In her March 30, 2023, speech,
President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, laid out the EU’s new strategy of engagement with
China, with “de-risking” playing a prominent role. In essence, it means that
the EU should strive to become more competitive and resilient in strategic
sectors such as health, IT, and clean tech. It also aims to diversify the EU’s
trade relations in the Indo-Pacific region to reduce overt dependency on
Chinese-controlled supply chains. Von der Leyen’s speech also took a clear
position against any prospect of “decoupling” from China, which can be
understood as a move towards full disengagement from relations with Beijing.
Such an option is not viable and is not in the EU’s interest, she stated in her
speech.
In the Chinese Communist
Party-controlled Chinese- and English-language media, the distinction between
“decoupling” (Ch. tuogou 脱钩)
and “de-risking” (qu fengxian 去风险)
is blurred in general, although some more nuanced explanations of the
relationship between the two emerged in recent months. Apart from equalizing
“de-risking” with “decoupling”, another common theme has been the argument that
the EU’s China policy lacks autonomy from the United States. It is also
commonly repeated that the ultimate aim of “de-risking” is to contain China’s
rise, a strategic interest pursued by the United States that its allies are
being pressured to follow, according to CPP media. The US was also seen as the
main culprit behind “over-politicizing” or “pan-politicizing” (泛政治化)
relations between the West and China, suggesting that the CCP leadership would,
by default, be ready to conduct relations with the EU in a de-politicized,
strictly pragmatic, and profit-oriented way. Another line of argumentation
focuses on the EU’s internal divergences, implying that the EU will not be able
to maintain a coherent approach towards its relations with China. Therefore,
according to this argument, “de-risking” will prove to be a failed experiment.
In more recent articles, greater focus has been put on criticizing the notion
that China poses any risk to the EU as well as on warning that “de-risking”
might prove to be a risk in itself.
First reactions: No difference between “de-risking” and “decoupling”
A May 2023 article by CCTV English titled “So-Called ‘De-Risking’
Just Another Term for ‘Decoupling’ Used by Washington, Allies to Contain China”
outlined the main points of Beijing’s initial reactions to the EU’s new
direction. The article warns us that “A change in words does not mean a
difference in action. In essence, de-risking is hardly different from
decoupling.” Another English-language article by Global
Times, published in June 2023 with the title “EU warned of risk of
‘decoupling’ under [the] guise of ‘de-risking’”, makes it even clearer that
from the CCP’s perspective, the two terms are the same. A
Chinese-language Xinhua article from
July 2023 uses the set expression “jie shi huan hun” 借尸还魂 (which can be translated as to
borrow another corpse to return the spirit of a dead person) to characterize
the relationship between “decoupling” and “de-risking”, implying that
“de-risking” is merely a new guise for an old evil. A July 2023 CGTN article titled “De-risking disguised form of
decoupling the West uses to contain China” does not add too much new
information in this regard. A China.com.cn (中国网) article also published in July 2023 describes
“de-risking” versus “decoupling” as only a change in words without any change
in the essential goal to suppress China’s development by the West.
Washington behind everything
While they noted that the
“de-risking” discourse originated in Europe, many of the Chinese media articles
on “de-risking” focused on Washington’s perceived efforts to rally its allies
for its grand strategy of containing China’s development. China is hence
continuously victimized, while Washington’s allies, including Europe, are
denied any agency of their own. Several articles on the topic display a
paternalistic attitude towards Europe, a quest to enlighten Europeans about the
constraints imposed on them by US foreign policy objectives. The
above-mentioned CCTV English article lectures Washington’s allies that they “might
think they will benefit from following America’s foreign policy. But the United
States is so self-serving that its allies have become half accomplices and half
victims.” CCTV English notes that “Compared to the United States, China has
brought the world opportunities, cooperation and stability”, citing China’s
status as the top trading country for a number of consecutive years.
The earlier-mentioned
Chinese-language Xinhua article is
more graphic in its tirades against the US as the main creator of risks and
instability in the world and the main promoter of “de-risking” in the West’s
relations with China. The article includes a video by a presenter named Deer Wang,
lumping together several unrelated charges against the US for starting wars,
forcing other countries to adopt its norms and values, and also briefly
mentioning the US plot of “de-risking”. Three drawn illustrations in the
cartoon also add to the narrative, all of them vilifying the US, victimizing
China, and “de-agentifying” the allies of the US. The most expressive of these
illustrations depicts an evil “Uncle Sam figure” (a bearded male figure wearing
clothes and a hat decorated with the US flag) riding a railcar together with
three Caucasian-looking figures labelled as “allies” 盟友 (an
arguably clear reference to Europe). “Uncle Sam” is depicted cutting off
himself and the “allies” from another railcar carrying a sad-looking panda.
With an evil look on his face, “Uncle Sam” utters the phrase “de-risking” 去风险, while his “allies” are observing his action
with a helpless and frustrated expression on their faces.
It is often argued in these
articles that the West, and especially the US, over-politicize relations with
China. According to the June 2023 Global Times article,
“the ‘de-risking’ push, be it from outside forces or China hawks inside the EU,
has a pan-politicization, pan-ideology, and pan-security tendency”. The Xinhua article notes
that “de-risking” originally was only used as a term in economics and suggests
that its politicization is aimed at moving away from pragmatic exchanges with
China to one determined by geopolitical interests.
The EU will not find a unified approach to “de-risking”
While the US is seen as the
principal actor behind the EU’s “de-risking” approach, some of the articles
venture into discussing the EU’s internal dynamics. They mostly argue that the
EU has significant internal divergences when it comes to China policy, which
will make it difficult for Brussels to maintain a unified “de-risking” approach
towards Beijing. According to the June 2023 Global Times article,
Germany and France, major economies with significant economic interests linked
to China, will be at odds with countries such as Lithuania, a small country
with little economic ties to China and increasingly soured relations due
to Taiwan-related disputes.
According to China-Europe
relations expert Yan Shaohua, of Fudan University, in an October 2023 China
Daily article, Germany will be the “benchmark” for other
countries when defining and implementing the EU’s “de-risking” strategy. Yan
also argues that Germany’s decision on whether to ban Huawei from the country’s
5G sector will be the first major test for the country’s approach to
“de-risking”. Yan warns Germany that a ban on Huawei would be seen as
provocative by most Chinese people and as a sign of Germany’s support for the
“US’ tech strategy to contain China”.
“De-risking is the risk itself”
In more recent articles, a
somewhat softer tone can be observed in some expert opinions on the
relationship between “decoupling” and “de-risking”. In some, it is tacitly
accepted that “de-risking” will not necessarily mean an attempt at fully
“decoupling” from China. Meanwhile, the question of how “risk” is defined is
repeatedly asked, and, at the same time, whether China poses a risk to the EU
is called into question.
An August 2023 Xinhua article,
which popularizes the phrase that “de-risking is the risk itself”, mostly
focuses on criticizing the US as the main source of chaos in the global order.
Here, the widely reproduced phrase “small garden and high walls” (小院高墙), a critical remark on protectionism
recently expressed by Chinese President Xi Jinping during a
meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, appears as a reference to
the supposed risks of “de-risking”.
A September 2023 article in People’s
Daily English copy focuses on the EU’s recently announced plans to “de-risk” its reliance on
Chinese-produced EV batteries, comparing it to the dependence on Russian fossil
fuels. The article, titled “EU’s attempt to ‘derisk’ Chinese batteries ‘biased,
not feasible’”, argues that China is an opportunity for Europe, not a risk, and
calls into question whether dependence on Russian fossil fuels is comparable to
China’s role in the EU’s EV battery sector. An October 2023 article in China
Youth Network (中国青年网) reproduces statements that
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán gave at the 3rd Belt and Road Forum,
which underpinned the “de-risking is the risk itself” narrative. Orbán’s
insistence on “de-risking” being the real risk, his calls for connectivity and
his rejection of “bloc formation” are much in line with Beijing’s general talking points. Thus,
they are reproduced in the article to showcase that not all EU leaders bow to
supposed pressures coming from Brussels (and Washington) to “de-risk” from
China.
EU High Representative Josep
Borrell’s October 2023 visit to China is summarized in an article on
the Chinese-language website of Global Times (Huanqiuwang 环球网). The article focuses on Borrell
explaining what “de-risking” will mean, highlighting his remarks on the
importance of China as an economic partner of Europe. Borrell’s remarks on
there being no plans for the EU to fully break relations with China as well as
the interpretation of “de-risking” as a sort of trade “diversification” (多元化)
feature prominently. Meanwhile, questions of how “risk” is defined and why
“de-risking” is different from “decoupling”, posed by the Renmin University IR
scholar Wang Yiwei, also feature in the article.
Following the 24th EU-China
Summit on December 7-8, 2023, in Beijing, a number of new publications appeared
in Chinese media on the topic. In a December 8 article by The Paper (澎湃新闻), a news source known for its relatively open
reporting, China-Europe relations expert Ding Chun 丁纯 argues that “de-risking” is not the same as
“decoupling”, but it should not be “generalized” (泛化). By
this, Ding means that it is acceptable for the EU to seek less dependence on
China in some sectors, but this attitude should not become a general trend of
its China policy. Meanwhile, articles in major state-aligned sources like China
Daily and Global
Times published during the summit continue to urge the EU to
rethink its “de-risking” approach to avoid moving towards de facto
“decoupling”.
Conclusion
As can be seen from recent
articles published in China on the EU’s “de-risking” approach, Chinese
Communist Party-controlled media is highly skeptical about whether “de-risking“
can be differentiated from “decoupling”. Moreover, there is also skepticism of
the EU’s willingness and capacity to act as an independent actor, with
“de-risking” often being seen as part of the broader US attempts to constrain
China’s development. The “de-risking” discourse is regarded as a pragmatic turn
to avoid spreading the unrealistic narrative of full “decoupling”, but it is
still mostly seen as related to the long-term geopolitical goal of the US to
contain China’s development. The question of why China is seen as a “risk” to
the EU is regularly posed. Beijing-controlled media has thus been unwilling to
present any criticism of China’s own foreign policy actions during recent
years. In other words, it avoids discussing the possibility that these actions
can be legitimately seen as “risky” by other states. There is no discussion of
Beijing’s increasingly assertive stance on territorial disputes, its
increasingly centralized and authoritarian leadership, and its autarkic
economic policies under Xi Jinping. Instead, the blame is squarely put on
Washington and, to a lesser extent, on Brussels when the EU’s “de-risking”
approach is discussed.
This article was originally published in the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) on 14 December 2023.