China, the Indo-Pacific and European illusions
Victor Angelo
This
week, Josep Borrell, who heads the European Commission's external relations,
and his Chinese counterpart, Minister Wang Yi, met by videoconference as part
of the strategic dialogue that exists between the two parties. The day before,
Frans Timmermans, the Executive Vice President of the Commission, had been in
contact with the Chinese Vice-Premier, to discuss the preparation of the
COP-26, which will start in Glasgow at the end of this month.
These
talks have their merit. They must be frequent and without naivety. The EU can
have no other political stance vis-à-vis China than dialogue, the affirmation
of its critical positions and the search for common interests. In this, as in
other areas of vital importance to the security and prosperity of Europe, it is
essential to demonstrate that we continue to believe in the value of diplomacy,
of clarifying positions and of reaching agreements. Where others focus on
confrontation, Europeans must be seen to promote strategic interdependence and
common platforms that contribute to international security and the resolution
of major global issues. By doing so, we will consolidate the EU's role on the
international scene and reduce the risks of being involved in conflicts that
are not in our interest. We will also reduce our subordination to the USA.
Returning
to the dialogue between Borrell and Wang, several topics were addressed. Most
have long been on the agenda: human rights, Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Taiwan, the
mutual investment climate, international cooperation, support for
multilateralism, etc. But between this meeting and the previous one, which took
place in June 2020, an eternity has passed, and dramatic changes have occurred,
notably in Myanmar and Afghanistan. The policy towards these countries had to
be part of the discussions. Nor could a reference to the EU Indo-Pacific
strategy, approved a couple of weeks ago in Brussels, be missing. Borrell took
great pains to explain that this new policy intention is not aimed at
antagonizing China. He would not have convinced his interlocutor.
I
am among those who think that the approval of this strategy was a mistake. The
document appears to be well written, and the abundance of resources in the
European External Action Service means that it has to be. But it is vague, too
broad, touching on everything, and undefined in the prioritization of the
objectives included in each of the intervention areas. To begin with, the
geopolitical content of the Indo-Pacific concept is not well understood. A
recent study shows that different member states see the contours of the region
in a separate way. What's more, the concept is associated with the anti-Chinese
obsession started by Donald Trump and which Joe Biden has been materializing.
Thus, for Beijing, the EU does nothing more than follow American policy, albeit
in a more sophisticated way, introducing in the document a series of buzzwords
about development and cooperation.
It
is true that this part of the world, even if imprecisely defined, has a growing
economic weight. It accounts for a very large share of Europe's foreign trade:
Brussels tells us that the region is the EU's second largest trading partner.
It is also a fact that a very high percentage of maritime freight transport
passes through the Indian Ocean. But the real challenges in the Indo-Pacific
are, apart from piracy, an area where cooperation with China is possible, the
disputes over maritime borders between China and its neighbours, the future of
Taiwan, or the identity tensions in India, the military dictatorship in Myanmar,
the struggle for democracy in Thailand, Cambodia or Vietnam, the institutional
violence in the Philippines and so on, without forgetting Taliban extremism and
terrorist threats. These are concrete issues where the EU needs to define its
interests, the role it can play and the alliances that will be needed.
(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published in the Diário de
Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper. Edition dated 1 October 2021)
No comments:
Post a Comment