Conflict of interests hard to hide in EUUS summit
US President Joe Biden attended the EU- US summit on Tuesday as the last highlight of his visit in Europe, which aimed at showing a new outlook of transatlantic relations and bring the bloc closer to its anti- China front before his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Some believe this tactic by the US has had some effects, pointing to the G7 summit’s harsh stance on China and the NATO communiqué that designated China as a “systematic challenge” to international order.
However, Chinese observers said it is expected that Tuesday’s summit on more specific areas concerning development and immediate interests would expose divergences and conflicts between the
US and Europe, demonstrating the
fragility of “symbolic solidarity” in values and ideology in the previous two events.
The EU- US summit, the first of its kind under the Biden administration, is expected to put COVID- 19 pandemic, China, trade tariffs, technology regulation, climate change and democracy on top of the agenda, Euronews reported.
Some Western news outlets have presented a rosy atmosphere of the summit, depicting it as a chance to rebuild US- EU relationship. But they also had to admit the existence of conflicts, including existing steel and aluminum tariffs imposed by the Trump administration and EU’s countermeasures. Vaccines and the Northern Ireland situation after Brexit are some of the sticky points in the dialogue, media reported.
Cui Hongjian, director of the Department of European Studies at the China Institute of International Studies, told the Global Times on Tuesday that the EU- US summit is an occasion where the two try to manage differences and reach consensus, solving down- to- earth problems. EU has concrete demands for the US and if the latter fails to meet them, the bloc will further distance itself from the US.
Divergence in solidarity
Before the EU- US summit, Biden also attended the NATO summit meeting on Tuesday and the G7 leaders’ summit which concluded on Sunday. The NATO communiqué designated China as presenting “systematic challenges” to international order, citing China’s expansion in its nuclear arsenal, being “opaque” about military modernization and military cooperation with Russia.
NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg warned China was “coming closer” in military and technological terms but he stressed the alliance did not want a new Cold War with China.
The claims sparked firmly hit- backs and both Chinese Foreign Ministry and its Commission to EU said the Chinese people will never forget the NATO bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia.
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian on Tuesday slammed the NATO as playing double standards in its attacks. China spends less than global average and one fifth of NATO members in military expenditure per capita, Zhao Lijian said.
The Commission said NATO’s claims have slandered China’s peaceful development, misjudged the international situation and its own role, and continued the Cold War mentality mixed with group politics. The NATO, born from an era of ideological confrontation, puts China into strategic view so that it can prove its relevance in the current world, Cui said.
The alliance wanted to use US- China rivalry to argue its political dimension beyond the traditional military and security dimensions, while the US wanted to weaponize NATO in its toolkit against China, the expert said.
Closing on Sunday, the G7 leaders’ summit, with the US and some European countries at the core, also played ideology and values card in forming a so- called united front in bashing China in an attempt to maintain global governance.
Almost every issue on which Washington has recently attacked China has been mentioned in the G7 communiqué, but attitudes were expressed in different degrees of tone.
CNN reported that the seven leaders aired serious differences over how best to approach China during a session of the G7 summit. German, Italian and European Union leaders in particular, opposed dealing with China in a confrontational manner.