Two years ago, the European Union introduced a bill, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. In fact, it is the controversial "**Chain Act". This bill was not initiated by the European Union on its own, but was carried out at the behest of the United States. This masochistic choice not only harms the EU, but also harms China.
Until recently, the bill went to a public vote. However, more than a dozen countries, including Germany, abstained from voting, and Sweden voted against it, resulting in a defeat in the final voting phase of the bill.
Forbes said the vote's failure meant they had only about two weeks to work out possible alternatives. But whatever the solution, it is almost impossible to pass effectively. Because under current EU rules, any decision must be unanimously approved by all members of the Council, or at least more than half of the votes in favor of it, to take effect.
And ahead of the next European Parliament elections in June, a variety of potentially rift factors could add to the confusion. As a result, Forbes magazine believes that the bill is effectively dead in name.
With the announcement of the voting results, many European and American companies are pleased. According to the current president of the Federation of German Industries, the result is undoubtedly a great victory. It is reported that the bill stipulates that European companies must strictly review each other's "human rights" records when selecting ** chain partners. Such a regulation is undoubtedly an unacceptable arrogance, which will cause non-negligible problems for European companies to operate their business operations and artificially create unnecessary obstacles.
As pointed out in an internal report submitted to the EU by the EU-China Chamber of Commerce, the regulatory requirements imposed by the Act on companies go far beyond their own tolerance and control.
The bill was conceived at a time of tension in Europe's relations with China. In addition, in the fiercely competitive international market environment, China has occupied the three important positions of Europe's second largest partner, the first major commodity importer and the third largest export destination of technology products for many years. European ** frequently publishes the so-called"Declaration of Human Rights"Blaming China, and often making unwarranted smears against its own economy, makes us wonder if the main motive behind the EU's introduction of this bill is against China, or even the EU"Decoupling"Policy Bill.
From the outset, the bill was met with strong resistance from the majority of EU member states. The reason is that these European countries have huge commercial interests in China, and France** chose to fine-tune the legal provisions as the vote approaches, thus significantly reducing the number of affected companies; Germany, Finland, Italy and other countries have abstained. Sweden even chose to vote against it, much to the surprise of some.
Sweden has always been less friendly to China. However, it is surprising that the country had the courage to come out and veto the proposed bill. But after in-depth analysis, I have to say that this is actually a very reasonable choice. First of all, the current ruling party in Sweden is extremely repulsive to the mainstream form of the white left; Secondly, many of Sweden's largest companies, such as Volvo, IKEA, Ericsson and Electrolux, have significant business opportunities and business interests in China.
In this voting process, the so-called "political correctness" is quite vulnerable to actual monetary interests. As we all know, inflation in Europe has reached an alarming high, and if we insist on abandoning Chinese goods, I am afraid that the entire European Union economy will suffer a collapse blow.
The current deterioration of the inflation situation in Europe has undoubtedly laid the groundwork for the future tragedy, and the "most beautiful scenery" may be realized sooner or later, and even the social phenomenon of "hanging street lights" may be difficult to avoid.
The image of a developed country that had been built up through centuries of colonial rule is likely to collapse and decline in a very short period of time perhaps far more than one might expect. Without a social environment without labor and the ability to innovate and create wealth, it is bound to gradually move towards the abyss of destruction! Premium short** plan