China-CEE relations need new strategies
The 16 + 1 mechanism established in 2012 has produced spectacular results. Today, China’s presence in Central and Eastern Europe is increasingly visible in every respect. Also, business leaders, scientists and artists from the CEE countries are discovering China at high speed. For them, this is a huge market, a source of ideas and a generator of cultural impulses.
This dynamic cooperation should continue, because it is of mutual benefit. It will also help achieve the goals set out in Chinese President Xi Jinping’s concept of “building a community with a shared future for mankind”. The fact that the CEE countries are interested in intensifying cooperation with China is one side of the coin. The other side is that the European Union does not look at it any more favorably.
Until now, the 16 + 1 mechanism has remained a peripheral issue for the EU. But China-CEE relations have started catching the EU’s attention. There are two reasons for that.
First, the economies of Western Europe are wary of Chinese companies operating in CEE. As long as such Chinese companies were selling textile products and running restaurants in CEE, it was not a problem for the EU. However, when China began exporting sophisticated products to CEE, which are usually cheaper than Western European products, the EU started considering them as a threat. Also, joint ventures by Chinese investors and CEE governments are creating companies that are ready to compete in Western European markets.
Second, better political relations between China and the CEE countries have made Western European countries change their views about China. When defining a relationship with China, the EU insists on issues such as human rights, media freedom and democratic elections, which often leads to disagreement between Brussels and Beijing. The CEE countries do not have political
As part of the Belt and Road Initiative and the 16+1 mechanism, China will dispatch its capital, expertise and employees to the Baltic states where at present there is the European Union’s economic domination, US military presence and influence, and which is a geopolitically important region for the United States. The US, like the EU, has a negative attitude toward the 16+1 mechanism.
Considering that investments in the Baltic markets are dominated by Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands and Russia, adding one more player would not be in the interest of the financial sectors of these countries. And for the implementation the Belt and Road projects, the European Commission demands that definite rules be introduced.
The lack of historical conflict between China and Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania means that they can put aside ideological considerations and take a pragmatic view of bilateral relations. But since the Baltic states don’t have a common vision when it comes to the 16+1 mechanism, there is no action plan that would clearly state the aims and objectives in relation to the initiative.