Unsteady complexity of the EU-China relations. A Case Study of the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment: Why does the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment fits into the European Union trichotomous strategy towards China, when both parties are facing the complexities of their bilateral relations?
Translated title
Unsteady complexity of the EU-China relations. A Case Study of the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment
Author
Obremski, Tomasz Jakub
Term
4. term
Publication year
2021
Submitted on
2021-04-15
Pages
57
Abstract
Siden Kinas økonomiske reformer begyndte for omkring 40 år siden, er forholdet mellem EU og Kina gået fra næsten intet til en kompleks blanding af fælles interesser og konflikter. Det kræver en flerstrenget tilgang fra EU. I 2019 beskrev EU derfor Kina som på én gang strategisk rival, økonomisk konkurrent og samarbejdspartner. En sådan tredelt politik er svær at føre konsekvent i praksis. Den voksende rivalisering mellem USA og Kina har samtidig fået EU til at sigte mod strategisk autonomi – evnen til at træffe egne beslutninger om vitale spørgsmål uden at blive presset ind i andres geopolitiske valg. I dette nye landskab blev Den Omfattende Investeringsaftale (CAI), som blev afsluttet i slutningen af 2020, EU’s første alvorlige beslutning. Kontroverserne omkring aftalen afspejler skepsis over for EU’s nye Kina-strategi. Aftalen handler primært om materielle, økonomiske interesser og kan i høj grad forstås gennem to ledende teorier i international politik: liberalisme (samarbejde og gensidig nytte via regler) og realisme (stater beskytter magt og sikkerhed). Men disse teorier rækker ikke langt nok, når det gælder de politiske omstændigheder omkring aftalens tilblivelse og de immaterielle elementer som værdier og identitet. Her kan socialkonstruktivisme – der ser normer, værdier og identitet som formende for staters adfærd – udfylde hullet og forklare, hvorfor CAI kan passe ind i EU’s tredelte tilgang til Kina, mens begge parter navigerer i et komplekst bilateralt forhold. Aftalen er næppe perfekt, og mere var næppe opnåeligt, især med timingen. Alligevel er de forhandlede bestemmelser lovende, og aftalen kan forsvares som et skridt i den rigtige retning og i tråd med målet om strategisk autonomi. Den politiske skæbne er dog uvis: Ratifikationen møder alvorlige forhindringer, og om aftalen overhovedet træder i kraft kan omdefinere EU’s Kina-politik. De næste år vil vise, om kursen fører til mere engagement, skuffelse eller decoupling – det vil sige en løsere økonomisk adskillelse.
Since China’s economic reforms began about four decades ago, EU–China relations have grown from almost nothing into a complex mix of shared interests and conflicts, demanding a multi‑pronged EU approach. In 2019, the EU described China simultaneously as a strategic rival, an economic competitor, and a cooperation partner. Putting this threefold policy into practice coherently is difficult. Rising US–China rivalry has also pushed the EU to seek strategic autonomy, meaning the ability to make its own choices on vital issues without being forced into others’ geopolitical agendas. In this new context, the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI), concluded at the end of 2020, was the EU’s first serious decision. The controversies around it reflect skepticism toward the EU’s new China strategy. The agreement focuses mainly on material, economic interests related to investment and can largely be read through two leading International Relations theories: liberalism (cooperation and mutual gains through rules) and realism (states protecting power and security). Yet these lenses fall short on the political circumstances of the deal and the non‑material aspects such as values and identity. Social constructivism—which emphasizes how norms, values, and identities shape state behavior—helps fill this gap and explains why the CAI can fit the EU’s threefold approach to China as both sides manage a complex bilateral relationship. The agreement is likely far from perfect, and given the timing, achieving more was unlikely. Even so, the negotiated provisions are promising, and the deal can be defended as a step in the right direction and consistent with the goal of strategic autonomy. Its political fate, however, is uncertain: ratification faces serious obstacles, and whether it enters into force could redefine the EU’s China policy. The coming years will show whether this path leads to deeper engagement, disappointment, or decoupling—that is, loosening economic ties.
[This summary has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Documents