On the global political chessboard, the situation continues to evolve, often unexpectedly. In the face of such a tense international background, cooperation between countries is more prudent and strategic.
However, this already complex international landscape has been exacerbated by the actions of certain countries interested in creating chaos. Remarkably, 27 countries came together to vote to impose economic sanctions on Chinese companies.
While the vast majority of countries seem ready to act in concert to sanction China, there is one country that has bravely stood up to enormous international pressure and firmly expressed its support for China.
What is the reason behind the decision of these countries to jointly impose sanctions against China? Moreover, which country has firmly chosen to support China in the face of pressure? What will be the final outcome of this international game?
Want to sanction China
According to the Financial Times, at this year's EU Summer Summit, the Ukrainian issue once again became the central topic, triggering in-depth discussions among leaders of various countries.
From the outside, despite a wide range of topics and in-depth discussions, the EU seems to have a clear direction: continue to provide Ukraine with weapons and equipment and strengthen its military defense capabilities. This not only reflects the EU's determination to maintain regional stability, but also shows the consistency of its policy towards Ukraine.
In addition, in addition to the Ukraine issue, another key point of the summit is the EU's China policy. The relationship between the EU and China has always been complex, and in the context of international politics, how to adjust or determine the strategic relationship with China has become an unavoidable issue. This is also reflected in The Times' forecast, which believes that the summit may provide an excellent opportunity for the EU to unify its China policy and further clarify the EU's role and position on the global political stage.
Since the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the EU has been in a state of tension, frequently sending weapons and equipment to Ukraine, and this support is so strong that it sometimes depletes its ordnance stockpiles. In the field of science and technology, the EU and the United States have formed a solid front, uniting sanctions against Russia and blocking its access to electronic components from outside.
In modern warfare, electronic information systems are undoubtedly one of the key equipment. It is a pity that Russia's strength in the field of electronics is not outstanding. Before the sanctions, they relied on components imported from Europe and the United States to create advanced electronic warfare equipment. However, due to European and American sanctions, Russian forces on the battlefield have a clear gap with Ukraine in terms of information and intelligence processing.
But Russia soon found another strategy, which was to import cost-effective electronic components from China. It seems that the strategy of Europe and the United States has not completely worked, but they do not intend to give up easily. Next, they targeted Chinese companies that cooperate with Russia.
In international trade, exchanges between countries should be based on the principles of equality and reciprocity. When Russia and Chinese enterprises carry out trade cooperation in electronic components, this is undoubtedly normal business exchanges between the two countries. But that cooperation has been misinterpreted by the European Union, which claims that China is contributing to Russia's war efforts. Furthermore, the EU even listed eight Chinese companies suspected of providing military support and decided to impose sanctions on them.
State-to-state interactions are often fraught with subtleties, and tactics often lie behind the apparent politeness of diplomacy. For example, while the EU's real goal may be to support Ukraine against Russia, they did not choose to express it openly, but turned to China in an attempt to transfer responsibility for this conflict to it.
It is worth mentioning that China has always maintained a neutral attitude throughout the Russia-Ukraine conflict, maintained a balanced cooperative relationship with both sides, and has no intention of participating in this dispute. But in the current international political landscape, every competition or cooperation can become a bargaining chip, and the EU has tried to use this method to achieve their diplomatic goals by creating trade barriers.
In today's international trading system, justice and reciprocity are cornerstones. Trade activities between Russian and Chinese companies for electronic components are precisely the practice of this principle, highlighting the normality of bilateral business exchanges. However, this cooperation has been misinterpreted by the EU. They falsely accused China of supporting Russia's military activities, and furthermore, the EU disclosed eight alleged Chinese companies suspected of providing military assistance and decided to impose sanctions.
Between countries, there are often complex and subtle diplomatic strategies behind the interactions. In the case of the European Union, while what they may really want is to support Ukraine against Russia, they have not chosen to express this sentiment directly. Instead, they chose to blame China, trying to shift responsibility for the conflict.
China has always maintained a neutral role in the Russia-Ukraine dispute, maintained a balanced cooperative relationship with all parties in the dispute, and made it clear that it will not take sides. But in today's international political arena, any foreign policy decision can become a strategic target for others. Faced with this situation, the EU has chosen to put trade barriers in the hope of exerting pressure and trying to achieve the goals of its diplomatic strategy.
China's opposition
The United States is known on the global political stage for its "long-arm jurisdiction", and the European Union, a staunch ally, seems to be imitating its previous tactics in this sanctions against China.
Admittedly, this is not the EU's first economic action against China, but the strategy adopted this time is clearly inspired by the United States. At the beginning, the EU imposed sanctions on Russia, then waited for the opportunity to focus on Sino-Russian cooperation, and finally sanctioned China on the grounds of "military threat".
In the face of this sudden accusation, China responded quickly. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin's statement emphasized the commercial nature of Sino-Russian cooperation and refuted the EU's false claims.
"China firmly opposes illegal sanctions or "long-arm jurisdiction" against China on the grounds of "China-Russia cooperation". Our position on the Ukraine issue has always been objective and fair, and we have not only actively promoted peace talks, but also played a constructive role in resolving this political crisis. Economic and trade cooperation between China and Russia is open, transparent and non-targeted, and should not be interfered with by any third party. ”
China has always remained neutral in the Russia-Ukraine dispute, and that has never changed. In contrast, the EU's sanctions allegations are not only unsubstantiated, but also far-fetched.
Firmly support China
As a political and economic union, the decision-making process of the EU usually requires unanimity or majority consent among member states. However, this does not mean that all member states have the same diplomatic strategies and economic interests. Especially in foreign policy, major powers such as Germany and France often take positions that differ from those of other members because of their global influence and multilateral relations with other powers.
Although most EU countries voted in favor of the proposed sanctions against Chinese companies, the real situation is far more complicated than it seems. On the one hand, many small countries find it difficult to disagree with the United States because of their deep political and economic ties, and they are aware that taking a hostile stance toward China could take a serious toll on their economies.
France is a striking example. France's diplomatic strategy has historically emphasized independence, and Macron's visit to China is a sign of its intention to forge closer ties with China. But then mass protests in the country showed the opposite. Many have questioned whether there are other major powers behind the protests.
Small countries are even more difficult. They lack sufficient voice in the international political arena to confront or contradict powerful allies. They may choose to align themselves with allies out of practical diplomatic and economic considerations, even if it means friction with an important economic partner such as China.
The EU's vote reflects the intertwining of power imbalances, economic interests and external pressures among member states, making the decision-making process more complex and delicate.
For most EU countries, they seem to have formed a "tacit understanding" on sanctions, as if pressing the copy button. However, in this decision, Germany obviously chose another path and did not blindly follow other countries to sanction China.
Looking back at the recent past, when France took the lead in taking its position, it was widely expected that the rest of the EU member states would follow the same path. Everyone almost tacitly agreed that whether it is sanctions against China or Russia, the EU's decision-making should be one-sided.
But Germany's choice apparently surprised many. However, Germany is not the brainless kind to follow the trend. Considering that most other EU countries have chosen to side with the United States and easily find reasons to confront China and Russia, Germany's choice this time is actually to go it alone in the adverse current.
The reasons given by Germany sound very "official": German Chancellor Scholz stressed that they prefer to solve the Ukrainian problem by peaceful means. Moreover, Scholz also highly praised China's efforts and achievements in dealing with the Ukraine issue in the past. This also makes Germany hope that China will continue this positive attitude. As a friendly partner of China, Germany obviously does not want to choose to be an enemy of China.
But for the outside world, this may not be the whole reason. If the problem could have been resolved peacefully sooner, why has it been delayed until now? Is Germany, this seemingly outsider bystander, really chosen only on the basis of a peaceful position?
It's all for the good
On this big international chessboard, Germany clearly wants to shake hands with China. In today's global economic landscape, not only Germany, but the entire European Union is aware of the indispensability of the Chinese market.
The world situation in this era is not so confusing. The United States, as a global hegemon, seems to be creating friction around the world, while also making it clear that it wants to sever economic ties with China.
However, the truth is that it is clear to most countries that it is impossible to truly sever economic ties with China, which is not only the world's second-largest economy, but also has a first-class consumer market. If it is just to cater to the United States and lose China's huge market, it is simply not worth the loss.
Famous sayings such as "there is no eternal friendship between countries, only eternal interests" are mentioned again and again because it reveals the truth of reality.
Recall that Germany also experienced its own golden age. At present, if they want to continue to move forward, they cannot sever relations with China. To put it simply, Germany's strong support for China is more about weighing it up for its own best interests.
Although the EU has many member states, Germany is undoubtedly the leader in terms of influence. Once Germany has taken a firm position, other countries will naturally begin to reconsider. France, for example, has long been less eager to keep pace with the United States. When both European powers have expressed opposition to sanctions, the proposal is clearly difficult to move forward.
In fact, many countries originally voted in favor of the United States because they feared the reaction of the United States, but they knew in their hearts the huge risks of abandoning the Chinese market. Recently, the EU has continued to provide military aid to Ukraine, and even increased military production capacity. If cooperation with China is lost at this time, it will undoubtedly be a bigger blow to them.
With Germany and France, the two "trailblazers", other countries are naturally happy to maintain good relations with China. And for these countries that follow the trend, when the sanctions are reduced from 8 companies to 3 and actively communicate with the Chinese side, they prefer to keep a low profile, so as not to anger the United States.
end
For the EU, if it really falls out with China over sanctions, it will almost have to rely on the United States, which is undoubtedly a risk. Because for the United States, the EU may be just a pawn on the strategic chessboard, and when it is no longer useful, the United States is likely to give up without hesitation. At that time, the EU may face serious economic pressures and challenges.
Over the years, the strategy of the United States is obvious, that is, to try to use various countries and forces to contain or even suppress China's development. But the reality is that no matter what the United States does, China can steadily defuse these pressures and challenges.
The trend of globalization will not be interrupted because the United States wants to cut ties with China, just as God rewards hard work, and historical and economic development will not be easily changed by the decisions of a single country.
China, as a rising country, will of course continue to strengthen friendly cooperation with other countries. In the face of any form of sanctions, China must also have enough strategies and means to respond and confront.