China's EU deal betrays insecurity; not a wedge between US & EU

In our first edition of The Red Pen for 2021, we take a look at an editorial by the FT's Gideon Rachman, who argues that the recent EU-China treaty will complicate President-elect Biden's ability to handle China and rebuild the US-EU relationship. Ian Bremmer and Eurasia Group's Michael Hirson point out the deal actually demonstrates how much Beijing fears being out-maneuvered by Biden.

There's a lot going on in the world, and obviously plenty to discuss right here in the United States where our democracy is getting tested like nobody's business. But that doesn't mean that good op-eds out there don't deserve to be sparred with. And, I don't want to just neglect all those perfectly important writers, so we have one this week.

Turning our attention abroad to how China factors in as President-elect Joe Biden takes office in a short period of time … and what role Europe will play in how the United States approaches the second biggest economy, soon to be first, on the planet.


The op-ed we're marking up is by Gideon Rachman. He's the chief foreign affairs commentator at the Financial Times. And the piece is entitled, "Europe Has Handed China A Strategic Victory." He argues against a recent investment treaty between Europe and China championed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, also heavily supported by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. And it's viewed overall as a deepening of financial ties and commerce between Europe and China.

Now as a little bit of background, the deal, which was several years in the making, boosts market access in China for European firms in sectors such as autos and finance.

Now Gideon argues that the European Union has just handed China a big win despite all of that nation's diplomatic and humanitarian transgressions…and that this is going to further complicate things for incoming President Joe Biden as he tries to figure out how to deal with China.

Now, agree with Gideon, it's a significant development. And also, it's true that Europe does appear to be flexing its muscles a bit here: The US can do a unilateral trade deal with China (Phase One) and so can Europe. But is this going to change the geopolitical landscape? No, and the argument goes too far on that point.

First, Gideon writes, "Ms. Von der Leyen concluded 2020 by sending a truly awful geopolitical message — as her commission signed off on an investment treaty between the EU and China."

Well, the EU also has said it agrees with the United States "on the strategic challenge presented by China's growing international assertiveness." And there are many humanitarian and diplomatic issues Europe as a whole has strongly condemned—from China's attack on democracy in Hong Kong to its treatment of Muslim minorities. This is a fairly narrow deal, not a white flag on the relationship.

"But Ms. Von der Leyen concluded 2020 by sending a truly awful geopolitical message - "  Don't overdo it. This is a narrow deal, not a white flag.

Number two, Gideon describes the timing of the deal as "exquisite" for China, driving a wedge between Europe and the US on the eve of Biden's inauguration.

Now you can make that argument, but let's be clear, Beijing was clearly intent on rushing to get the deal done before Biden took office and ended up giving a lot of benefits to the Europeans accordingly. Does that sound like a confident superpower? Or, rather, like an insecure country worried about being out maneuvered by Biden and preparing to face a lot more coordinated and multilateral pressure? In other words, China might have grabbed what it could at a fire sale before Biden comes in to remove the wedge that has existed between Europe and the United States under the Trump administration.

"We've allowed China to drive a huge wedge between the US and Europe." China rushed to seal the deal before Biden took office.

Now on that, Gideon describes this deal as a "kick in the teeth" to Biden, who wants to restore ties to some of our strongest global allies in Europe.

Now, it's a wake-up call. But Beijing keeps digging its own diplomatic hole, from turning away WHO inspectors to conducting mass arrests in Hong Kong. And that's just this week. The new Biden team's commitment to transatlantic cooperation is going to go a long way to repairing the US-Europe relationship.

"It's also a considerable kick in the teeth for Joe Biden." Wake-up call? Yes. But Beijing keeps digging its own hole.

Finally, Gideon writes that Europe "is naive to believe that China will respect the agreement it has signed…And it is naive to think that the darkening political climate in Beijing will never affect life in Brussels or Berlin."

Now sure, you can point to plenty of examples of China not holding up its end of the bargain. Gideon mentions the WTO agreement in 2001. He's right. Also, in the terms of this EU/China deal, Beijing is expected to deliver on things like climate action, reducing favoritism to state-owned businesses, and improving labor practices. All kind of red lines for the Chinese state capitalist system. Good luck with that. But let's be clear, when China fails to meet those terms, that ends up working in America's favor and makes any EU/China agreement short-lived at best. It gets weaker as a consequence of that.

"It's naive to believe that China will respect the agreement it has signed." Maybe. But the deal's weaknesses mean it could be short-lived.

So, is it the end of the world order as we know it? No. But is China, and how its growing economic influence and power impacts every nation, going to be a big issue for Biden…and beyond? Yes. We just don't think Ursula von der Leyen or the EU did something "truly awful," as Gideon states.

That's Bank of America's new target in its Environmental Business Initiative in order to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon, sustainable economy.

Here's how it will drive innovation to address climate change.

On Tuesday, a major US intelligence report said the top threat to America right now is China. A day later, John Kerry, the Biden administration's "climate czar," got on a plane to... China.

Such is the drama of ties between the world's two largest economies these days.

More Show less

Should the Biden administration "reverse course on China" in the hope of establishing a friendlier relationship, as diplomat Kishore Mahbubani argues in a recent Financial Times op-ed? Ian Bremmer and Eurasia Group analyst Michael Hirson take out the Red Pen to explain why it's not that simple.

And today, we are talking about the United States and China. The relationship between the two most powerful nations in the world is the worst it's been since the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. Pundits and policymakers alike all around the world are trying to figure out how Washington and Beijing can at least stop the bleeding because a reset is nowhere in the cards.

That's the topic of the op-ed that we are looking at today. It's from the Financial Times, written by Singaporean diplomat Kishore Mahbubani, and the title summarizes the key argument: "Biden should summon the courage to reverse course on China." Meaning, he should throw out the Trump era approach and open the door to more cooperation and kinder, gentler relations.

More Show less

More than a dozen COVID-19 vaccines have been fully approved or are currently in early use globally, and COVAX, the global initiative started last year by the World Health Organization and other partners, is pushing for equitable access to vaccines for all. But most of the half billion jabs given so far have gone to citizens of wealthy countries, with half going to the US and China alone. What's the problem with so-called vaccine nationalism? Ian Bremmer explains that besides the clear humanitarian concerns, the continued global spread of COVID increases the risk of new mutations and variants that can threaten the entire world, vaccinated or not.

Watch the episode: Vaccine nationalism could prolong the pandemic

Should wealthy individuals and nations shoulder more of the burden in addressing climate change? Pulitzer Prize-winning climate journalist Elizabeth Kolbert argues that Big Tech leaders like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk should shift more of their focus to fighting for our own planet's survival, instead of space exploration. "We're doing as much as we can to make life difficult on planet Earth for ourselves. But there's virtually nothing we could do to make it as difficult as life on Mars, where there's, among other things, no oxygen." Kolbert, the author of Under a White Sky, discusses why it's so crucial for a few rich countries to bear most of the climate burden, since they're also the biggest emitters. Her conversation with Ian Bremmer is featured in the upcoming episode of GZERO World, airing on US public television stations starting this Friday, April 16. Check local listings.

In recent days, Northern Ireland has seen some of its worst street violence in over a decade. The anger has subsided a bit this week, but post-Brexit fears leave many uncertain about their future in a deeply divided land with a long history of political violence between Irish republicans and UK unionists.

More Show less

Fighting climate change is about making the planet get less hot. The more quickly countries slow down their carbon emissions, the faster that'll happen. All the more important for the nations that pollute the most — but not all of them are on board. Although the majority, including China, are setting future targets to go Net Zero, India doesn't want to commit (yet) to when to stop burning fossil fuels to spur economic growth. We take a look at when the world's top polluting economies intend to go carbon-neutral, compared with their share of global emissions, of renewable energy as a source of electricity, and percentage of global coal consumption.

Peruvian runoff: Perú's presidential election is going to a runoff in June between two surprise and polarizing contenders, each of whom won less than 20 percent of votes in a highly fragmented first round. Pedro Castillo, a far-left union leader and teacher who benefited from a late surge in the polls, will battle rightwing populist Keiko Fujimori, daughter of the country's imprisoned former strongman. Castillo wants to rewrite the constitution to weaken the political influence of the country's business elite and maybe to allow the state to nationalize parts of the mining sector to pay for social programs for the poor. Fujimori wants to use mining revenues to create jobs by investing in infrastructure and healthcare. The runoff will probably be a national referendum on Fujimori, a divisive figure running for the top job for the third time. No Peruvian president has ever left office without facing corruption charges, but Fujimori already faces several — and she'll avoid jail time if she wins.

More Show less

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter, Signal

The GZERO World Podcast with Ian Bremmer. Listen now.

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter: Signal