A Cold War Crossroads for the EU
As the U.S. escalates a New Cold War stance against China, the EU has a choice: adopt the belligerent U.S. path to conflict, or pursue independent relations with China as equals.
After months of unprecedented U.S. escalation, very little pretense of normalcy remains in the U.S.-China relationship. In July, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared that the era of bilateral engagement inaugurated by the Nixon Administration was a “failure.” Such sweeping declarations coincide with growing acts of U.S. aggression that include the U.S. exclusion of Chinese tech companies, greater scrutiny towards overseas Chinese students as well as scientists, and skyrocketing hate crimes against people of East Asian descent.
Many analysts have likened this situation to a New Cold War. And much like the previous Cold War, such an endeavor would hinge on the U.S.’s ability to rally like minded allies in opposition to China. Something of this nature already exists with the Five Eyes initiative of the U.S. UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, although Washington certainly hopes to build a broader alliance.
Among such prospective allies is the European Union, which will play a key role in consolidating or fracturing a U.S. alliance vis-a-vis China. However, aspirations for a U.S.-led alliance are complicated by the fact that China has enjoyed burgeoning relations with the European Union in recent years. Indeed, the EU is now officially China’s second largest trading partner after the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
U.S. lawmakers hope that such economic ties will be trumped by the presumed ideological solidarity of the world’s developed liberal democracies. Europe’s historic role standing alongside the U.S. against the Soviet Union sets a natural precedent to do so once again against a foe of a similar ideological vein. But alliances are fluid in nature, with countries reorienting their foreign policy based on shifting economic, security, and ideological factors. As such, the U.S. may find in the EU an ever-reluctant ally in its crusade against China.
The EU is an economic juggernaut and a remarkably successful political union, having effectively ended interstate conflicts in what was previously the world’s most war-torn continent. However, the EU’s decision-making bureaucracy makes the outward projection of power difficult despite its economic clout. As such, although plans to organize the Union into a geopolitical force are in constant discussion, the reality of the EU global position today is that of being wedged in the middle of competing U.S., Russian, and Chinese agendas.
The U.S. has taken the charge once more in imposing on Europe its strategic vision for the coming decades, of which “containing” China takes center stage.
With that reality in mind, the U.S. has taken the charge once more in imposing on Europe its strategic vision for the coming decades, of which “containing” China takes center stage. Falling onto familiar Cold War geographies, the U.S. paints Russia and China as revanchist powers that form the core threat to European security, of which the U.S. has maintained since the end of World War II and a region it hopes can remain strategically aligned.
When assessing the U.S.’s claims of Russian and Chinese interests being diametrically opposed to that of the EU, it is important to examine where each of the three major powers stand regarding their own respective strategic relations with the European bloc.
Until recently, Russia has been identified by heads of NATO as the EU’s most immediate threat. The NATO consensus is that Putin’s foreign policy is designed to re-establish the country’s Soviet-era spheres of influence through interventions in the Syrian Civil War and Eastern Europe. Geopolitical moves at the behest of Russian interests are a yearly occurrence in Europe, but to what extent do they actually pose a tangible threat to European interests? When looking at the hard numbers involved in discussions of Russia’s menace to Europe, very little of it lends credence to the fearmongering. Many NATO members have already effectively strengthened cybersecurity efforts amidst high-profile allegations of Russian cyberwarfare and disinformation. Meanwhile, formidable Russian military power is nonetheless dampened by Russia’s petro-reliant economy, which would likely prove inadequate to serve as the primary source of funds for a major land-based campaign to re-exert the country’s Soviet era sphere of influence. As such, the geopolitical threat of Russia has been effectively inflated by Washington.
It is in this context that China has become the focal point for the U.S. administration’s vision of a revitalized NATO alliance. In recent years China has become the EU’s biggest importer of goods, a relationship that has led to fears of growing Chinese influence on the continent. However, although China has been accused of harboring desires to subvert the EU, China’s actual record paints a very different picture. While the EU sides with many U.S. allegations against Chinese human rights violations, the EU-China relationship for the moment is still largely commercial and, as such, one that Europeans have shown to be rather eager to engage in.
U.S. fear mongering not only belies a desire on its part to maintain its own hegemonic status among the EU member states. It also carries a sense of irony, for in many ways the U.S.’s own direct and indirect actions in recent years have contributed to the heightened political crisis afflicting the EU.
Styling itself as the shining city on a hill, the U.S. has used its institutions to project its role as the world’s exemplar democracy. This type of soft power has the ostensible effect of inspiring “dissidents” and color revolutions in the Global South, but more importantly it perpetuates U.S. legitimacy amongst its allies.
As the world’s most powerful country, the U.S. projects more than just financial and military power. It is a trend setter as well, not just in culture but in politics. Styling itself as the shining city on a hill, the U.S. has used its institutions to project its role as the world’s exemplar democracy. This type of soft power has the ostensible effect of inspiring “dissidents” and color revolutions in the Global South, but more importantly it perpetuates U.S. legitimacy amongst its allies. From the EU to South Korea and Japan, heads of state feel confident in using American financial institutions and hosting U.S. armed forces, not least due to their shared political systems and a belief—shaped through U.S. soft and hard power—that the U.S. remains steadfast in upholding its values.
Nowhere is the role of values in politics more important than in the EU, a bloc whose purpose from the beginning was to ensure that the cataclysmic World Wars never happen again. And no other country feels the weight of this burden more than Germany, the country that was the main aggressor in both conflicts and the EU’s current hegemon. To this day, patriotism may be expressed on the continent at football games or at festivals. But the overt displays of national pride that galvanized a country to commit mass genocide has left long lasting scars in Germany and influence policy to this day. Policy, which places the upholding of liberal values as not just a matter of governance, but categorically paramount to the continent’s security.
Needless to say, the bloc’s confidence in U.S. liberalism has been shaken with Trump’s election victory in 2016 and the wave of populism that has since permeated the world. Rather than relying on traditional donors and by extension their influence with the U.S. media, Trump has relied on the largely grassroots organized “Alt-Right”, headed by notable figures such as Steve Bannon. For European officials already dealing with a Far-Right resurgence engendered by Muslim immigration and the lingering effects of the 2008 financial crisis, their job stemming the rise of populism was hardly made easier by the soft power effects of Trump’s victory. (It should be worth noting that the 2008 financial crisis and the MENA Migrant Crisis were similarly the fruits of U.S. military and financial adventurism.)
The genuine threat, however, comes from the fact that the same grassroots movements that buoyed Trump victory have in recent years set their sights on abetting the domestic clout of their counterparts in Europe. Propaganda outlets, whether they be official news platforms like Breitbart or independent YouTube channels, assiduously peddle conspiracy theories based on tenets of the alt-right movement. Conspiracy theories including the notion that Muslim immigration will replace the European native population by 2050, encouraging countries to break away from the bloc, and promoting all around bigoted sentiments towards LGBT. And despite the fact that it is a popular tactic of the Far Right to disguise their hate mongering under the guise of free speech European leaders, especially those in Germany, are well aware of the true effects select words appealing to the fears and prejudices of the common people can have. Especially if those common people have been struggling to find work and are thus more prone to extremism as well as scapegoating. The effects of this wave of militant right wing propaganda have manifested into real world violence, radicalism, and separatism.
Some European countries have begun to express a desire to prioritize ties with China over that of the U.S. The U.S.'s disastrous response to COVID-19 has aggravated such sentiments, but the abatement of cross-Atlantic trust started long before the current pandemic.
The German-led EU has managed to endure, but the unity of the bloc and its devotion to “liberal” ideas hangs by a thread. The U.S.’s seeding of right-wing illiberalism in Europe may one day cut that thread and send it into crisis. Decoupling for the moment is an unrealistic scenario, considering the U.S.’s continued financial and military dominance of the EU. But over the years the U.S.’s standing on the continent has diminished dramatically. In fact, some European countries, such as Germany for example, have begun to express a desire to prioritize ties with China over that of the U.S. The U.S.’s disastrous response to COVID-19 has aggravated such sentiments, but the abatement of cross-Atlantic trust started long before the current pandemic.
When observers characterize the EU-China relationship, it is almost always codified as one of pure convenience. Europeans wish to do business with the world’s second largest economy but will always be alienated by China’s supposedly illiberal system of government. And yet in many ways, the relationship has only deepened, owing to the fact that China in many ways presents less of a security threat to the EU than the U.S. This ultimately comes down to the fact that China, compared to Russia and the U.S., is the party that perhaps desires European disunity the least. While per principles of realpolitik China would not mind an EU squabbling perpetually among itself, which makes it more malleable, China is above all else a trading power on the world stage rather than a military or political one.
Economic cooperation with China will boost the EU’s stagnant markets and more importantly, bolster the material benefits for its citizens so that they may not be as easily swayed by destabilizing far-right ideologies. In doing so, the legitimacy of existing left-leaning to centrist governments would be preserved, as would the bloc’s existence as a result.
Contrary to U.S. fears that China wishes to supplant the Western order, it is already CPC policy that the country does not export its political system.. Moreover, as a trading power, China’s goals are abetted by trade agreements as well as trade blocs and the existence of the EU as a single market bloc worth 18 trillion dollars, would make it an invaluable partner to have. The EU would likewise be wise to reciprocate the sentiment, as trade and commerce will be needed to ensure economic stability, and thus keep the influence of far-right parties in check. The COVID-19 pandemic has also thrown into stark relief the impact of China as a stabilizing force in Europe. Where the U.S. hoarded medical supplies and attempted to buy ‘first dibs’ on a German vaccine, China has offered steady support, medical delegations, and medical supplies across ideological lines.
Despite what one may find in Western narratives, the EU can find a steadfast partner in China. While it may be true that neither side finds the opposing parties’ political system to be favorable, the EU does not face any threat from China with regards to its domestic affairs. Economic cooperation with China will boost the EU’s stagnant markets and more importantly, bolster the material benefits for its citizens so that they may not be as easily swayed by destabilizing far-right ideologies. In doing so, the legitimacy of existing left-leaning to centrist governments would be preserved, as would the bloc’s existence as a result. For China, the benefits would be simpler—market access to absorb the shock of the threatened U.S. economic decoupling, and a potential diplomatic restraint to U.S. belligerence. Thus, the relationship between the polities in the 21st Century can be defined by a fruitful partnership, in which all sides reap the benefits of cross-continental cooperation for the sake of human progress.
Read more:
