Union.
I mean, in terms of policy direction, as Mr. Sultan Khalil was suggesting earlier in his elaboration, China is actually looking to pursue high quality development and a high level opening up in some specific sectors, such as the EV.
The Chinese government is also rolling out some efforts to try to curb the EV price war in a domestic market.
Do you think these policy directions can make the companies from the EU feel committed and optimistic about the Chinese market, especially from a longer -term perspective?
Well, as you suggested, it's very important for European companies to sell their products in the huge Chinese market, which is developing fast. And this is happening indeed, as my esteemed colleagues also said before.
So before we do do focus on existing problems, it's quite important to mention that the Chinese market is of critical significance for the European trade.
So the problems themselves do not mean that Europe is not exporting to China.
On the contrary, Europe is exporting huge quantities of product to China.
Of course, as far as the electric vehicle sectors is concerned, the success of the Chinese Chinese car making industry makes it more difficult for European companies to be as successful as they used to be in the past. So what you mentioned concerning the intention of the Chinese government to carve the prices or to develop policies that can help European companies to continuously sell their products in good prices in China might be a good opportunity.
But again, it depends on the decision of the Chinese consumers and what Chinese consumers, what type of products they decide to buy.
So in a period where competition exists, it is the right of Chinese consumers to buy the electric car they wish.
So it's difficult. It's a matter of competition.
I would say that from a European perspective, The problem is rather related to the export of Chinese electric vehicles to the European market and how the success of the Chinese products might be managed in the Chinese market.
I would say that consortia or closer cooperation in building cars, for example, might be a good opportunity in that regard. There are solutions.
There are solutions.
And the fact that the two sides are talking to each other means that they are interested in finding solutions.
Again, I would rather focus on the problem of political will.
If there is political will, there are economic solutions to be found.
If there is no political will, obviously, we will in the future overemphasize the problems which are existing.
So in other words, in your opinion, if we're talking about a situation where Chinese companies are investing on the European soil and providing jobs, like what the BYD and the CATL is already doing nowadays in Germany, in Hungary, that is largely welcomed by the policymakers in Brussels?
Well, I would say that it depends on the terms of contracts which can be signed.
But there are examples of cooperation as the ones you just made.
And obviously Germany or France, the leaders of the European Union, attempt to formulate a common policy in order to agree on terms concerning the engagement of Chinese companies.
I would say that there is a huge interest from the side of the European business sector in particular to collaborate with China.
And this huge interest is the result of the success of China's companies.
And I'd like to mention that this discussion goes beyond business interests themselves into the joint interest of China and the European Union to meet together climate change objectives.
So they issued a joint statement in that regard so if there is no cooperation in the area that you just nicely sketched out about electric vehicles then it will be much more difficult for the European Union to meet that type of objectives so all issues and all themes are interlinked and this is where I would like to focus on which is highly significant in today's war.
war. Yeah, of course, the development of the EV industry is highly interconnected with our whole humanity's mission to tackle the global climate crisis, that's for sure.
So, Salton, what is your takeaway from this China -EU joint statement regarding the climate change?
Actually, this year is marking the 20th anniversary of the China -EU climate change partnership.
What do you think this particular partnership has achieved over the past two decades?
Okay, this is a very important question which concerns the entire world.
The joint statement on climate change, it reaffirms a clear pivot from dialogue to co -leadership.
It signals that both China and the European Union aren't just talking about shared responsibility.
They are evolving into co -authors of the next phase of global climate governance.
Now, here's what stands out from the statement, as you asked, and this will be the partnership's legacy.
So the key takeaways from the joint statement are commitment to green technology.
Both sides emphasized scaling up green technologies and building resilient climate infrastructure.
The messaging is unmistakable.
Innovation is no longer optional.
It is strategic. Then cooperation on methane and adaptation.
Moving beyond the carbon dioxide emissions, the focus now includes methane control and climate resilience.
This is suggesting a more integrated and science -informed agenda.
Now, the reaffirmation of the Paris Agreement is also very important because China and the European Union positioned themselves as defenders of global climate consensus in an era of geopolitical fragmentation.
Now, what are the achievements over the past 20 years?
Technological transfer and joint research. Numerous platforms have been launched from urban emission labs to green energy incubators.
This helped Europe access China scale and for China to tap into European Union's innovation.
Then policy harmonization.
The two sides gradually aligned around emissions trading schemes, energy efficiency standards and sustainable finance principles.
The narrative evolution.
The climate partnership has become a template for pragmatic multilateralism.
One built not on identical values, but on shared outcomes.
So my takeaway is that two decades in the China -European Union climate partnership isn't just surviving, it is transforming.
From technological collaboration to global climate diplomacy.
It's become a litmus test for shared leadership in a divided world.
So Dr. Jomi, as Sultan was talking about this earlier, the joint statement on climate between China and the European Union is urging greater use of green technologies.
On the EU side, though, there seems to be a fear or a kind of concern that greater use of Chinese green technologies or products will harm the EU's own industries, especially industries on the green economy.
how can the two sides balance between greater use of green technology on one hand, and on the other hand, taking care of the relevant industrial benefits or industrial interests?
Well, it's a very important question.
We have to make some very carefully design on this kind of collaboration.
So let's take this the solar panel as one example.
For example, as the first 10 years of this 21st century, Chinese companies are really eager to be in this sector.
So they imported the equipment from the EU and they processed this kind of solar panels based on their abilities on the much cheaper labours and ability in manufacturing, then re -export those solar panels to the EU.
After several years, I think after several years, when we are saying that the EU has put a lot of trade disputes against the Chinese companies on the solar panels, on the, you know, the anti -dumping or some subsidy issues.
And after that, you know, a lot of Chinese companies just went bankrupt.
Because they are not able to provide good enough products to the EU market and to the rest of the world.
But you know, after several years, when the scenarios have changed, The scenarios are supported by Chinese companies, expansions in China's domestic market.
When China's market is big enough to support the capacities of producing the solar panels in China, the factors of the solar panels in China gradually improves their efficiency based on a little bit of different logic.
logic. I want to use this example to show that, you know, without enough big markets, we cannot expect that technology can be improved and be more efficient.
Without enough capacities of supplying the product, the market will always facing the problems of the cost by using the leading technology or some upgraded technology.
So we have to combine these two sides of the supply and demand.
demand, and that is definitely important for the sectors to be in a good and healthy way of development.
So like when we're talking about the green governance of EU, I still think that there may be some kind of misconceptions about what we should do to deal with green technology, whether we should make it more facilitator for the companies or we should try to use as the green barriers for the investment and the development.
So I think that we should put these two things together.
Well, like if you are looking at the EU, they have the C -bomb, the carbon administration border mechanism, which is likely our kind of measurement to improve the obligations of the companies who are producing the solar panels.
So it is coming in the next year, maybe will be effective next year.
So in this regard, I think that both sides of China and the EU should try to take care of these important abilities of the companies and trying to make them have a better and more stable development.
But when we're talking about that, I want to say that the supply chain will never be just in one way.
If we are able to provide better support to the related mainstream of the supply chains, they will bring us more opportunities for the small and medium -sized enterprises.
The example you have illustrated about investment of the Chinese companies in the European Union is a good example.
When they are investing in the air, like for the auto parts producers, for the battery producers, they are supplying the local supply chains and also teach the people there and train the people there.
The technology disfusion is a real important effect that we experience in the past decades.
So in this new energy vehicle industry, I think that the EU can also benefit by coping with Chinese companies.
So, I think this is a kind of a very important way for us to address these problems. And we can also try to improve the collaboration and improve the efficiency in a better way of dealing with the difficulties.
Dr. George Zagopoulos, back in 2013, the European Union, we understand at the time, actually came close to imposing steep tariffs on Chinese solar panels that would have pushed the prices of Chinese solar panels up to the prices of their European counterparts.
But in the end, China persuaded European officials to accept a deal that essentially required those Chinese solar panel manufacturers here to charge the same prices as those in European countries.
Do you think that episode in 2013 between the two sides can offer any inspiration or even guidance, let's say, with regard to how Beijing and Brussels could resolve their existing disputes over, say, over the EVs?
Well, obviously, if we look at the past, it's useful in order to get some lessons on how problems of similar type were addressed.
Certainly, the negotiations about solar panels can be to some degree relevant to current debates, also as my distinguished colleague nicely explained before.
However, we can also remind our wonderful audience that this phase concerning the solar panels passed through different decisions and different stages.
So there was no solid European response in that regard. But there were periods of anti -dumping policies and periods of relevant calmness.
Now, the difference in comparison to what happened after 2013 is that the discussion is right now placed into who might take the leadership into managing climate change.
And obviously, China's position in that regard is very well placed, taking into account the success of Chinese companies producing electric vehicles and the general success of China concerning green energy, renewable energy resources and so on.
So I would say that the current face is different because right now China and the European Union are attempting as much as possible to address a problem which had pre -existed like 12 or 10 years ago, but not to the same extent.
And this is why negotiations right now are much more difficult.
And obviously, China's position in that regard, as I said before, is very strong.
Now, apart from the cooperation on green energy, on climate change, as well as cooperation on trade and investment, the economic ties, we understand President Xi Jinping has caught on China and the European Union to support resolving international conflict through political settlement, adding that China advocates addressing both the surface of an international hotspot conflict as well as the conflict's root cause.
So, Sultan, when we talk about the Ukraine crisis, do you think there is still room right now for Beijing and Brussels to work together to create the necessary conditions for political settlement?
Indeed, I agree, I fully endorse what President Xi Jinping has said, because there is still meaningful room for China and the European Union to collaborate on a political settlement in Ukraine if the engagement is framed through complementary strengths, rather than competing agendas.
Now, you see, Beijing and Brussels, they may differ sharply in worldview, but diplomacy, please remember, isn't about echo chambers.
members you don't you see endorse each other's opinions there will always be differences of Union but the main spirit behind it is about converging the capabilities wherever possible for example shared incentives for stability economic connectivity both China and the European Union have a strategic and economic interest tied to Eurasian stability what are they supply chains energy transit, trade corridors, for example, the Belt and Road Initiative and European Union's global gateways.
Then normative influence.
The European Union promotes norms -driven peace building.
China advocates sovereignty and dialogue.
But these can be harmonized into a hybrid framework that values process and outcome.
Then humanitarian interest. The joint Defiant support for post -conflict reconstruction, demining, refugee stabilization and food security could show alignment way beyond rhetoric.
I mentioned China's surface plus root cause.
Now, this principle is that Beijing emphasizes addressing security dilemmas, economic grievances and geopolitical triggers, not just battlefield dynamics.
Their European Union's focus is more on immediate aggression and rule -based frameworks.
But you see, there can be synergy on the surface, ceasefire facilitation, prisoner exchanges, civilian protections.
But the root cause?
A broader dialogue on NATO expansion anxieties, regional economic fractures and security guarantees.
Thus, China and the European Union they can approach peace from different traditions, But shared stakes in Eurasian stability can turn divergence into diplomacy.
Political settlement isn't just a goal.
Now it has become a responsibility and a chance for co -leadership in conflict resolution.
So, George, as we know, because of the Ukraine crisis, the relationship between China and Russia has come under some sort of scrutiny by the EU side.
That's undeniable. I mean, as much as China values its relationship with the EU, with each individual European countries, I guess China's relationship with Russia also represents a core interest for China as well.
well. So if the relationship between China and Russia became a fundamental point of contradiction between China and the EU, what kind of harm would that kind of scenario bring to the two sides, I mean, to China and the EU?
Well, to start with, the problem that exists is that the war war is progressing more than three years after its outbreak and this is bad news for both sides and for the international community in general and obviously for Ukraine and Russia.
So the European stance from the very first beginning was clear that Russia is the aggressor and that Russia should start the war.
The Chinese position is more neutral.
And this is what is causing disagreement in negotiations between the two.
As I said before, the problem is that the war itself is progressing despite the efforts of President Donald Trump to play a role and stop the hostilities.
So from the moment the war is progressing, the misunderstandings I sketched out before will continue because obviously China has its own interests and the European Union has its own interests.
Theoretically, both the European Union and China can exercise an influence on Ukraine and Russia, respectively.
But obviously the two sides themselves are engaged in the conflict, so they are the ones who can make decisions about ending or non -ending the war.
I'm not optimistic that the conflict will end, and obviously this will add to existing disagreements between China and the European Union, although it should be clear in Europe that China is not responsible for this war and for the outbreak of this war either.
Hmm. So Dr. Zhongming, Chinese President Xi Jinping has said to EU leaders this time that the challenges facing Europe at the moment do not come from China.
What is your take on this?
And do you think there are fundamental conflicts of interest or geopolitical contradiction between China and the EU?
Well, I think that when he is trying to see that because that there are some rumors or misunderstanding in the you know some of this part they say that china is a cause that the the conflict is still there but i don't think that it's a reasonable excuse that we can trying to put you know all these things together well it is fair to say that when the trade is important you know aspect for us to observe this situation like i have doing i have done some research for the past several years about the trade between China and the Ukraine.
Well, in the past several years, actually we have improved or increased the import from the Ukraine and the export to Ukraine is a little bit shrinked.
So, I think this is kind of a very clear signal that China is trying to buy more things from Ukraine and trying to get the trade more beneficiary for Ukraine to have more income.
So, well, it is fair to say that China is, you know, just a very assert country.
We're not involved in the conflicts and we are not supporting any parts of this, you know, two sides of the conflicts.
I think it's fair that every country have its own concerns about the so -called national security issues, about the threat from, you know, some of the military organizations.
So it's a very, very reasonable things that we have to treat everything based on the promises and on the trust. Without enough trust, I don't think that any countries will make the best choices based on the mutual understanding about some conflicts.
I also understand the fear from the EU side, because in the past, maybe last century, a lot of countries are hit a lot or strictly allowed by the world.
So I can understand that, but we have to take care of these concerns, not only from one side.
We have to sit down and talk these issues with the related stakeholders, instead of of just using some kind of unilateral mechanism, like the sanctions, to block the communications.
I think that is not helpful for us to exchange our ideas and resolve these problems. Yeah, so putting aside the war in Ukraine, putting aside the trade disputes between China and the EU and et cetera, et cetera, Salton, the final question before we let you go.
So as we mark the 50 years of diplomatic relations between China and the EU this year, how do you think the next chapter, the next 50 years in this important relationship might look like?
Yeah, that is a very important consideration, Ting Heng.
50 years in, China -European Union diplomacy stands at a pivotal threshold, not just of retrospection, but reinvention.
If the current trajectories are thoughtfully stewarded, the next half century could see this relationship evolve from pragmatic coexistence into strategic co -leadership across multiple domains.
Five long -term trends that could shape the next 50 years, they are from trade to technological ecosystems. China and the European Union might shift from transactional trade to co -creating innovation ecosystems in AI governance, clean energy and biotechnology.
Think joint R &D hubs, patent sharing frameworks and global tech tech ethic platforms. Therefore, climate diplomacy will be a strategic pillar.
Building on the climate change partnership, we should expect co -leadership in carbon markets, green financing and adaptation strategies, especially in the global south.
Now shared climate missions could become a stabilizing force amid the geopolitical fragmentation.
Then manage competition with guard rails.
Economic rivalry will persist but with dispute resolution mechanisms and value chain diplomacy, both sides could institutionalize stability.
Industrial de -risking may evolve into industrial rebalancing guided by smart policy calibration.
Please remember, coexistence in a multi -polar world will come about because as the US, China and the European Union redefine their roles, China -European relations could serve as a bridge between global blocks, avoiding binary alignments.
And non -alignment and strategic autonomy will likely become assets, not liabilities.
And narrative diplomacy and cultural synchronization, now this is where we should think about reducing misperception and foster soft connectivity.
To conclude, the next 50 years won't just be shared by policy, they shall be sculpted by purpose.
If China and the European Union commit not just to cooperation, but to co -creation, they shall lead a model of pragmatic pluralism in an increasingly divided world.
Well, a big thank you to our panelists.
That's all the time for this edition of World Today.
Dr. Zhou Mi from Chinese Academy of International Trade and and Economic Cooperation, Sultan Ali, a Chinese foreign policy analyst in Pakistan, and Dr. George Zagopoulos from European research organization CIFE.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
