IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iie/wpaper/wp19-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

EU Trade Policy amid the China-US Clash: Caught in the Cross-Fire?

Author

Listed:
  • Anabel Gonzalez

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

  • Nicolas Veron

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

The combination of China's rapid rise and unique economic system, and of the increasingly aggressive and disruptive US trade policy, is putting the global rules-based trade and economic system under unprecedented and possibly vital threat. The European Union has critical interests at stake in the current escalation, even as it has so far been comparatively spared from US trade policy belligerence and China's reactions. In this context, the European Union should adopt an independent and proactive stance, building up on recent efforts and going beyond them. While in the past the European Union has been unambiguously closer to the United States than to China, it now has shared interests and differences with both countries. It does not currently have to make a general choice of one against the other. And like many other jurisdictions around the world, it should aim at defending its continuing ability not to make such a general choice, even as this stance will generate tensions with both. The recent China-EU summit success illustrates the credibility of this approach, and the objectives stated in its conclusions should be delivered upon. The European Union, even more than the United States or China, has a strategic interest in the preservation of the global rules-based order embodied by the World Trade Organization (WTO). It must take leadership for steering WTO reform and modernization, working closely with broadly aligned third countries such as Japan and other players. It should expand its outreach beyond its immediate negotiating counterparts in both the United States and China, and specifically work at a better understanding of China on the part of its (EU- and member state-level) leading officials. While strengthening its domestic policy instruments to address new challenges, such as the screening of foreign direct investment for security purposes, it must also resist its own temptations of protectionism and economic nationalism. In support of these objectives, the European Union should prepare itself for difficult decisions, which may involve revising some of its current red lines in international trade negotiations. Conversely, the European Union should stand firm on principles such as refusing one-sided agreements and rejecting abusive recourse to national security arguments in trade policies. In working with the European Council and the European Commission, the European Parliament will have a critical role to play in steering the European Union through these challenging times.

Suggested Citation

  • Anabel Gonzalez & Nicolas Veron, 2019. "EU Trade Policy amid the China-US Clash: Caught in the Cross-Fire?," Working Paper Series WP19-13, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:iie:wpaper:wp19-13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/working-papers/eu-trade-policy-amid-china-us-clash-caught-cross-fire
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Laurent, & Jeudy Bruno-Philippe., 2021. "Le blocage de l’OMC, un révélateur de la crise du multilatéralisme ?," Bulletin de la Banque de France, Banque de France, issue 234.
    2. Sebastian Santander & Antonios Vlassis, 2021. "The EU in Search of Autonomy in the Era of Chinese Expansionism and COVID‐19 Pandemic," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(1), pages 149-156, February.
    3. Liu, Nan, 2020. "Trade war from the Chinese trenches," MPRA Paper 103929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Liu, Nan, 2020. "Trade war from the Chinese trenches," MPRA Paper 110175, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    China; European Parliament; European Union; investment; tariffs; trade policy; trade confrontations; trading blocs; United States; World Trade Organization;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iie:wpaper:wp19-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.