1. [para. 1][para. 2][para. 3][para. 4] – In her September 16 address to the European Parliament, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen highlighted a daily EU goods trade deficit with China of 1 billion euros ($1.15 billion), warning of a "second China shock" and pledging to use "every available tool" to rebalance economic ties. In the same speech, she announced plans to establish a European Critical Raw Materials Company to secure rare earths and critical inputs, reflecting anxiety over Europe's heavy reliance on China. This dual anxiety—fearing a flood of Chinese manufactured goods while dreading a shortage of critical inputs—demonstrates that Europe's dilemma has evolved far beyond a simple trade imbalance. Downstream, in electric vehicles, solar equipment, and batteries, Chinese enterprises are direct competitors; upstream, in rare earths and refined derivatives, China remains indispensable for European automotive, clean energy, digital, and defense sectors.
2. [para. 5][para. 6][para. 7][para. 8] – This creates two conflicting roles for China within EU policy—a manufacturing rival downstream and a critical supplier upstream—prompting Brussels to expand its focus from setting market access conditions to scrutinizing who controls upstream resources and where they flow. On the very day of the speech, the European Commission issued an antitrust warning over MMG Ltd.'s proposed acquisition of Anglo American's nickel operations in Brazil. MMG is a unit of state-owned China Minmetals Corp., and Brussels feared the deal could divert low-carbon ferronickel away from Europe to Chinese stainless steel producers, curtailing supply options and raising prices for European buyers. This intervention shows that European oversight now extends to Chinese ownership of upstream resources in third countries. Precedents include the Critical Raw Materials Act of 2024, which set targets for domestic extraction, processing, recycling, and import diversification, and the RESourceEU action plan of 2025, which proposed pooling demand through a dedicated platform, joint procurement, long-term offtake agreements, and coordinated strategic reserves.
3. [para. 9][para. 10][para. 11][para. 12] – These policy strands are converging: downstream, the EU applies anti-subsidy investigations, countervailing tariffs, and public procurement restrictions; in investment, it vets Chinese acquisitions of critical overseas resources; upstream, it attempts to pool European demand for joint procurement and coordinated reserves. The ramifications could be far more consequential than trade remedies alone—while tariffs alter import costs of specific goods, mining assets, long-term offtake contracts, and strategic stockpiles determine whether factories can continue operating at all during supply squeezes. However, creating administrative entities and tightening investment screening does not guarantee that alternative supplies have materialized. Mining development requires sustained long-term capital, and European domestic projects face formidable headwinds including environmental permitting, high energy costs, and community resistance. Strategic reserves can cushion temporary disruptions but cannot replace a viable, ongoing industrial base, and supply chains remain vulnerable if midstream processing capacity lags. Europe faces a genuine dilemma: it aims to shield domestic manufacturing through trade restrictions, yet simultaneously requires affordable raw materials—escalating measures may raise business costs long before domestic capacity comes online, burdening the very sectors it intends to protect.
4. [para. 13][para. 14][para. 15] – Von der Leyen's call for "rebalancing" cannot be interpreted solely as an effort to curb Chinese imports. While future EU-China consultations will continue to address trade deficits and market access, they will increasingly hinge on the security of raw material supplies, Chinese investment within Europe, and overseas resource development. The EU expects Chinese investors not only to accept greater reciprocity in market access but also to anchor local jobs, supplier contracts, and R&D activities within Europe; Chinese enterprises, meanwhile, need clearer boundaries on the true scope of European "de-risking." The core tension in EU-China economic relations is moving up the supply chain—Europe seeks secure supply lines while viewing Chinese ownership of global resources with mounting skepticism. The next phase will involve disputes over who develops overseas mineral deposits, who locks in long-term supply agreements, and who secures priority access when global supplies tighten—challenges vastly more complex than simply pledging to "deploy every available tool."
AI generated, for reference only
Sign in with Google
Sign in with Facebook
Sign in with 财新