Exposed! The EU is doing this kind of "small tricks" in the China-EU negotiations

Since the European Commission announced that it would impose additional tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, EU countries such as Germany, Sweden, Hungary, and many European automakers have continued to speak out in an attempt to stop the European Commission's willful decision.

Sorting out the timeline of the EU's anti-subsidy investigation on Chinese electric vehicles, the European Commission announced the "disclosure of preliminary ruling results" on June 12. According to the investigation procedure, the next key node is July 4. On that day, the European Commission will announce the "preliminary ruling results."

Judging from the amount of reporting data, the US and Western media are paying close attention to this node, with the recent average daily reporting volume reaching nearly a thousand articles per day.

However, Mr. Tan reviewed previous cases of EU anti-subsidy investigations and found that this node does not seem to deserve so much attention.

In fact, according to EU rules, "disclosure of preliminary ruling results" is just the advance announcement of some temporary tax rates, situations of investigated companies, etc. in the "preliminary ruling results".

According to data from the EU official website, in anti-subsidy cases since 2003, the temporary tax rates announced in these two links are generally the same.

Ding Ru, an associate professor at the China University of Political Science and Law, has been following the progress of the EU's anti-subsidy investigation for a long time. From her experience, there will be no difference in the temporary tax rates announced in these two links.

This conclusion can also be drawn from the amount of foreign media coverage - in previous cases, after the tax rate was disclosed, foreign media paid little attention to the subsequent "preliminary ruling results."

Since the so-called "preliminary ruling" on July 4 is not worthy of attention, why do the US and Western media still focus on reporting on this node?

After analyzing the relevant content, Tan Zhu found that "China hopes" is a frequently mentioned expression. Voice of America wrote in the title, "China hopes that the EU will cancel tariffs on electric vehicles before July 4."

Similar headlines also appeared in reports from American and Western media such as Reuters and Consumer News and Business Channel.

By reporting extensively on the words "China hopes", the narrative that China hopes to resolve the issue before July 4 was constantly hyped, which invisibly raised the outside world's expectations for a quick resolution of the issue.

From another perspective, this is actually a form of "flattery" against China.

Ding Ru told Mr. Tan that from a technical point of view, it was unrealistic for the EU to withdraw its decision on July 4.

It took more than half a year from the launch of the anti-subsidy investigation by the European Commission to the disclosure of the preliminary ruling. During this period, the European Commission collected a large amount of corporate data and made calculations. If the additional tariffs are to be cancelled, a new calculation and assessment is also required. From June 12 to July 4, there was only more than three weeks, and such calculations could not be completed.

In addition, due to major differences among EU member states on the issue of imposing additional tariffs on China, it is basically impossible to reach an internal consensus on tariff adjustments before July 4.

Therefore, it is impossible for China to regard July 4 as a turning point in resolving the issue.

If we understand this clearly, we will find that the reason why the US and Western media are focusing on exaggerating that "China 'hopes' to resolve the issue before July 4th" is more importantly to help the European side increase its "bargaining chips" in the negotiations.

Ding Ru shared with Mr. Tan her observations and experiences from past negotiations. Once the outside pressure on one party to quickly obtain negotiation results is too great, the party under pressure will be at a disadvantage in the negotiation.

In other words, the EU can take advantage of the outside world's eager expectation for China to quickly achieve negotiation results and "ask for a price" from China during the negotiation process.

In fact, in this anti-subsidy investigation, the two sides started consultations earlier than before.

The earlier the talks start, the more time there will be to resolve the issue, which is actually a factor that benefits all parties.

According to EU rules, the EU must complete the investigation 13 months after launching it.

That is to say, after the preliminary ruling is announced, there are still four months for consultation and negotiation, and there are still many variables.

The pressure on the EU will also increase before the final ruling.

It should be noted that the essence of negotiation lies not only in the comparison of the "bargaining chips" of both parties, but also in the direction of the times and trends. The statements of some EU member states can show who is on the side of the times and trends.

Currently, the EU is under great pressure in terms of import and export trade. In the first quarter of this year, the EU's overall external trade in goods fell by 8.4% year-on-year.

Ding Ru said that the European Commission's approach may intensify trade frictions between the Chinese and European markets, which will sacrifice the interests of EU member states, especially those that are export-oriented.

As the deadline of November 2 approaches, more opposition voices will emerge within the EU, which will bring real pressure to the European Commission.

As for the Chinese side, next, China will conduct consultations with the European side patiently and rhythmically.

In any case, China will resolutely take all necessary measures to firmly defend the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies. There is still some time before the final ruling, and the EU can think about it carefully.