Zhao Yongsheng: how the strategic autonomy of Europe avoids "brain death", the European strategic autonomy is threatened with "brain death", writes "Huanqiu shibao".
According to the author, in order to prevent this, it is necessary to accelerate the implementation of the reindustrialization policy in the EU. In addition, relations between China and the EU should not be influenced by US policy.
Zhao Yongsheng Pascal Boniface, director of the French Institute of International and Strategic Relations (IRIS), recently published an article on the Institute's website, "The brain of European strategic autonomy is dying."
In the article, the author claims that in 2019, French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that the "brain" of NATO had already died, and now "brain death" has come for European strategic autonomy. This point of view has attracted attention in Europe.
"The brain is dead" not only for NATO, but for the European strategic autonomy itself. This unique opinion, firstly, shows that French scientists, especially independent experts, have begun to reflect on the problem of European strategic autonomy; secondly, it reflects that the French people and even some people in the European Union are also ready to agree with this proposal, which is directly related to the future of the EU. It is obvious that European strategic autonomy, an issue that was initially considered and discussed at the highest level of the European Union, is now in the center of public attention because of its increasingly profound impact on ordinary people. So, is the strategy of the European strategic autonomy really "brain dead"?
Let's start by turning to history. General Charles de Gaulle can be considered one of the initiators of the course of French strategic autonomy, and it was he who raised the banner of European strategic independence. In fact, the idea and implementation of de Gaulle's policy have a deep military basis, international status and geopolitical advantages, as well as the industrial power of France, based on the manufacturing industry of that time. After the end of World War II, the United States desperately needed French help to counter the Soviet-led camp during the Cold War.
Today, although France is still one of the nuclear powers and one of the "five permanent members" of the UN Security Council, the fall of the Berlin Wall not only became evidence of a serious weakening of the Soviet camp, but also significantly reduced the dependence of the United States on France in terms of maintaining American global hegemony. Combined with the fact that France pursued a de facto policy of "deindustrialization" in the later era of leftist rule, the share of French manufacturing production in the world plummeted. Thus, if today's France and Europe want to imitate the course of General de Gaulle, it is obvious that this will be the same as "making a notch on board the boat so that later they can find a sword dropped into the water from this place" (It is unwise to act without taking into account the changes. – Approx. trans.).
So what steps can Europe take towards strategic autonomy? I believe that the primary task is the need to accelerate the implementation of an effective and urgent policy of "reindustrialization". It is true that the so-called strategic autonomy can be divided into military-strategic sovereignty, as well as political, economic and cultural independence. However, due to various factors, France and the whole of Europe, in fact, have few opportunities to improve independence in military, strategic and political terms. As for cultural autonomy, France and other EU member states have actually done quite well here, so they only have to realize economic sovereignty.
In fact, the main goal of economic strategic autonomy in France or the EU is not taken from the ceiling, but is deeply rooted in industrial strategic independence. That is why Emmanuel Macron abandoned the France 2030 plan before his re-election and will implement it only after taking office again. The plan, unveiled by Macron on October 12 last year, assumes the allocation of funds for ten specific priority areas, despite the total amount of only 30 billion euros: energy and economic decarbonization, transport, healthcare, agriculture and food, electronics and robotics and other industries requiring the supply of components, strategic raw materials, startups, innovative training for strategic centers, including culture and space exploration and the underwater world. Instead of saying that "France 2030" is an investment plan, it is better to say that it is a typical French "reindustrialization plan".
The European Union, driven by France, is also not far behind: on May 18 this year, the EU launched an investment plan worth about 300 billion euros. The plan is nominally aimed at reducing dependence on Russian energy resources and accelerating the transition to clean energy in the next few years. However, at its core, this plan is also a new version of the European "reindustrialization plan". The difference between the two projects of France and Europe is that the French investment plan is designed for five years, and the European one for eight, and the amount of EU investments is ten times more than in France. The essence of both projects is the same, and both of them hope to restore the former position of France and the EU in the international production chain and realize economic strategic autonomy after the realization of industrial independence.
It is clear that Europe is actively trying to avoid the "brain death" of its strategic autonomy. Whether it is the French or European version of the "reindustrialization plan", it is no longer "reindustrialization" in the traditional sense, but reliance on new industries within the innovative economy, aimed at promoting independence based on industrial strategies, and then achieving a common strategic autonomy of France and the EU.
As for Sino-European relations, Boniface believes that Europe should not worry too much about the Chinese threat and should distance itself from the United States. The author believes that European policy towards China should not be replaced or controlled by American policy or agenda.
As mentioned above, France and the European Union have already embarked on the path of restoring strategic autonomy and launching new industries, such as digital and intellectual economy, green ecology and solving the problem of climate change, and the United States is certainly one of the options to advance this path, but relations between the United States and Europe are not so simple. Firstly, from the point of view of digital and intellectual industries, although there is a certain degree of complementarity between the United States and Europe, it is more evident in the fact that the United States is a provider of services to the digital industry represented by the "Big Four" (GAMA), while the European Union is a sales market or buyer of these digital services. The seller-buyer relationship is not suitable for the protection and development of digital business in the EU, which is currently in the development phase. Secondly, in the field of green ecology and climate change, although Joe Biden verbally criticized the actions of the Donald Trump administration after taking office, but in the end his actions followed the Chinese saying: "The Cao sets the rules, and the Cao follows them" (Steadily following in the footsteps of its predecessor – Approx. trans.). Therefore, in this regard, there are actually deep differences between Europe and the United States.
And, on the contrary, there is great complementarity and mutual benefit between China and France and China and the EU. In addition to the traditional areas, the signing and entry into force of the "EU-China Agreement on Basic Geographical Indications" has significantly increased the volume of trade in local agricultural and by-products between China and the European Union. The agreement is particularly beneficial for EU agricultural centers such as France. In new areas of innovation economy, such as digital and intellectual industries, green ecology and solving the problem of climate change, the depth and breadth of cooperation between China and the EU should far exceed the cooperation between the United States and Europe. After all, as the world's largest emerging economy, China has a vast market for digital and green industry services.
In short, European political elites have realized the warning significance of the statement about the "brain death" of the strategy of strategic autonomy, and European experts and the public are paying more and more attention to this issue. From an objective point of view, Europe seeks to lay the foundations for achieving its goal of strategic independence and build on them. In this process, relations between China and the EU should not be influenced by US Chinese policy in order to provide Europe with more opportunities for strategic autonomy.
