The latest report from the South China Morning PostThe recent failure of the European Union to pass an important "**chain bill" has caused quite a stir in the international arena. It is reported that this bill has been in the making for two years since its introduction, and its core goal is to strengthen the supervision and review of the ** chain of relevant non-EU companies within the EU.
According to the content of the bill, any intra-EU turnover of more than 1Companies with 500 million euros and more than 500 employees will be required to carry out a detailed review of the companies in their chain. Further, the Act also intends to extend this requirement to all European turnover of more than 1€500 million for non-EU companies.
Although this bill does not seem to be obvious on the surface, it is widely believed in Europe to be a "decoupling" bill against China. In fact, since 2021, the United States and the European Union have begun to hype the so-called "Chinese human rights issue" internationally and use this issue as an excuse to suppress China.
And the core content of this **chain bill,It is precisely the requirement for enterprises to include the so-called "human rights issues" in the ** chain background investigation, once the enterprise is found to have "human rights issues".It will be excluded from the ** chain of European companies. The UK** further disclosed that the bill also specifically mentions China's "forced labour problem".
The U.S. has used this as an excuse to completely ban imports from China's Xinjiang region. Obviously, the EU is following in the footsteps of the United States and trying to put pressure on China through restrictive measures. It is worth noting that this "decoupling" action is not the first time that the EU has proposed it. As early as 2022, the European Union began to push for the implementation of this bill, which was followed by widespread criticism of China by the United States and the European Union.
If the bill is finally passed in the EU Parliament,Then Chinese companies are likely to become the targets of EU supervision, which will undoubtedly have a significant impact on China-EU economic and trade relations. The European Commission has said that the inclusion of this principle in the first-chain standards of EU enterprises will help maintain the EU's dominant position in the global industrial chain.
However, outSurprisingly, the bill did not pass. Germany, Italy and other countries chose to abstain from voting in the vote, and what is even more surprising is that Sweden, which has always been opposed to China, directly voted against it, becoming a key vote in this vote.
An EU analyst believes that once this bill is passed, it will greatly consume the resources of EU countries, especially some small countries, thereby reducing the administrative efficiency of the EU. In addition, this move could also lead to the global prevalence of "** barriers", which in turn will seriously squeeze the development expectations of countries within the EU that rely on the development of a single industrial category. Therefore, it is natural that these countries will oppose the passage of the "decoupling" bill.
In the case of the Belgian presidency of the European Union, for example, the country has issued a statement explaining that it does not see the need for such a bill. The EU needs to take into account the status quo, with the implication that it is not only China that needs the EU, but that the EU is also dependent on China. This is evident in the voting behavior of European industrial powers such as Germany and Italy, which have both abstained from voting on the issue.
China is the second largest partner of the European Union, and these countries are highly dependent on China in terms of markets and chains. If the bill passes, it is likely to lead to a series of countermeasures by China, which will have a huge adverse impact on these countries. In addition, this move will also place an additional burden on EU companies, meaning that they will have to pay more economic costs for the bill, and this task is beyond the control of these companies.
This law is not unheard of in the EU. As early as 2023, Germany, the economic engine of the European Union, once implemented the "**Chain Due Diligence Act", the core content of which has many similarities with the bill vetoed by the EU this time. But less than a year later, this bill was questioned by German companies, believing that it would hinder the smooth flow of the ** chain of German enterprises.
It is worth mentioning that the "decoupling" bill introduced by the EU has not only met with strong opposition from the EU economic circles, but also generally rejected by the EU political circles. The reason why this bill has been able to move forward is likely to be related to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The German newspaper Die Welt, on the other hand, bluntly stated that this is an important political asset for EU President von der Leyen, but this asset is already on the verge of collapse.
In this regard, some netizens said:
Also, netizens said:
If the bill or supplements are not passed by March 15, the bill could be put on hold permanently. Because the European Parliament will hold a general election in June this year, and the chances of the European Parliament passing this bill after the change are very small. After all, von der Leyen may no longer be president of the European Commission by then.
Recently, there has been news that von der Leyen is running for the post of NATO secretary general with the support of the United States, but von der Leyen, who is a German, has been resolutely opposed by Germany, resulting in a lot of suspense in her race for the post of NATO secretary general. Von der Leyen, as the best interests of the United States in the European Union, has always been keen to follow in the footsteps of the United States, especially on the issue of "decoupling" from China.
For China, the veto of the EU's "** chain bill" is not only a diplomatic victory, but also an indirect recognition of China's economic strength. In the era of globalization, the importance of the first chain is self-evident, and China, as the "world factory", occupies a pivotal position in the global first chain. While EU countries may politically want to keep a certain distance from China, economically, they cannot easily get rid of their dependence on China.
In addition, this incident has also exposed the divisions and contradictions within the EU. On the one hand, the EU as a whole wants to maintain its dominant position in the global industrial chain, but on the other hand, there are clear differences in attitudes towards China among member states. Industrial powerhouses such as Germany and Italy abstained from voting in this vote, reflecting their concerns about decoupling from China's economy. Sweden's opposition reflects its independence and firmness in its China policy.
For the EU, balancing its economic dependence on China and its political stance will be a long-term and complex challenge. For China, the incident is also a reminder that economic power is an important means of safeguarding national interests in the international arena. In the future, China needs to continue to strengthen its economic strength, and at the same time actively participate in international cooperation to ensure that its position in the global chain will not be shaken.
In general, the veto of the EU's "** chain bill" is a complex international political and economic event, which reflects the differences within the EU, China's important position in the global ** chain, and the interaction of economic and political factors in international relations. This incident is of great significance for understanding the current international situation and the future trend of international economy and politics.
List of high-quality authors