The China Thread

[Sheilbh]

So yet again short term political concerns take precedent.

I mean it's the nature of politics - it's the art of the possible and the successful statesmen are the ones who align the politics with the long-term vision/goal. In this context arguably Merkel's played it very well in that she has aligned the politics with this agreement.

I don't think we've been overly blessed with successful statesmen in a while (and this isn't just at country leader level it feels like lots of countries have lightweight/unimpressive cabinets behind them). I always wonder if that's just nostalgia/things were always better in the past view - but it reminds me of the 70s in terms of lots of countries seeming to have leaders who are just unequal to the task.

[garbon]

This seems like a problem of their own making unless I'm mistaken and the EU populace as been clamoring for a China deal?

[Tamas]

This seems like a problem of their own making unless I'm mistaken and the EU populace as been clamoring for a China deal?

I am pretty sure what the US call "lobbyists" were clamoring for it far more, though.

[Sheilbh]

This seems like a problem of their own making unless I'm mistaken and the EU populace as been clamoring for a China deal?

Totally agree - but I don't think that even in democracies the only bit of politics that matters are the people.

The EU and China set this artificial deadline. That creates pressure because no-one wants to fail. Merkel had identified it as a policy goal (theory: in the long-term Merkel's Eurasian focus/turn east on China, Russia, Turkey over the last 15 years will have more impact on the Atlantic alliance than Trump? ) for the German Presidency to focus on. That creates political pressure. Having made an agreement in principle to withdraw would be weak and folding under American pressure - again there are political incentives.

I think there was a really good column in the Economist about how inertia is the strongest force in European politics. Once the EU decides to do something it will normally do it because it takes a lot of effort/political capital to change that decision. I think that's definitely at play here.

[Duque de Bragança]

What's the positive spin on this agreement?

Just to add to this the Portuguese PM has now added another argument for the agreement that is, I think, true. Backing out now under American pressure would send a bad message about the EU when it's trying to behave as a strategically autonomous power. Politically that is right.

This is António Costa, what he says today can change very quickly.

[Admiral Yi]

The timing of this deal is interesting given China's recent treatment of Australia.  A cynic might say the EU is signalling they are happy to throw Australia under the bus and shut up about Uighur slave labor in exchange for more Luis Vuitton and BMW sales.

[Tamas]

The timing of this deal is interesting given China's recent treatment of Australia.  A cynic might say the EU is signalling they are happy to throw Australia under the bus and shut up about Uighur slave labor in exchange for more Luis Vuitton and BMW sales.

You don't have to be a cynic because there is simply no other explanation why the EU would turn a blind eye to the literal enslavement of an entire nation of peoples.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

This seems like a problem of their own making unless I'm mistaken and the EU populace as been clamoring for a China deal?

The EU doesn't have the habit of listening to what it's inhabitants want...

The timing of this deal is interesting given China's recent treatment of Australia.  A cynic might say the EU is signalling they are happy to throw Australia under the bus and shut up about Uighur slave labor in exchange for more Luis Vuitton and BMW sales.

You don't have to be a cynic because there is simply no other explanation why the EU would turn a blind eye to the literal enslavement of an entire nation of peoples.

considering that the EU is also turning a blind eye to one of it's member states having a boatload of political prisoners.

[The Minsky Moment]

What's the positive spin on this agreement?

Just to add to this the Portuguese PM has now added another argument for the agreement that is, I think, true. Backing out now under American pressure would send a bad message about the EU when it's trying to behave as a strategically autonomous power. Politically that is right.

Better to go off the cliff then have to admit to your friends Mom was right . . .

it's not like the Biden people were taking out full page ads.  There are plenty of ways backing out can be explained without any reference to the US position.

[Zanza]

What's the positive spin on this agreement?

It creates a more level playing field for European companies by removing several obstacles (tech transfer/JV in some industries, new access in other industries like healthcare).

Chinese companies were already fairly free to invest in Europe, but this agreement ogether with some new political instruments in 2019 enshrined that scrutiny and endorsement of Chinese investments moves from national capitals to Brussels, which will make China's divide & conquer tactics in Europe harder.

It also contains Chinese commitments for some ILO worker rights conventions (not signed by the US, so working with them on this issue seems a strange idea) and on SOEs, which is apparently the first time China ever engaged an external party about these.

Also as the EU officially sees China as a "systemic rival", but also a negotiation partner, I don't see why this agreement precludes common action with the US on topics of common concern regarding China.

[Zanza]

Is there any indication that Biden plans to stop the trade conflict the US started under Trump against Europe?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/biden-europe-trade-war-negotiate/2020/11/11/1e7e87c6-2440-11eb-8672-c281c7a2c96e_story.html

Did you read the story?  it's about the Airbus/Boeing subsidy cases, which started under GWB and were pursed during the Obama administration.  Both cases were substantially justified under WTO rules.

Was just an example for the long-running trade disputes between US and EU. Here is a recent example where the USTR set new tariffs in response to new French tax, which might lead to another tit-for-tat between US and EU. If Biden wants to fix trade relations with Europe, he has a lot to do...
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/weekly-trade/2021/01/04/ustr-set-to-impose-tariffs-on-french-goods-in-tax-dispute-792544

The US signed its own deal with the Chinese earlier this year and did not align that with the Europeans either.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/business/economy/china-trade-deal.amp.html

That was an agreement on trade in goods and services, not investment.  The US discussed a bilateral investment treaty with China but did not sign one.

Do you know if it contained provisions on human rights? Or just mercantilism for American farmers?

[Zanza]

The timing of this deal is interesting given China's recent treatment of Australia.  A cynic might say the EU is signalling they are happy to throw Australia under the bus and shut up about Uighur slave labor in exchange for more Luis Vuitton and BMW sales.

Australia (and NZ, Japan Korea) signed RCEP, which has similar provisions as the EU/China CAI, with China less than two months ago and did not withdraw from that as far as I know.

[The Minsky Moment]

Do you know if it contained provisions on human rights? Or just mercantilism for American farmers?

China is a member of the WTO so they are free to trade with any other WTO member on WTO terms.
The hitch is that Trump imposed unilateral tariffs anyway and then effectively neutered the WTO dispute resolution process by blocking the appointment of new appeals panel members.
Thus, the China trade agreement did not expand China's trading rights, it actually involved an implicit acceptance of arguably illegal restrictions that were less onerus than the ones Trump initially imposed.  In return, as you allude to, Trump got some verbal promises that he could put in a press release and that to no one's surprise have been ignored by China.

Unfortunately, China did not include human rights provisions so Trump was allowed to keep on violating human rights in the US.

If you want me to defend Trump's asinine trade policy, I can't and won't.  If you want to cite it as a policy model for the EU I beg to differ.

[garbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/06/british-politicians-urge-eu-to-drop-china-deal-after-hong-kong-arrests

British politicians urge EU to drop China deal after Hong Kong arrests

The last British governor of Hong Kong has told the EU not to go ahead with an economic deal with China in the wake of the latest crackdown on the opposition in the territory.

The arrest of 53 people on charges of "subversion" led Lord Patten to tell the EU it would forfeit its right to be treated as a serious global economic and political power if it went ahead with the draft investment deal.

The draft has yet to be ratified by the European parliament, and Germany, the lead advocate of the deal, will come under intense pressure to justify the closer economic ties.

Patten, in remarks designed to resonate in Germany, said: "It is worth remembering, for all European politicians wherever they come from, that the Jewish community around the world has been outspoken about Xinjiang and in particular has drawn attention to the similarities between what is happening in that region today and the Holocaust in the 1940s."

He added: "If this deal goes ahead it will make a mockery of Europe's ambitions to be taken seriously as a global political and economic player. It spits in the face of human rights and shows a delusional view of the Chinese Communist party's trustworthiness on the international stage.

"It is surely inconceivable that the European parliament can support the miserable draft deal that the European commission wants to sign with Beijing.

"It is a massive strategic blunder at a time when [incoming] President [Joe] Biden will be seeking to put together an international partnership of liberal democracies to deal with the bullying loutish behaviour and assault on our international rules by Chinese Communists. We should not be seeking to contain China but to constrain the Chinese Communist party."

The EU called for the release of the arrested opposition figures on Wednesday and said it was considering further sanctions.

"We are currently analysing the situation to see how we might need to react. There are other possibilities open to us, sanctions for example," the European commission spokesperson Peter Stano told journalists.

"We call for the immediate release of the arrested people," Stano said.

Lisa Nandy, the Labour opposition's foreign affairs spokesperson, called for the British government to make a Commons statement on the arrests.

"Democracy is being dismantled in Hong Kong," she said. "China is undermining the rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Basic Law [Hong Kong's mini-constitution] and further disregarding its commitments under the Joint Declaration," which set out the terms of the return of the territory from the UK to China in 1997.

Her deputy, Stephen Kinnock, urged ministers to end the delay in the use of sanctions against individual Chinese officials behind the suppression.

The chair of the UK foreign affairs select committee, Tom Tugendhat, also challenged the EU saying: "The EU's China deal undermines freedom and democracy."

Norbert Röttgen, a candidate for the German CDU leadership and possible successor to Angela Merkel, said the EU could not ignore China's methods, including breach of contract and suppression.

Leading members of the European parliament demanded a response from the commission, including a credible explanation of how the commitments made by China in the investment deal can be policed and enforced.

Sabine Weyand, the lead EU commission official behind the deal, had only 24 hours earlier defended it partly on the basis that the EU was being asked to apply to its economic relationships moral standards not required of other blocs or countries.

She said the EU had used its negotiating leverage to obtain "WTO+ commitments on level playing field, market access and on sustainable development that benefit other partners as well, and should act as a springboard for global disciplines".

Other international politicians condemned the arrests.

Taiwan's foreign minister, Joseph Wu, tweeted: "The mass arrest in Hong Kong comes as a deep shock to those who treasure freedom."

Australia's foreign minister, Marise Payne, said the Australian government was concerned and was monitoring developments.

The Democratic chair of the US house foreign affairs committee, Gregory Meeks, said: "Beijing's national security law is being used to ruthlessly attack Hongkongers – last week by sentencing democracy activists, this week by arresting dozens of pro-democracy politicians for participating in last year's LegCo [legislature] primaries."

[Barrister]

No discussion about how China has been rounding up pro-democracy politicians in Hong Kong?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55555299