Finbarr Bermingham

As US-China rivalry redefines economic warfare, EU scrambles for its dictionary The EU is preparing to unveil a new doctrine on economic security, but it’s a concept that officials and experts say has no clear definition.

As US-China rivalry redefines economic warfare, Europe scrambles for its dictionary

My report on the EU's struggle to define economic security, even as it prepares to launch yet another economic security initiative...

Taking off for Berlin ✈️

I'll be in town for the Berlin Foreign Policy Forum tomorrow and the European China Conference on Wednesday - say hi if you'll be there!

Readout, run through a machine translation

Trump and Xi spoke today. Apparently Taiwan wasn't raised in Busan but definitely discussed today. From Xinhua:

Trump: "China played a crucial role in the victory of World War II, and the US understands the importance of the Taiwan issue to China"

Seems to be: no deal on steel until you change your digital laws to our liking. Tough love from "best friends"!

Back to digital: clear again US wants to change EU laws

Lutnick: "Our hope is EU will take our advice and guidance, resolve some of the outstanding case and create a framework that we're comfortable with… then we can go and attack steel and aluminium"

Lutnick on EU-US joint work on China

"We have shared alignment & understanding to tackle the issues that face us together. We're working closely on CRMs, REEs. Those are easy to work on and don't take up a lot of time when we're talking. When everybody agrees it's not difficult"

Sefcovic says the rules are not targeting US companies but that they're listening to US' complaints.

Goes on to say that the major issue is not the US and EU, but "global overcapacity". Says that the EU's recent safeguard actions on steel is proof it takes it seriously

Lutnick paints changing EU digital rules as good for Europe, but clearly a US demand

"Our suggestion is EU deeply consider analysing digital rules, come away with a balanced approach that works with us. If they can come up with that, we'll together handle the steel & aluminium"

Speaking in Luanda, Donald Tusk puts Europe's plight in plain terms

"The matter is delicate, because nobody wants to discourage the Americans and President Trump from ensuring the US remains on our side in this process. As you can see, it’s not that simple or straightforward"

Possibly reflected in the low number of doorsteps too?

Sefcovic: US share of EU LNG imports up from 40% to 65% as evidence it is delivering on Turnberry. Talks continue on buying $40bn in AI chips.

"We want to discuss how to take on global overcapacity and all the elements linked with economic security including critical minerals"

Danish FM Rasmussen talks up the honour of hosting Greer and Lutnick

"It's also a great opportunity to discuss problems we have in common, such as the global trading system, China etc… I'm really looking forward to that..."

Budrys:

"If we're not doing this we'll be lost. It's time to push back on China, together with American friends"

Contrast with his predecessor Landsbergis

"If you are a European leader asking your team to book you on next flight to Washington to go talk to Daddy, pls don’t"

Budrys:

"We have to prioritise our tasks, of course the very urgent one is to build the strategy & right decisions on pushing back against China's offensive economic policies, coercive policies, their controls on rare earths and other goods that are needed for our industries"

Lithuania's FM Budrys as always goes hard on China, not so much on the US

"Really looking forward to discussing our agenda of cooperation, the transatlantic agenda of economic security. That is something we have with to work on and build right now."

Baranowski:

"We are clearly seeing, especially looking at last month when China put the big gun of dependencies on the table, both American dependencies and European dependencies on rare earth metals, that we need to work together on this."

EU trade council in Brussels today. Greer & Lutnick also in attendance. It's clear ministers are still using China as a carrot to keep US interested

Poland's Baranowski:

"We'll also talk about bigger picture... challenges of overproduction coming from third countries again"

As we speak, the Western world is currently discussing whether to impose a cap on the army of a country that has been invaded, while sparing the country that launched the invasion from any such limit.

Feels like the strategic autonomy debate all over again these days: endless scoping, definitions, etymology debates.

Let's just focus on solving a threat: Call an emergency on REEs, put all possible trade and security (3Ps) on the table, see how each could help solve the emergency, and go implement

“We are 27 members with our own specific characteristics and interests. It’s not easy to create a common platform in something as complex as economic security that we can’t even define,” said Lund Jeppesen.

“We can’t spend years just agreeing on the analysis. We need speed.”

While the nature of some challenges facing the EU in 2025 is new, the structural impediments are not. It can be tricky to do economic statecraft when you are not, in fact, a state.

Francesca Ghiretti, director of the RAND Europe China Initiative, added that “my opinion is that what matters are clear goals, not a definition”.

“Clear goals, for example, is what Japan has, and it has served the country very well,” Ghiretti said.

“Europe is in a historic economic security crisis, with its industry being dependent on bureaucrats in Beijing signing licences for REEs.

"The EU needs to get together to solve this issue as quickly as possible... call it economic security or not,” said @tobiasgehrke @ecfr

But experts, looking at the urgency of Europe’s predicament, are begging policymakers to forget about stringent definitions, for fear that things could grind to a halt altogether.

Some capitals also rejected a mirroring of policies set by former US President Joe Biden, whose White House worked closely with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on the 2023 proposal.

In Berlin and even in Paris, where some of the concepts involved enjoy popular support, there is reluctance to conflate national security – a sovereign issue to each member – with trade policy – a commission competence.

There appears little danger of moving too quickly, given the glacial pace of things so far

For over 2 years member states have stymied a strategy that would give commission powers to screen outbound investments in sensitive sectors & created unified export controls for the 27

Mona Paulsen, a professor specialising in the topic at London School of Economics, agreed the pendulum may swing too far.

“The question is, are they building a stable doctrine for the future that they would be comfortable operating … or do they see it as exceptional?” she said.

During the same panel discussion, Norway’s WTO envoy warned the EU against moving into the space

“I agree it’s a dangerous path to embark on, because you risk setting up a spiral,” Petter Olberg said. “You will easily trigger other countries to respond.”