To deal with China, Europe must find its own voice

In its ties with China, Europe needs to be more assertive and pragmatic, playing to its own strengths and the interests of its citizens.   

In a closed-door expert panel held at the Brussels Institute for Geopolitics on 17 July, participants discussed Europe’s evolving relationship with China, highlighting potential risks and openings for pragmatic engagement. 

The conversation – ahead of what is expected to be a pivotal EU-China leaders' summit in Beijing on 24 July – had the goal of assessing Europe’s strategic positioning beyond policy silos and taking into consideration longer-term trends.  It looked at the triple definition of  China as being ‘partner, competitor and systemic rival’ [first] introduced in the EU’s 2019 Strategic Outlook and its ongoing relevance. 

The panel featured Ambassador Martin Selmayr, former Secretary-General of the European Commission and a key architect of the EU’s 2019 China strategy, alongside Sigrid de Vries, Director General of the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA). They were joined by Xiaoxue Martin, Research Fellow at the Clingendael China Centre and Hans Kribbe, Senior Fellow for Geostrategy at BIG.  The conversation was moderated by BIG’s founding director Luuk van Middelaar. Together, they brought a mix of institutional memory, economic insight and strategic perspective to the discussion. 

During the conversation, panelists discussed the balance of the three elements of the triple definition within the wider context of Europe’s relations with the US, as well as how it was received at the time. The multifaceted framing, drawn up in 2019 during the Juncker Commission and with Trump in the White House, reflected a growing disillusionment with earlier assumptions that China’s integration into the global economy would lead to greater openness and convergence with liberal democratic norms. The systemic rival label—seen as provocative at the time— signalled Europe’s commitment to building economic resilience, whilst not shying away from speaking the language of power. 

The panel also explored how China views Europe, noting that the EU is not seen as a strategic priority in its own right, but rather through the lens of US–China rivalry. While access to the European market and advanced technological expertise remains important to Beijing, Europe is often perceived more as an economic partner than a geopolitical actor. Paradoxically, this relative lack of prioritization could give Europe greater room to manoeuvre and assert its own strategic choices. 

Despite growing tensions, panellists identified reasons for cautious optimism, highlighting opportunities for pragmatic cooperation with China particularly on climate change and identifying economic opportunities of mutual benefit.  Political leaders, it was posited, can sometimes learn from the more pragmatic and target-driven approach of the business world.  Speakers also evoked the need for deeper research into China’s vision for the global order and urged for stronger European leadership in international standard-setting bodies. 

Participants agreed that strategic clarity, internal cohesion and economic resilience are essential if Europe is to find its rudder in stormy waters and engage China on its own terms.