BEIJING: Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao talked with EU Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security Maros Sefcovic on Thursday via video link, the Ministry of Commerce said in a post on Friday.
The two sides conducted in-depth and professional exchanges on areas of China-EU economic and trade cooperation, including trade remedy cases such as the EU’s electric vehicles (EVs) anti-subsidy case, as well as export controls and market access issues.
A Chinese expert said the meeting demonstrates continued willingness from the two sides to resolve disputes through dialogue and consultation amid escalating global turbulence, rampant unilateralism and economic coercion.
The two sides agreed that they should work together and meet each other halfway to make good preparations in economic and trade fields for important China-EU talks this year and promote the sound, stable and sustainable development of China-EU economic and trade relations, according to the MOFCOM press release.
The two officials had a face-to-face meeting earlier this month in Paris. Following the meeting on June 3, MOFCOM said in a statement on June 7 that the EV price commitment negotiations between China and the EU have entered the final stage, though further efforts are still required from both parties.
According to the June 7 statement, both sides held focused, candid, and in-depth discussions on urgent and important issues, including the EU’s anti-subsidy case against Chinese EVs, China’s anti-dumping probe into EU brandy, and export controls.
Both sides called on their working teams to intensify efforts in preparing for this year’s major China-EU economic and trade talks, per the June 7 statement.
According to a separate statement on June 7, MOFCOM said that China is willing to further enhance exchanges and dialogue over export controls on rare earths with relevant countries, to promote and facilitate compliant trade.
The two meetings took place as some Western media outlets, including the Financial Times, claimed on June 17 that the EU has refused to hold a high-level economic meeting with Beijing because of a lack of progress on numerous trade disputes, citing sources.
“In the face of rising uncertainty and trade protectionism, the continued communication between China and Europe reflects both sides’ willingness to strengthen bilateral negotiations or coordination mechanisms to jointly address economic and trade friction and disputes,” Jian Junbo, deputy director of the Center for China-Europe Relations at Fudan University’s Institute of International Studies, told the media on Friday.
At press conferences this week, spokespeople for China’s Foreign Ministry and MOFCOM both stated that China and the EU have maintained communication on trade and economic issues.
At a time of escalating global turbulence, rampant unilateralism and economic coercion, enhanced strategic communication and deepened dialogue and cooperation between China and the EU will benefit both sides and the world, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun told a routine press conference on June 17.
However, the Foreign Ministry also lambasted the decision by the European Commission (EC) on Friday to restrict Chinese companies from participating in medical equipment tenders worth over 5 million euros ($5.76 million) – a move it claimed was in response to China’s restrictive measures against European firms operating in China.
Asked to comment on the EC’s decision, Guo pointed out that China is committed to high-standard opening-up, upholding the principles of market economy and WTO rules, and solving trade disputes through dialogue and consultation.
“The EU claims to be one of the most open markets in the world, but in reality has been inching toward protectionism,” the spokesperson said, noting that the bloc frequently resorts to unilateral trade tools, competing unfairly in the name of fair competition – a typical example of double standard.
Jian said unilateral measures are unhelpful in resolving trade conflicts, as they only exacerbate bilateral tensions. “Such actions are not conducive to solving disputes.”
