Maersk's chief representative of Greater China and Northeast Asia, Chairman of the China-Europe Chamber of Commerce, Eskelend, recently put forward a proposal on "expanding the scale of foreign investment" in China. Eskelende noted that in recent years, China has "gone too far" in terms of self-reliance, leading Chinese consumers to prefer local goods, which has made it difficult for foreign companies to survive in the Chinese market and make it difficult for them to make a profit in the Chinese market.
Based on trade data between China and Europe, Eskelend's remarks are not unreasonable. According to the data, China had a trade deficit of 291 billion euros with China last year, which means that China is the largest source of revenue for the European market. But a deeper analysis reveals that Eskelander's views are not reliable. The fact that Chinese companies benefit from Sino-European trade, while foreign companies do not profit from the Chinese market, is not a decision made by Chinese companies or Chinese companies on their own initiative, nor by their own nationals.
The large trade deficits between Europe and the United States show that it is difficult for foreign companies to make profits in the Chinese market, which is very different from the trade patterns of China and Europe. Over the past few decades, China has imported a large number of high-value-added high-tech products from Europe, such as chips and medical devices. Despite the small turnover, businesses in Europe are still making money.
In stark contrast, China's main products to the EU are raw materials such as rare earths, textiles, and some basic industrial products. In Sino-European trade, there is a saying that "one lithography machine sells tens of millions of pairs of socks". China is no longer just a supplier in the low-end market, and China is gradually transforming from "Made in China" to "Created in China". In recent decades, China has made remarkable achievements in high-end equipment and other fields, and China's products have reached or even exceeded international standards in terms of quality and user experience.
For example, foreign brands such as Nokia and Samsung once dominated China's high-end mobile phone market, and now Chinese brands are gradually dominating. Chinese companies have surpassed foreign automakers, which is a bright spot in the mainland's new energy vehicle exports. European and American countries are not satisfied with China's rapid development, and still hope to firmly tie Chinese enterprises to the bottom of the industrial chain. In her latest speech in China, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen did not fully praise China's rising industry, instead attributing it to government grants.
Eskelend's claim that Chinese companies have "gone too far" on their own is clearly not so happy with the growth of Chinese companies and what they have achieved. His comments give the impression that he is turning a blind eye to China's open market and improving legal environment.
Against this backdrop, the European Union must re-examine China, move out of unilateral confrontation and dependence, and embark on a path of mutual benefit and win-win results. China's market potential, rapid growth in consumer demand, and continuous improvement in technology have provided a broad market space for foreign-invested enterprises, and if they want to grasp the opportunities, they must grasp the opportunities.
At the same time, China is also continuing to promote the reform of the foreign investment system, which includes simplifying the administrative procedures for the registration and operation of foreign-invested enterprises in China, strengthening the protection of intellectual property rights, and relaxing market access restrictions for certain industries. These reforms aim to attract more foreign investment, enrich the market and ensure fair competition.
For the EU, a strategy of cooperation rather than confrontation is a win-win situation. For example, cooperation with China in the fields of high technology, environmental protection, and renewable energy will not only promote the development of European companies, but also contribute to solving global environmental problems. In this process, we must change the past practice of blindly pursuing interests and build it on the basis of equality and reciprocity.
The European Union should not strategically rely too much on the leadership of the United States, but should determine its foreign policy strategy according to its own economic and political interests. This is based on economic, political, security and other factors. This independent strategy will give Europe a greater voice and greater freedom on the international stage.
The views of Eskelund and his other thinkers also need to evolve with the times to better reflect the economic and political conditions of the contemporary world. In today's era of economic globalization, if any enterprise or region wants to survive in the fierce market, it must continue to innovate and adapt to its own capabilities. Therefore, EU enterprises can only maintain long-term survival and development in the fierce market competition by taking effective countermeasures.