Misjudgment 1:
Beijing thinks the EU will be quiet about China’s human rights violations in exchange for economic benefits.On the evening of Dec. 30, 2020, China and Europe concluded in principle the negotiations for the CAI, which caused the CCP’s official media to break into loud cheers.
For many years, the CCP has been dealing with Europe and the United States through its offers of economic benefits in exchange for less or no criticism of the CCP’s human rights problems. This tactic has worked repeatedly over the past decade or so.
On Dec. 7 last year, the EU adopted a decision and a regulation establishing a “global human rights sanctions regime.” The EU announced in a statement: “For the first time, the EU is equipping itself with a framework that would allow it to target individuals, entities, and bodies—including state and non-state actors—responsible for, involved in, or associated with serious human rights violations and abuses worldwide, no matter where they occurred.”
Prior to this, the EU’s human rights dialogue with China had been held 37 times, behind closed doors at Beijing’s request. Europe has now generally come to realize that this dialogue has had little impact on getting the CCP to improve its human rights record.
Therefore, when the EU adopted a new human rights sanctions regime and concluded talks with Beijing on an economic agreement similar to the first phase of the U.S.-China economic and trade agreement, Xi made the first mistake in assuming that this was just a higher offer from the EU in terms of acknowledging economic benefits from China again, the EU would not turn completely to the United States, and it would remain silent on the CCP’s human rights issues as it had before.
Misjudgment 2:
Beijing does not realize that the EU’s orientation toward the CCP has changed.The Xi administration has clearly misjudged this new positioning of China-EU relations. After the EU imposed sanctions on the CCP in March this year over the Xinjiang human rights violations, Beijing was outraged with shame. This was reflected in the remarks of Wang Yi, the CCP’s foreign minister.
“It has never come to our mind that the EU will put sanctions on us,” Wang said, speaking at the Munich Security Conference on May 25. According to European media, he questioned “how a strategic partner could take such action.”
Wang acknowledged that “Beijing had been shocked when Brussels placed sanctions on Chinese officials,” Reuters reported.
Misjudgment 3:
Beijing underestimates the consequences of sanctions on Europe, as many sanctioned European lawmakers fight back.Another sign of Beijing’s fury is the lack of reciprocity in the sanctions imposed by China and Europe. The CCP sanctioned 10 people and 4 entities of the EU, while the EU only sanctioned 4 people and 1 entity in China.
The sanctions imposed by the CCP on the EU have caused serious consequences. The Xi administration has misjudged or underestimated the consequences.
The most immediate consequence was the EU Parliament’s freezing of the ratification of the CAI on May 20. Moreover, the CCP’s sanctions have triggered various aftereffects.
For example, Samuel Cogolati, a member of the Belgian Parliament and one of the Europeans sanctioned by the CCP, reportedly claimed that Alibaba (Chinese e-commerce giant) was “a nest of spies” for the CCP.
This kind of reaction to Beijing’s sanctions took the Chinese regime by surprise. In addition, the challenges to human rights abuses, which were originally confined to Xinjiang, have gradually begun to spread to other areas because of the sanctions imposed by the CCP on European officials.
Actions taken by Lithuania have resulted in the biggest impact on the CCP’s diplomacy. On May 20, the Lithuanian Parliament claimed the CCP was practicing “genocide” in Xinjiang. A resolution sponsored by Dovile Sakaliene, a member of Parliament who was blacklisted by the CCP, was “supported by three-fifths of Lithuanian parliament members,” according to Reuters. The non-binding resolution called for “a U.N. investigation of internment camps and to ask the European Commission to review relations with Beijing.”
The “17+1” platform, which became “16+1,” was launched by the CCP in 2012, initially to intensify Beijing’s cooperation with 11 EU member states and five Balkan countries. In 2019, Greece joined the initiative, which was then renamed “17+1.”
In the future, for the sake of saving face (avoiding humiliation), the CCP may absorb other European countries into the initiative and maintain the “17+1” number. However, the CCP may face additional problems if there are any conflicts of interest between the newly-joined parties and the original Central and Eastern European countries.
Another European country standing up against the CCP is the UK.
According to a statement from the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), the UK’s move “is the latest in a series of coordinated actions by IPAC members.” The IPAC (Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China) “is an international cross-party group of legislators working towards reform on how democratic countries approach China.”
Miriam Lexmann, the Slovakian member serving on the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, was also placed on the CCP’s blacklist of sanctions in March, and she is also a member of IPAC.
Misjudgment 4:
Beijing imposes heavy-handed sanctions against the European Council’s Political and Security Committee.Another misjudgment is the CCP Foreign Ministry’s announcement on March 22 that the Political and Security Committee (PSC) of the European Council is a sanctioned entity.
The European Council “sets the EU’s policy agenda,” according to its official website, and “the members of the European Council are the heads of state or government of the 27 EU member states, the European Council President, and the President of the European Commission.” “The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy also takes part in European Council meetings when foreign affairs issues are discussed.”
By imposing sanctions on this body, the CCP is in fact sanctioning the decision-makers of the EU’s common foreign and security policies. The PSC will continue to draft EU policies related to the CCP in the future, whether the CCP likes it or not. In the current political climate, the PSC is unlikely to be the first to back down from the CCP.
More seriously, if the CCP were to announce that it would ban the diplomats in this organization from entering China, it would end up in an awkward situation in its relations with Europe because of the importance of these individuals in their country’s diplomatic system, a situation that could be described as devastating to China-Europe relations.
It is foreseeable that Beijing will make appropriate adjustments to its future European policy, otherwise, relations between China and Europe will go downhill rapidly. The CCP is neither willing nor ready to let the EU become another rival alongside the United States. To this end, the CCP has signaled it is softening up.
The April 29 issue of the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported a cool-down on the sanctions.
“But there has been little indication since of how the Chinese restrictions apply,” reported the SCMP. “Diplomatic sources say Chinese officials have tried to downplay the significance of its sanctions and tried to prove the policies were less forceful than they appear.”
Some European diplomatic insiders know this well.
“We have stopped inquiring as it would force the Chinese side to define it,” a source told SCMP.