OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023

CHINA AND EUROPEAN UNION COUNTRIES: DO CHINESE PARTNERSHIPS

BOOST COOPERATION RESULTS?

CÁTIA MIRIAM COSTA

catia.miriam.costa@iscte-iul.pt

Researcher at the Centre for International Studies (ISCTE-IUL, Portugal) and invited professor at

the same university. She is also Director of the Global Iberoamerica Chair of the European

Institute of International Studies, Stockholm, Salamanca. She coordinates two international

Erasmus+ projects and is ISCTE’s alternate representative in UNESCO’s Academy programme.

She has numerous publications in English, Portuguese, Spanish, and French. Her main areas of

research are Chinese Foreign Policy, Macau, Sea and Globalisation, International Communication,

and Discourse Analysis. She was an advisor to the Secretary of State of Internationalization of

the Portuguese Republic until April 2022.

YICHAO LI

A18092105144@cityu.mo

Ph.D. from the Institute for Research on Portuguese-speaking Countries, City University of

Macau. She also received a master’s degree in comparative civil law (in Chinese) from the

University of Macau, and a Bachelor of Laws from Nanjing University of Information Science &

Technology, China. From 2021 to 2022, she has been a postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for

International Studies (ISCTE-IUL, Portugal). Her current research interests are the Belt and Road

Initiative and Portuguese-speaking countries.

Abstract

The People’s Republic of China and countries of the European Union (EU) have signed multiple

diplomatic documents for cooperation under different types of conception. France was the first

EU country to start a comprehensive partnership with China in 1997, and, by 2021, among

the 27 EU member countries, 19 had already established partnerships with China (the

exceptions were Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Slovakia, Slovenia, and

Sweden). Since the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was announced in 2013, 18 EU member

states (except Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Spain, and

Sweden) have signed MoUs with China. What this study investigates, however, is why some

of the countries have opted to sign a BRI MoU but not establish partnerships with China. On

the other hand, some countries that have long had partnerships with China have deepened or

strengthened those partnerships, yet have not signed a BRI MoU. The current study is

therefore motivated to pose this main research question: To what extent does the Chinese

partnership framework facilitate practical cooperation between EU countries and China? The

study also poses these secondary questions: What are the main differences between these

cooperation documents? Do such differences in documentation result in discrepancies in the

nature of cooperation? From a bilateral state-to-state perspective, the study compares joint

statements pertaining to Chinese partnerships with different EU countries, analyzing how

closely they are tailored to each European country’s specificity. Through reviewing the

literature, the authors gather data concerning the outcomes of cooperations on trade and

investment between China and EU member states, and analyze any official diplomatic

documents available.

Keywords

Belt and Road Initiative, Chinese Partnerships, EU, FDI, Trade, Investment.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Resumo

A República Popular da China e os países da União Europeia (UE) assinaram vários acordos

diplomáticos para cooperação sob diferentes tipos de concepção. A França foi o primeiro país

da UE a iniciar uma parceria abrangente com a China em 1997 e, até 2021, entre os 27 países

membros da UE, 19 já haviam estabelecido parcerias com a China (as exceções foram Estónia,

Letónia, Lituânia, Luxemburgo, Malta, Eslováquia , Eslovénia e Suécia). Desde que a Nova

Rota da Seda (NRS) foi anunciada em 2013, 18 estados membros da UE (exceto Bélgica,

Dinamarca, Finlândia, França, Alemanha, Irlanda, Holanda, Espanha e Suécia) assinaram

Memorandos de Entedimento (MdE) com a China. Este estudo investiga, no entanto, porque

razão alguns dos países optaram por assinar um MdE da NRS, mas não estabelecer parcerias

com a China. Por outro lado, alguns países que há muito mantêm parcerias com a China

aprofundaram ou fortaleceram essas parcerias, mas ainda não assinaram um MdE da NRS. O

presente estudo coloca como principal questão de investigação: até que ponto o quadro de

parceria chinês facilita a cooperação prática entre os países da UE e a China? O estudo também

coloca as seguintes questões secundárias: Quais são as principais diferenças entre estes

documentos de cooperação? Essas diferenças na documentação resultam em discrepâncias

na natureza da cooperação? Numa perspetiva bilateral entre estados, o artigo compara

declarações conjuntas relativas a parcerias chinesas com diferentes países da UE, analisando

até que ponto estão adaptadas à especificidade de cada país europeu. Através da revisão da

literatura, as autoras coletam dados sobre os resultados da cooperação nas áreas do comércio

e do investimento entre a China e os estados membros da UE e analisam os documentos

diplomáticos oficiais disponíveis.

Palavras-chave

Nova Rota da Seda, Parcerias Chinesas, União Europeia, Investimento Direto Estrangeiro,

Comércio, Investimento

How to cite this article

Costa, Cátia Miriam, Li, Yichao (2023). China and European Union countries: Do Chinese

partnerships boost cooperation results?. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. VOL14

N1, TD1 – Thematic dossier “European Union-China relations”, September 2023. Consulted

[online] in date of last visit, https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.DT0123.1

Article received on November 26, 2022 and accepted for publication on January 16, 2023

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

CHINA AND EUROPEAN UNION COUNTRIES: DO CHINESE

PARTNERSHIPS BOOST COOPERATION RESULTS?

CÁTIA MIRIAM COSTA

YICHAO LI

1. Introduction

In post-1990s international relations, as the international order underwent gradual

reconfiguration, partnerships, especially strategic partnerships, became a fashionable

means for states to seek dialogue and cooperation with other states and/or with

regional/international organizations (Tyushka & Czechowska, 2019: 8 & 11). China

established its first strategic partnership in 1993 with Brazil

, and the European Union

(EU) established its first strategic partnership with Russia in 1998 (Pałłasz, 2015: 4).

Being two of the most important economies in the world, the EU and China held their

first summit in April 1998 during which they issued a joint statement

, declaring that

both sides hope to build and develop a 21st century–oriented long-term and stable

constructive partnership

. This description of the partnership between China and the EU

was expressed in the 4th summit in 2001 as “a comprehensive partnership”

and in the

6th summit in 2003 as “an overall [comprehensive] strategic partnership”

. As of 2022,

the China-EU Summit has been held 23 times, mostly annually, but with some

exceptions

. In addition, in December 2003, the EU adopted the European Security

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from

https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/ziliao_665539/3602_665543/3604_665547/200011/t20001117_697

843.html

In March 1998, according to a communication from the Commission of European Communities, Brussels

expressed wishes to build a comprehensive partnership with China. Retrieved on 13 July 2022, from

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:1998:0181:FIN:EN:PDF

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from

https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/ziliao_665539/3602_665543/3604_665547/200011/t20001117_697

888.html

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from

https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwie58bnlt34AhV

FxYUKHV3RCf8QFnoECBAQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fec.europa.eu%2Fcommission%2Fpresscorner%2Fa

pi%2Ffiles%2Fdocument%2Fprint%2Fen%2Fpres_01_312%2FPRES_01_312_EN.pdf&usg=AOvVaw08ACC

33L7c6Msr_-VBPyrt

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/er/77802.pdf

China-EU summits were held in neither the 2008 nor 2011, but took place in both in 2009 and 2012. In

2014, although the China-EU summit was not held, President Xi Jinping visited the EU’s headquarters in

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Strategy, in which particular emphasis was placed on developing a strategic partnership

with China (European Council, 2003: 16).

Till now, China has established various types (e.g., strategic) of partnerships with more

than 100 countries in the world (Li & Vicente, 2020: 207), while the EU has formed only

strategic partnerships with merely ten countries

. China and the EU also differ in their

choices of strategic partners and definitions of partnership. As explained by Stumbaum

and Xiong (2012: 163), China and the EU’s conceptual gap regarding signing a

partnership lies within their difference in the timeline and pace of implementing a

partnership: China pays more attention to keeping the flow of the partnership over the

long term, a point which is often reflected through positive, promotional language in the

partnership’s joint statement, in a view to achieving better cooperation and development

in the future (Brown, 2021: 14). For the EU, the immediacy of its strategic thinking

prompts it to place more emphasis on solving bilateral challenges that they face both

presently and in the short term (Stumbaum & Xiong, 2012: 164).

One aspect, however, is consistent between China and the EU’s understanding of a

partnership: whether in terms of quality or quantity, a partnership has to be (further)

developed through a dynamic and variable process. A partnership should therefore be

regarded as a “soft law” (i.e., it is not legally binding) (Li, 2021: 46; Cihelková, et al.,

2020: 1729 & 1737). This, however, to some extent, causes concern for the effectiveness

of partnerships. For example, this has led to the term “strategic partner(ship)” being

viewed as “ill-defined in EU usage”8. China does not have a clear, standardized way to

classify partnerships either. When assessing China-EU strategic partnerships, many

scholars find the concept of partnership either unclear (Sautenet, 2008: 11), imperfect

(Pałłasz, 2015: 7), or elusive (Maher, 2016), such that people may doubt whether the

two sides in fact regard each other as a strategic partner9. In regard to areas of

cooperation, indeed, the coverage has been widening, but no real strategy has formed

(Wouters & Burnay, 2012: 330). Yue (2018: 5) also believes that the Chinese partnership

network “is still an aspiration rather than a realistic blueprint.” Nevertheless, it is

undeniable that a partnership provides a platform for dialogue between the two sides. It

is therefore considered a diplomatic and relational approach, and, has, to a certain

extent, led to positive results (Hu & Pelkmans, 2020: 2–3).

The foremost premise of establishing a partnership with China is adherence to the “one-

China” policy and respect for Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity. Such is always

reiterated in the joint statement every time a Chinese partnership is established,

deepened, or upgraded. Generally speaking, a partnership is reached through dialogue

and provides a framework for bilateral cooperation, covering various cooperation areas,

such as politics, economy, culture, people-to-people exchanges, health, sustainability,

Brussels, and the two issued a joint statement to deepen their comprehensive strategic partnership for

attaining further mutual benefits. A China-EU summit did not take place in 2021 either.

The EU’s strategic partners are, namely, the U.S., Russia, Japan, Canada, China, India, Brazil, South Africa,

Mexico, and South Korea. Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/eu-

strategic-partnerships

Retrieved on 15 June 2022, from https://euobserver.com/eu-political/30828

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

and other regional or global affairs (Men & Jiang, 2020: 394). In 1997, France became

the first EU country to establish a comprehensive partnership with China

, and by 2021,

19 of the 27 EU member countries had established partnerships with China (except

Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden).

Christiansen, Kirchner, and Wissenbach (2019: 73) argue that the fact that China has

established separate bilateral partnerships with some EU countries affects coordination

between the EU and its member states and weakens the EU’s overall solidarity as it

engages China. Although this situation may happen to some extent, it needs to be

emphasized that all joint statements on the establishment of partnerships between China

and any EU countries reinforce that the two sides should continue to deepen bilateral

relations within the framework of comprehensive China-EU strategic partnership

complemented by partnerships between China and individual EU countries. This two-tier

framework shows that China is interested in using partnerships with each EU country to

advance its overall relations with the EU. There certainly is no direct, specific intention

of weakening Europe’s integration on the Chinese part.

As of March 2022, 146 countries in the world have signed memoranda of understanding

(MoUs) with China to become part of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)

. Among them

are 18 EU member states (EU countries that have not signed BRI MoUs with China are:

Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Spain, and

Sweden). Overall, the expansive network comprising these partnerships is an important

foothold for China to advance the BRI (Men & Jiang, 2020: 390).

Interestingly, however, it is notable that some EU countries that have not yet established

partnerships with China have instead signed BRI MoUs (e.g., Slovakia, Slovenia, Malta,

Luxembourg, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia). On the contrary, some countries that have long

established partnerships with China (and have even deepened or strengthened those

partnerships) have not signed BRI MoUs for the time being (e.g., Germany, France).

Furthermore, Garcia-Herrero and Xu (2019: 18) searched a global database of media

articles to quantitatively analyze the perceptions of BRI in different countries and regions.

Among the EU countries, the results are rather extreme: the Netherlands, which ranks

first in the tone of coverage related to BRI, has not signed an MoU, while Poland, who

ranks last in the tone of coverage related to BRI, was the second EU country to sign an

MoU (after Hungary) in 2015. Such paradoxical statuses motivate this main research

question of the paper: To what extent does the Chinese partnership framework facilitate

practical cooperation between EU countries and China? Further secondary questions have

also been proposed: What are the main differences between these cooperation

documents? Do such differences in documentation result in discrepancies in the nature

of cooperation? To offer answers to these questions, we gather data concerning

cooperations between China and EU member states on trade and investment, analyzing

them based on the timeline of the partnerships concerned — when they were established,

deepened/strengthened, and specific circumstances of the various countries involved.

Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from https://www.gov.cn/gongbao/shuju/1997/gwyb199717.pdf

Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from https://greenfdc.org/countries-of-the-belt-and-road-initiative-bri/

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

2. Grouping EU Countries by Types of Chinese Partnerships

Though all Chinese partnerships may be established on an equal basis, they likely differ

in terms of depth and breadth of cooperation. This is reflected through prepending

various descriptors — “strategic,” “comprehensive,” “all-round,” “reciprocal,” “friendly,”

and “innovative” — to the word “partnership.” The different descriptors express the

variability in the partnerships’ conceptualizations and characteristics, as well as show

that “China’s relations with different countries are developing at varying speeds” (Men &

Jiang, 2020: 392).

Generally speaking, a strategic partnership is of a higher level than a non-strategic

partnership (Li & Vicente, 2020: 210). As cooperation between two countries deepens,

their partnership agreement can be strengthened or upgraded, and the partnership may

therefore be re-described accordingly to reflect such change in the nature of cooperation.

Accordingly, we classify the 27 EU member states into four groups based on the type of

their current partnerships with China (with particular focus on whether the descriptor

“strategic” is present) (Table 1).

Table 1. Chinese Partnerships and BRI MoUs with EU Countries

Country

Current Types of Chinese Partnerships

(E – year of establishment, U – year of update)

BRI MoU Signing

Date

Group 1

Germany

All-round strategic partnership (U - 2014)12

Not signed

France

Comprehensive strategic partnership (U - 2004)13

Not signed

Italy

Comprehensive strategic partnership (E - 2004)

2019.03.23

Spain

Comprehensive strategic partnership (E - 2005)

Not signed

Poland

Comprehensive strategic partnership (U - 2016)14

2015.11.26

Hungary

Comprehensive strategic partnership (U - 2017)15

2015.06.06

Denmark

Comprehensive strategic partnership (E - 2008)

Not signed

Greece

Comprehensive strategic partnership (E - 2006)

2018.08.28

Portugal

Comprehensive strategic partnership (E - 2005)

2018.12.05

Group 2

Austria

Friendly strategic partnership (E - 2018)

2018.04.08

Ireland

Reciprocal strategic partnership (E - 2012)

Not signed

Czechia

Strategic partnership (E - 2016)

2015.11.26

Bulgaria

Strategic partnership (U - 2019)16

2015.11.26

Cyprus

Strategic partnership (E - 2021)

2019.04.25

Group 3

Belgium

All-round partnership of friendship and cooperation (E - 2014)

Not signed

Finland

Future-oriented new-type cooperative partnership (E - 2017)

Not signed

Netherlands

Comprehensive cooperative partnership (E - 2014)

Not signed

Croatia

Comprehensive cooperative partnership (E - 2005)

2017.05.16

Romania

Comprehensive friendly partnership of cooperation (E - 2004)

2017.05.13

China and Germany established a partnership with global responsibility within the framework of the China-

EU comprehensive strategic partnership in 2004.

China and France established a comprehensive partnership in 1997.

China and Poland established a friendly partnership of cooperation in 2004.

China and Hungary established a friendly partnership of cooperation in 2004.

China and Bulgaria established a comprehensive friendly partnership of cooperation in 2014.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Table 1. Chinese Partnerships and BRI MoUs with EU Countries

Country

Current Types of Chinese Partnerships

(E – year of establishment, U – year of update)

BRI MoU Signing

Date

Group 4

Sweden

Non-partnerships

Not signed

Slovakia

2015.11.26

Slovenia

2017.11.29

Malta

2018.11.05

Luxembourg

2019.03.23

Estonia

2017.11.29

Lithuania

2017.11.29

Latvia

2016.11

Source: Authors’ compilation. Retrieved on 13 April 2022,

from https://www.yidaiyilu.gov.cn/xwzx/roll/77298.htm and

https://www.mfa.gov.cn/web/gjhdq_676201/gj_676203/oz_678770/

All of the countries in Group 1 except Germany have established with China

comprehensive strategic partnerships that cover many cooperation areas, including

horizontal areas such as politics (e.g., bilateral dialogue, frequent reciprocal visits

between leaders, rule of law and human rights, security and military issues), economics

(e.g., reform global economic governance, investment and trade, technological

cooperation, development of small and medium-sized enterprises, intellectual property

protection), culture (e.g., establishment of cultural centres, Chinese year of cultural

activities, promotion of cultural diversity), people-to-people exchanges (e.g., tourism,

education, media, youth exchanges), health (e.g., agriculture and food security,

infectious disease prevention), environment (e.g., climate change, sustainability,

biodiversity). There are also vertical (i.e., in terms of the geographical scope of

cooperation) areas of cooperation: in addition to bilateral cooperation, regional and global

cooperations are also addressed, for example international issues including conflict

resolutions, counter-terrorism, the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,

refugees and illegal immigrants. Views on such international issues of mutual interest are

exchanged bilaterally. China and Germany have established an all-round strategic

partnership — an “all-round” partnership has one more dimension than a

“comprehensive” one, which is consultation between the governments of the two

partners. The Sino-German government consultations were established in 2010, six

rounds of which have been held so far.

The countries in Group 2 have strategic but non-comprehensive partnerships with China.

Compared with the countries in Group 1, those in Group 2 have narrower scopes of

cooperation, both horizontally and vertically. For instance, the frequency of bilateral

dialogue in the political field has reduced, discussions on reforming global economic

governance have not taken place, and focus on global affairs has also decreased. The

Chinese partnerships pertaining to Group 3 countries have been developing relatively

slowly, with little deepening or upgrading since being established. The countries in Group

4 have yet to formally establish partnerships with China.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Promoting economic development has always been the focus of both China and the EU

countries as they develop bilateral relations. The establishment, deepening and

upgrading of Chinese partnerships often happen during meetings between Chinese and

EU leaders

, with a view to not only building mutual trust and reaching political

consensus but also facilitating more practice in areas with potential for further or future

cooperation, especially if there is political support. In the following sections, we present

data on cooperations in trade and investment between China and EU member states. We

divide the EU countries into four groups for analysis.

3. Bilateral Trade in Goods

Since becoming a member of the WTO, China’s continuous expansion of export in the

21st century has had an impact on the EU. Of particular note is China’s capability to

maintain a trade surplus with the EU (Garcia-Herrero et al., 2020: 12–13). In 2021,

China was the EU’s biggest trading partner (total), ranking first as the EU’s import partner

and third as EU’s export partner

. Garcia-Herrero et al. (2020: 1) conclude that “China

is, and will continue to be, a major trade and investment partner for EU countries.” In

early 2022, the EU overtook the ASEAN to become China’s top trade partner.

In other

words, as Chen et al. (2021: 582) quantitatively demonstrate, the EU’s “share of trade

with China rose, while the share of trade with EU partners declined,” suggesting that “the

trade links with China weakened trade links among EU countries”. The chronic trade

imbalance between China and the EU has also raised questions about the notion of mutual

interests emphasized in Chinese partnerships. In this regard, the EU will work toward

obtaining greater reciprocity and balance, while from China’s standpoint, a “win-win”

outcome means that both sides will work hard together to periodically achieve their

respective goals, but not necessarily at a 50-50 split (Brown, 2021: 17).

The Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC) provides comprehensive data on the

import and export between China and EU member states from 2000 to 2020 (Annex I).

Figure 1 is obtained by adding up and averaging the volumes of import and export of

For example, the first China-EU Summit was held in 1998, hosted by Zhu Rongji, then Premier of China,

Tony Blair, then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and EU President, and Jacques Santer, President of

the European Commission. They issued a Joint Statement on China-EU Summit and reached a consensus

on their readiness to build and develop a 21st century–oriented long-term and stable constructive

partnership between them. Retrieved on 31 July 2022, from

https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/ziliao_665539/3602_665543/3604_665547/200011/t20001117_697

888.html

The Sixth China-EU Summit was held in 2003 in Beijing, hosted by Premier of the State Council Wen Jiabao

of the People’s Republic of China. The EU was represented by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in his

capacity as President of the European Council, as well as President of the European Commission Romano

Prodi and High Representative for the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana. Chinese

President Hu Jintao met with the visiting European leaders. The leaders expressed satisfaction on the

positive outcome of this Sixth Summit meeting, particularly for promoting the development of an overall

strategic partnership between China and the EU. Retrieved on 31 July 2022, from

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/er/77802.pdf

Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from

https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_122530.pdf

Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from

https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202203/18/WS6233da5ba310fd2b29e51a69.html

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

goods over 21 years. The following analysis is presented in conjunction with Annex I and

Figure 1:

(1) Generally speaking, the closer the partnership that an EU country has developed with

China, the larger and more frequent its trade with China will be. Figure 1 clearly

shows the difference in volume of bilateral trade in goods between countries that

have established a comprehensive strategic partnership with China (Group 1) and

Source: Authors’ compilation. Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from https://oec.world/en/rankings/eci/hs6/hs96

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

those in the other three groups, especially countries that have not established

partnerships (Group 4). The comparison is, however, not absolute: for example,

Sweden in Group 4, the Netherlands, Belgium, Finland in Group 3, and Czechia,

Ireland, and Austria in Group 2 all have more bilateral trade in goods with China than

Portugal and Greece in Group 1.

(2) As seen from Annex I, indeed, the bilateral trade volume between China and all EU

member states has grown considerably over the past 21 years, but fluctuations and

trade imbalances have remained. In Annex, I, the volume of trade export from most

EU member states to China (red line) has lagged behind import (blue line) for a long

time. There are two exceptions here: Germany and Ireland. From 2000 to 2012,

bilateral trade between China and Germany increased rapidly. Although China has

always had a trade surplus with Germany, the gap began to narrow significantly in

2010 (this was the onset of the Sino-German government consultation mechanism).

After that, China had several trade deficits with Germany, even though the gap, while

present, was very small. In other words, the development of bilateral trade between

China and Germany has been relatively balanced, mutually beneficial, and positive.

For Ireland, it is the only member of the EU that maintains a continuous trade surplus

with China over the recent several years, and the gap will likely continue to widen.

China and Ireland established a reciprocal strategic partnership in 2012. Integrated

circuits has always been a category accounting for a large proportion of Ireland’s

export to China. In 2020, Ireland exported in total $11.2B worth of integrated

circuits, $6.91B of which to China

. In the same year, integrated circuits made up

Ireland’s fourth largest export, and Ireland was the second largest exporter of

integrated circuits in Europe, after Germany.

(3) Another noteworthy point is that although China has always had a trade surplus with

the majority of EU countries, the larger surpluses mainly belong to Group 1 countries

(e.g., France, Italy, Poland and Spain). Czechia (Group 2) and the Netherlands

(Group 3) also have relatively large surpluses, with the Netherlands having the

largest gap among all EU countries. Conversely, for those countries in Group 4 that

are not in partnership with China, though they have trade deficits with China, the

gap is not large. Butter and Hayat (2008) did an empirical analysis and showed that

the main determinant of the Netherlands’ import growth from China was in-house

offshoring to China. Another factor has been the “Rotterdam effect,” as the port of

Rotterdam is an important entry point for products to enter into the EU (Garcia-

Herrero et al., 2020: 13–14). Suyker and Wagteveld (2019: 6) also believe that due

to its “gateway function,” the Netherlands has been accumulating deficits with China

since 2000. This means that products from China will arrive in the Netherlands first,

before being re-exported to their final destinations in the rest of Europe.

Retrieved on 11 July 2022, from https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/integrated-

circuits/reporter/irl?yearExportSelector=exportYear1

Retrieved on 11 July 2022, from https://oec.world/en/profile/hs/integrated-circuits

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Table 2 contains data collected from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) and

lists the top three import and export trading partners of each EU member state in 2019.

In terms of major trading partners of individual EU member states, China has ranked as

Germany’s main partner in both import and export. China is also one of the main import

partners of France, Italy, Spain, Poland, Czechia, and the Netherlands, while these

countries have had relatively large trade deficits with China. These results shown in Table

2 are consistent with our previous point. Interestingly, for Group 4 countries (those that

have not established partnerships with China), China has little influence over their import

or export trade.

Table 2. Top 3 Trading Partners for EU Countries in 2019

Groups

Countries

Top 3 Export Destination

Countries/Regions

Top 3 Import Origin

Countries/Regions

1st

2nd

3rd

1st

2nd

3rd

Group

Germany

USA

France

China

Netherlands

USA

France

Germany

USA

Italy

Germany

China

Italy

Germany

France

USA

Germany

France

China

Spain

France

Germany

Italy

Germany

France

China

Poland

Germany

Czechia

Germany

China

Russia

Hungary

Germany

Slovakia

Italy

Germany

Austria

China

Denmark

Special

categories

Germany

Sweden

Germany

Sweden

Netherlands

Greece

Italy

Germany

Turkey

Germany

Iraq

Italy

Portugal

Spain

France

Germany

Spain

Germany

France

Group

Austria

Germany

USA

Italy

Germany

Italy

China

Ireland

USA

Belgium

USA

France

Czechia

Germany

Slovakia

Poland

Germany

China

Poland

Bulgaria

Germany

Romania

Italy

Germany

Russia

Italy

Cyprus

Netherlands

Bunkers

Libya

Greece

Italy

Group

Belgium

Germany

France

Netherlands

Germany

France

Finland

Germany

Sweden

USA

Germany

Russia

Sweden

Netherlands

Germany

Belgium

France

Germany

Belgium

China

Croatia

Italy

Germany

Slovenia

Germany

Italy

Slovenia

Romania

Germany

Italy

France

Germany

Italy

Hungary

Group

Sweden

Norway

Germany

USA

Germany

Netherlands

Norway

Slovakia

Germany

Czechia

Poland

Germany

Czechia

Unspecified

Slovenia

Germany

Italy

Croatia

Germany

Italy

Switzerland

Malta

Bunkers

Germany

Italy

Germany

Luxembourg

Germany

France

Belgium

Germany

France

Estonia

Finland

Sweden

Latvia

Germany

Russia

Finland

Lithuania

Russia

Latvia

Poland

Russia

Poland

Germany

Latvia

Lithuania

Estonia

Russia

Lithuania

Germany

Poland

Source: Authors’ compilation. Retrieved on 10 July 2022, from https://wits.worldbank.org

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

In short, from the data of bilateral trade in goods between China and EU countries from

2000 to 2020, it can be shown that, generally speaking, the closer the partnership that

a country has established with China, the greater the trade volume between the two

sides will be, and the more influence China will have. For instance, countries in Group 1

(e.g., Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, and Hungary), which have established all-

round/comprehensive strategic partnerships with China, have relatively high trade

volumes in both directions. There are, however, exceptions: Czechia in Group 2 and the

Netherlands in Group 3 also perform well in bilateral trade in goods. If we look at each

time that a partnership was established, deepened, or upgraded (including the times

when a BRI MoU was signed) in conjunction with Annex I, we find no evidence that the

aim was to bring immediate positive impact to both parties on trade in goods. In other

words, every time a partnership is established, deepened or upgraded, it may not be

immediately reflected in bilateral trade in goods in the following year. Instead, trade in

goods is a long-term process that involves other factors as well.

4. Bilateral Trade in Services and Foreign Direct Investment

Compared with trade in goods, the scale of trade in services and foreign direct investment

(FDI) between China and the EU is relatively small. The EU is the world’s largest trader

in services. Trade in services accounts for 25% of the EU’s GDP, and 60% of all of EU’s

FDI to the rest of the world is in services (European Commission, 2021: 18). Unlike the

trade in goods situation, in which the EU has a deficit with China, in trade in services the

EU has a surplus with China

. Although China’s ranking among EU’s trading partners in

services is not far behind, it trails by some distance both the UK and the U.S. (top two)

in terms of volume

Table 3. Balance of Trade in Services between EU Countries and China: 2013-2020 (Million €)

Groups

Countries

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Group

Germany

1,625.0

2,914.0

5,216.0

5,509.0

6,288.0

8,873.0

7,934.0

7,364.0

France

458.0

986.0

2,487.0

1,063.0

3,550.0

4,248.0

5,045.0

3,303.0

Italy

-457.4

-338.7

-492.6

-705.2

-729.5

-399.4

-114.9

418.9

Spain

-356.0

-493.0

-549.0

-286.0

-391.0

81.0

42.0

-526.0

Poland

-27.2

0.7

36.8

13.5

-23.5

-28.2

-88.2

-250.3

Hungary

-56.9

-25.7

-46.3

25.7

19.6

257.7

305.0

-39.9

Denmark

1,360.8

1,060.4

466.8

134.9

499.3

476.4

511.1

626.5

Greece

-177.7

-133.1

769.8

647.9

944.4

1,045.5

1,083.3

933.9

Portugal

-53.0

-107.0

-144.0

-105.0

-71.0

-46.0

-58.0

-267.0

Group

Austria

20.0

235.0

160.0

185.0

123.0

217.0

197.0

61.0

Ireland

1,077.0

1,061.0

3,029.0

1,128.0

2,405.0

1,978.0

Czechia

-414.2

-303.3

-498.9

-405.3

-416.2

-513.6

-586.1

-886.9

Bulgaria

-8.6

-31.6

-17.0

-26.4

-16.8

3.1

2.6

-6.7

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-

region/countries-and-regions/china_en

Retrieved on 11 July 2022, from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

explained/index.php?title=International_trade_in_services#General_overview

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Cyprus

8.0

34.0

42.0

12.0

3.0

-17.0

-40.0

-17.0

Group

Belgium

230.0

263.0

181.0

183.0

244.0

156.0

395.0

445.0

Finland

-155.0

-314.0

-110.0

375.0

476.0

487.0

739.0

468.0

Netherlands

-103.0

-565.4

-451.9

-1,661.7

-1,211.9

-857.5

575.2

1,204.3

Croatia

4.4

3.7

11.6

24.2

24.4

23.7

11.6

6.8

Romania

-16.7

-8.3

-22.5

-17.6

-33.9

-35.5

-48.7

-46.5

Group

Sweden

103.7

-158.5

434.3

801.0

801.3

207.6

573.3

309.0

Slovakia

-14.7

-45.8

-60.3

-61.5

-41.4

-11.1

-8.1

-53.0

Slovenia

2.5

2.3

-1.4

12.4

15.3

23.2

22.4

-11.0

Malta

-11.0

-13.0

-6.0

13.0

-14.3

Luxembourg

281.0

617.0

1,122.0

1,239.0

779.0

913.0

880.0

958.0

Estonia

-36.6

-32.4

-33.7

-37.1

-41.4

-32.3

15.7

-9.6

Lithuania

-10.8

18.7

2.7

1.5

1.8

12.1

-22.2

Latvia

-31.0

-46.0

-53.0

-49.0

-55.0

-56.0

-32.0

-49.0

Note: “c” means data is confidential.

Source: Authors’ compilation. Retrieved on 13 April 2022,

from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/bop_its6_tot/default/table?lang=en

According to data from Eurostat, from 2013 to 2020, in terms of trade in services, seven

EU countries were always in surplus, and five always in deficit with China. The other 15

countries fluctuated between surplus and deficit during those eight years. Sweden and

Greece turned from deficit to surplus with China in 2015, while Finland did so in 2016

(Table 3). Although the countries in Group 1 had more eye-catching performances, no

correlation between the types of partnership and balance in trade in services could be

identified. Taking Luxembourg in Group 4 as an example, according to data from the

OECD, in 2018, among Luxembourg’s exported services to China, transportation,

financial services, and other business services had the highest values.

At the same

time, among countries that were always in surplus with China in trade in services, the

largest proportions pertained to these categories: royalties and licence fees, other

business services,

transportation, and travel.

Table 4. Czechia Trade in Services Import to China 2013-2020 (Million €)

Year

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

TOTAL TRADE IN

SERVICES

558

627

820

770

856

1076

1210

1260

Transport

491

558

732

691

770

958

1097

1157

Sea Transport

Air Transport

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-country/chn/partner/lux

According to EBOPS 2010 services components, other business services mainly included: (1) Provision of

customized and non-customized research, sale of proprietary rights arising from research and development,

other research and development services; (2) Legal services, accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax

consulting services, business and management consulting and public relations services, advertising, market

research, and public opinion polling; (3) Architectural services, engineering services, scientific and other

technical services, waste treatment and de-pollution, services incidental to agriculture, forestry and fishing,

operating leasing services, trade-related services, other business services. Retrieved on 13 July 2022, from

https://unstats.un.org/unsd/tradeserv/tfsits/msits2010/ebops2cpc_detailed.htm#ebops10

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Other Modes of

Transport26

441

508

674

635

716

867

995

1061

……

Transport/Total Trade in

Services

87.99%

88.99%

89.27%

89.74%

89.95%

89.03%

90.66%

91.83%

Source: Authors’ compilation. Retrieved on 13 July 2022, from

https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TISP_EBOPS2010#

Another outlier is Group 2’s Czechia, who has always had a deficit with China in trade in

services that seems to be expanding. The OECD provides detailed statistics on specific

categories of Czechia’s trade in services. The same can be observed from Eurostat’s

records: from 2013 to 2020, Czechia had a deficit in trade in services with China

throughout. An interesting finding is that transportation accounts for about 90% of

Czechia’s total exported services to China. Within the transportation category, railway

and road transport had the main shares, while air and sea transport accounted for only

a small proportion (Table 4). Among the EU countries, Czechia and Cyprus were the only

two that had signed a BRI MoU before formally establishing a strategic partnership with

China. In November 2015, China and Czechia signed a BRI MoU, and the two established

in March 2016 a strategic partnership. Their joint statement assured that they will

strengthen cooperation in connectivity, tapping the enormous of potential within such

fields as infrastructure construction, direct flights, logistics, and transportation.

September 2017, China Railway Express from Yiwu to Prague commenced. In addition,

China supports Czechia to become a financial centre of Central and Eastern Europe and

is willing to further strengthen financial cooperation with Czechia. In April 2016, the Bank

of China planned to officially open a branch in Prague

. In 2017 and 2019, the Industrial

and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC)

and Bank of Communications

also established

Prague branches to provide account services, corporate financing services, international

settlement and trade financing services, and treasury services.

In the 1990s, FDI from the EU to China grew rapidly, but has declined since the beginning

of the 21st century. The decline worsened due to the impact of the economic crisis, but

then in 2018 rose back to pre–economic crisis levels. Due to COVID-19, however, FDI

fell back to US$5.7 billion (a year-on-year decrease of 11.8%), accounting for 3.8% of

total trade (Figure 2). Kratz, Barkin and Dudley (2022) reviewed trends in European FDI

to China from 2000 to 2021 and found that European FDI in China in terms of countries

of origin are relatively concentrated, mainly including Germany (Group 1), Netherlands

According to EBOPS 2010 services components, other modes of transport mainly included: (1) Space

transport; (2) Rail transport; (3) Road transport; (4) Inland waterway transport; (5) Pipeline transport; (6)

Electricity transmission; (7) Other supporting and auxiliary services. Retrieved on 13 July 2022, from

https://unstats.un.org/unsd/tradeserv/tfsits/msits2010/ebops2cpc_detailed.htm#ebops10

Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from https://www.mfa.gov.cn/ce/cecz/chn/zjgx/zywx/t1621576.htm

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2016-

03/31/content_24214014.htm

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from https://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2017-

09/13/content_31933680.htm

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from http://www.china-

ceec.org/eng/hzjl_1/glyhz/jm1/201905/t20190521_6830385.htm

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

(Group 3), the UK and France (Group 1). These four countries accounted for an average

of 87% of total investment value in 2018-2021 and 69% in the last decade (2012-2021).

So far, Germany is the largest investor, with German firms accounting for more than half

of all European investment in China in 2018. The auto sector stands out in terms of

sectors, which consistently represents about a third of all European direct investment in

China. As a matter of fact, in 2020, 83% of FDI in China came from ten Asian

countries/regions

far exceeding FDI coming from the EU (MOFCOM, 2021: 8–9).

Meanwhile, Chinese FDI in the EU amounted to a similar amount. One research shows

that China’s OFDI focuses on less technologically advanced countries that are rich in

natural resources (Liu et al., 2022: 21). Brown (2012: 83–84) also believes that in terms

of factors affecting China’s overseas investment, indeed, the EU and China are major

trading partners of one another, with a broad market and an open economic environment.

However, not only does the EU not have advantages in resources, its distance from China

and small number of ethnic Chinese makes it a challenge to compete with many Asian

countries. In the EY Europe Attractiveness Survey 2022 (48–49), among the top 20

European countries that receive FDI, China is the second largest investor in Germany;

The ten Asian countries/regions are: Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Macau, Malaysia, the Philippines,

Singapore, Republic of Korea, Thailand, and Taiwan.

Note: Statistics of EU’s investment in China from 1987 to 2019 include investment from UK investors, which

is no longer included since 2020.

Source: MOFCOM, 2021: 28.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

for the rest of the countries, the top three investors are almost always either the U.S. or

other European countries.

With data from the Statistical Bulletin of China’s Outward Foreign Direct Investment,

Annex II presents the growth of China’s outward FDI stock in EU countries, showing large

increases from 2007 to 2020. Similar to trade in services (above), the types of

partnership between China and the EU countries do not correlate definitely to the size of

China’s outward FDI stock. Figure 4 presents an overview of China’s outward FDI stock

to EU countries in 2020: nearly half of the stock went to EU countries in Group 1, with

FDI exceeding US$1,000 million, with the Netherlands in Group 3 and Sweden and

Luxembourg in Group 4 being other notable receivers. Similar observations can also be

made from examining the cumulative values of transactions involving Chinese investment

in Europe from 2000 to 2021, according to data from a report by Rhodium Group &

MERICS: Overall, Group 1 EU countries have the highest cumulative value of Chinese

investment, with the Netherlands and Finland in Group 3, and Sweden and Luxembourg

in Group 4 forming a prominent part of that tally (Figure 3).

Source: Rhodium Group & MERICS, 2022: 7.

Source: 2020 Statistical Bulletin of China’s Outward Foreign Direct

Investment, p. 168. https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2021-

09/29/5639984/files/a3015be4dc1f45458513ab39691d37dd.pdf

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

In 2021, the financial sector accounted for 5% of the total FDI in Europe, 20% of which

pertained to Luxembourg. Although this percentage of Luxembourg was lower than

2020’s (i.e., the figure has been decreasing), Luxembourg remains the largest

investment centre in Europe, and, globally, second only to the United States (Wintgens,

2022). At the same time, Luxembourg is the largest investment fund centre in Europe,

and is seen as a gateway between China and the EU and even other countries

. Six large

Chinese banks have chosen Luxembourg as a hub for their European operations,

establishing their European headquarters there (Deloitte, 2015: 3). More than 40% of

Chinese investment in Europe has passed through Luxembourg. This is mainly due to

Luxembourg’s tax policies, stable regulatory environment, and ecosystem, which mainly

means easy access to experts in relevant areas for solutions to their problems

. In fact,

Ireland and Luxembourg have a lot in common, not least for having the reputation for

being fund domiciles for a wide array of investment funds (Nadaud, 2022). Moreover,

Chinese greenfield investment in Europe has grown rapidly over the past two years,

reaching 3.3 billion euros in 2021, up 51% from 2020’s level, which mainly benefited

from several large deals in the automotive and information and communication

technology (ICT) sectors, including ByteDance’s data centre in Ireland (Rhodium Group

& MERICS, 2022: 10–11).

The Nordic countries of Sweden and Finland have not shown a strong interest in the BRI.

However, though their bilateral trade in goods and services as well as FDI with China are

not at the very top among EU countries, they are not far behind either. Forsby (2019: X)

believes that “Nordic expertise, technology and innovation skills are in high demand in

China, especially with respect to green growth and sustainable development solutions

that are critical to China’s overall modernization objectives.” This is clearly reflected in

the future-oriented new-type cooperative partnership that Finland established with China

in 2017. The joint statement emphasized that the two countries will expand and deepen

practical cooperation in trade and investment, innovation, environmental protection,

urbanization and other fields, including (1) developing a circular economy, improving

resource utilization efficiency, and promoting sustainable development; (2) developing

new-type urbanization and green ecological smart city construction; (3) exploring the

potential for cooperation in the fields of transport and ICT; (4) exchanging and sharing

experience related to welfare solutions; (5) cooperating in relevant Arctic areas

Overall, there is still a lot of room for improvement in cooperation between China and EU

countries in terms of bilateral trade in services and FDI. Combining the data on trade in

services and FDI from both sides shows no definite correlation between the type of

partnership and the total value of trade in services and FDI; more appears to depend on

the countries’ own development conditions, resources, and abilities to attract investment,

as well as the whole international environment. However, the establishment of Chinese

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-11/30/c_139553724.htm

Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from https://www.bdo.lu/en-gb/insights/business-services-outsourcing-

en/new-china-eu-investment-deal-possible-implications-for-luxembourg

Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from

https://www.mfa.gov.cn/web/gjhdq_676201/gj_676203/oz_678770/1206_679210/1207_679222/201704

/t20170405_9339825.shtml

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

partnerships has indeed played a positive role in promoting the development of trade in

services and FDI with certain EU countries (e.g., Czechia).

5. Conclusion

Considering which EU countries have established partnerships and which ones have

signed BRI MoUs with China, we have proposed this main research question: To what

extent does the Chinese partnership framework facilitate practical cooperation between

EU countries and China? We have also put forth these secondary questions: What are

the main differences between these cooperation documents? Do such differences in

documentation result in discrepancies in the nature of cooperation?

After analyzing and comparing data on bilateral trade in goods, trade in services, and

FDI between China and EU countries over the years (economic cooperation), we believe

that Chinese partnerships contribute to boosting cooperation results, but it has a political

framework that goes beyond economic results. Meanwhile, the different types and

specificities of partnerships between China and the EU countries add complexity and

difficulty to a comparative study of all partnerships, as each nation’s economy and market

have individual specificities. This process demonstrates the creativity on China’s part in

adapting models to specific situations, which we have demonstrated in a previous study

concerning the development of different types of special economic zones (SEZs) in China

(Li & Costa, 2021). Trade in goods, services and FDI between China and all EU countries

have been growing over the years, whether or not those EU countries have established

Chinese partnerships. However, there is no evidence to suggest that the growth of

economic relations with China can be achieved immediately after a Chinese partnership

has been established, upgraded, or deepened. Nevertheless, economic development

requires stable political relations, and Chinese partnerships have been playing precisely

that role, paving the way for stable, long-term development and cooperation of economic

and trade relations between China and EU countries.

All Chinese partnerships have a similar building process. Each partnership’s joint

statement signifies a consensus reached by both partners after their heads of states have

met and expressed satisfaction (on behalf of the countries) with the establishment,

deepening, or upgrading of their partnership. However, the joint statement, though

reached, is not legally binding, but its core principle and premise adhere to the “One-

China” policy. The joint statements of Chinese partnerships usually include three main

parts: (1) an affirmation of current bilateral relations and reaffirmation of historical ties

or prior relations (if any); (2) a discussion on potential areas of cooperation and

development; (3) an exchange of regional or international situations and affairs.

Within the flexible and political framework provided by Chinese partnerships, the areas

of cooperation between the two parties cover many aspects such as politics, economy,

culture, environment, and public health. These areas are not limited to bilateral

cooperation; they can also be regional or global. Therefore, the main difference in the

documentations of these cooperations is that, according to China’s interests and the

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

characteristics of each EU country, the areas of bilateral cooperation can be diverse.

Furthermore, the agreements result in different kinds of cooperation that are sector-

specific. For example, in maritime cooperation, China and Portugal have developed a blue

partnership and are prepared to build a STARLab to promote new aerospace cooperation

and develop a blue economy from both sides. In terms of third-party markets, China and

Austria, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and the Netherlands believe that there is potential

to continue seeking development in cooperation with such markets. Africa and Latin

America are in particular drawing more attention for third-market cooperation between

China and Portugal, and China and Spain.

Last but not least, countries that have established partnerships but not signed BRI MoUs

have much more frequent economic exchanges than those that have signed BRI MoUs.

In fact, half of the EU countries that have not established partnerships but signed BRI

MoUs are members of the China and Central and Eastern European Countries (China-

CEEC, the “16+1”) Cooperation. The “16+1” initiative can be regarded as part of the BRI,

and these Central and Eastern European countries provide a strategic link between Asia

and Western Europe, which can greatly impact the success of the BRI (Jaklič & Svetličič,

2019: 84). China has devised a strategic approach by adapting the BRI discourse to

diverse circumstances and audiences, thereby paving the way for cooperating with

European countries even before establishing partnerships with them (Costa, 2020: 41).

Economic relations are complex due to asymmetries and interdependence between

countries. “A fruitful and balanced co-existence should be the aim of EU-China economic

relations” (Garcia-Herrero et al., 2020: 69). Ultimately, although Chinese partnerships

are affected by the whole international environment and may be long and changeable,

they can provide a platform for bilateral dialogue, build a political framework for

cooperation, and positively impact the process towards achieving the goal.

References

Brown, K. (2012). China’s Overseas Investment in the European Union. The International

Spectator, Vol. 47, No. 2.

Brown, K. (2021). The EU and China in 2021: Separate Discourses, Similar or Different

Aims? The ASAN Forum. Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from https://theasanforum.org/the-

eu-and-china-in-2021-separate-discourses-similar-or-different-aims/

Butter, F. A. G., & Hayat, R. (2008). Trade between China and the Netherlands: A Case

Study of Globalization. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper.

Chen, H., Luo, C., Renard, M., Sun, S. (2021). EU-China Trade and Intra-EU Trade:

Substitute or Complementary? Special Issue: Globalization and Environment: The Roles

of China. Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 36, Issue 3.

Christiansen, T., Kirchner, E., & Wissenbach, U. (2019). The European Union and China.

Red Globe Press.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Cihelková, E., Nguyen, H. P., Fabuš, M., & Čimová, K. (2020). The EU Concept of the

“Strategic Partnership”: Identifying the “Unifying” Criteria for the Differentiation of

Strategic Partners. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, Vol. 7, No. 3.

Costa, C. M. (2020). The Words of the Belt and Road Initiative: A Chinese Discourse for

the World? In Leandro, F. & Duarte, P. (Eds.), The Belt and Road Initiative: An Old

Archetype of a New Development Model. Palgrave Macmillan.

Deloitte. (2015). Luxembourg: The European Hub for China. Retrieved on 13 July 2022,

from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/lu/Documents/int-markets/lu-

en-european-hub-china.pdf

European Commission. (2021). Trade Policy Review — An Open, Sustainable and

Assertive Trade Policy. Retrieved on 1 July 2022, from

https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/april/tradoc_159541.0270_EN_05.pdf

European Council. (2003). European Security Strategy. Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from

https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-15895-2003-INIT/en/pdf

EY Europe Attractiveness Survey. (2022). Retrieved on 13 July 2022, from

https://www.ey.com/en_gl/attractiveness

Forsby, A. B. (ed.). (2019). Nordic-China Cooperation: Challenges and Opportunities.

Nordic Institute of Asian Studies Press.

Garcia-Herrero, A. & Xu, J. (2019). Countries’ Perceptions of China’s Belt and Road

Initiative: A Big Data Analysis. Bruegel, Working paper, Issue 1. Retrieved on 1 May

2022, from https://www.bruegel.org/2019/02/countries-perceptions-of-chinas-belt-

and-road-initiative-a-big-data-analysis/

Garcia-Herrero, A., Wolff, G., Xu, J., Poitiers, N., Felbermayr, G., Langhammer, R., Liu,

W. H., Sandkamp, A. (2020). EU-China Trade and Investment Relations in Challenging

Times. European Union. Retrieved on 1 May 2022, from

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EXPO_STU(2020)603492

Hu, W. & Pelkmans, J. (2020). Can Dialogues Advance EU-China Trade Relations? CEPS

Research Report. Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from https://www.ceps.eu/wp-

content/uploads/2020/11/RR2020-05_EU-China-Dialogues-trade-relations.pdf

Jaklič, A., Svetličič, M. (2019). China and Central and Eastern European Countries within

‘16+1’: Group or Bilateral Relations? Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review,

Vol. 7, No. 2.

Li, Y. & Vicente, M. (2020). Chinese Partnerships and the Belt and Road Initiative: A

Synergetic Affiliation. In Leandro, F., Duarte, P. (eds.). The Belt and Road Initiative: An

Old Archetype of a New Development Model. Palgrave MacMillan.

Li. Y. (2021). Threefold Contributions Delivered by the Belt and Road Initiative: The Case

of Portuguese-speaking Countries. Doctoral thesis, City University of Macau.

Li, Y. & Costa, C. (2021). International and Domestic Discourses of China’s Special

Economic Zones: An Instrument for New Projects. In Leandro, F., Figueiredo, P., Li, Y.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

(eds.). Handbook of Research on Special Economic Zones as Regional Development

Enablers. IGI Global.

Liu, Y., Su, M., Zhao, J., Martin, S., Yuen, K. F., Lee, C. (2022). The Determinants of

China’s Outward Foreign Direct Investment: A Vector Error Correction Model Analysis of

Coastal and Landlocked Countries. Economic Change and Restructing, Springer.

Kratz, A., Barkin, N., & Dudley, L. (2022). The Chosen Few: A Fresh Look at European

FDI in China. Rhodium Group. Retrieved in January 2023, from

https://rhg.com/research/the-chosen-few/

Maher, R. (2016). The Elusive EU–China Strategic Partnership. International Affairs, Vol.

92, No. 4.

Men, H. & Jiang, P. (2020). The China-Italy Comprehensive Strategic Partnership:

Overview and Pathways to Progress. China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies,

Vol. 6, No. 4.

MOFCOM. (2021). Statistical Bulletin of FDI in China. Retrieved on 13 April 2022, from

http://images.mofcom.gov.cn/wzs/202111/20211125164038921.pdf

Nadaud, L. (2022). Luxembourg ranks first in number of foreign direct investment

projects per capita, shows first EY Attractiveness survey. Ernst & Young. Retrieved on 13

July 2022, from https://www.ey.com/en_lu/news/2022/07/luxembourg-ranks-first-in-

number-of-foreign-direct-investment-pr

Pałłasz, U. (2015). Strategic Partnership as an Instrument of EU Foreign Policy —

Workshop Report. Carleton University. Retrieved on 13 June 2022, from

https://www.egmontinstitute.be/content/uploads/2015/12/Strategic-Partnership-

Workshop-Report-final.pdf?type=pdf

Rhodium Group & MERICS. (2022). Chinese FDI in Europe 2021 Update: Investments

Remain on Downward Trajectory – Focus on Venture Capital. Retrieved on 1 July 2022,

from https://merics.org/en/report/chinese-fdi-europe-2021-update

Sautenet, A. (2008). Europe and China: Cooperation with Complex Legal Dimensions.

Stumbaum, M. U. & Xiong, W. (2012). Conceptual Differences of Strategic Partnership in

EU–China Relations. In Pan, Z. (ed.). Conceptual Gaps in China–EU Relations: Global

Governance, Human Rights and Strategic Partnerships. Palgrave Macmillan.

Suyker, W., & Wagteveld, S. (2019). A Fresh Look at the Dutch Current Account Surplus

and Its Driving Forces. CPB Background document.

Tyushka, A., & Czechowska, L. (2019). Strategic Partnerships, International Politics and

IR Theory. In Czechowska, L., Tyushka, A., Domachowska, A., Gawron-Tabor, K., &

Lamparska, J. P. (eds.), States, International Organizations and Strategic Partnerships.

Edward Elgar Publishing.

Wintgens, C. (2022). Think Tank: Consolidating Luxembourg’s Position as an Asset

Management Centre. Ernst & Young. Retrieved on 13 July 2022, from

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

https://www.ey.com/en_lu/wealth-asset-management/luxembourg-market-

pulse/think-tank--consolidating-luxembourg-s-position-as-an-asset-mana

Wouters, J., & Burnay, M. (2012). Concluding Remarks: China–EU Relations in Turbulent

Times: Which Way Forward? In Wouters, J., Wilde d’Estmael, T., Defraigne, P., Defraigne,

J. C. (eds.). China, The European Union and Global Governance. Edward Elgar.

Yue, S. (2018). Towards A Global Partnership Network: Implications, Evolution and

Prospects of China’s Partnership Diplomacy. The Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies,

Vol. 36, No. 2.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Annex I. Bilateral Trade in Goods 2000–2020 between China and EU Countries

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL14 N1, TD1

Thematic dossier - European Union-China relations

September 2023, pp. 10-43

China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results?

Cátia Miriam Costa, Yichao Li

Annex II

Groups

Countries

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Germany 845.41 845.5 1082.24 1502.29 2401.44 3104.35 3979.38 5785.50 5881.76 7841.75 12163.20 13688.61 14233.99 14549.58

France 126.81 167.13 221.03 243.62 3723.89 3 950.77 4 447.94 8 444.88 5 723.55 5 116.17 5 702.71 6 598.79 5 954.34 4 860.95

Italy 127.13 133.6 191.68 223.8 449.09 573.93 607.75 719.69 931.97 1 554.84 1 903.79 2 145.35 2 570.17 2 847.81

Spain 142.85 145.01 205.23 247.76 389.31 437.25 315.71 424.53 608.01 736.47 692.63 1 060.14 1 110.57 1 109.50

Poland 98.93 109.93 120.3 140.31 201.26 208.11 257.04 329.35 352.11 321.32 405.52 523.73 555.59 682.31

Hungary 78.17 88.75 97.41 465.7 475.35 507.41 532.35 556.35 571.11 313.70 327.86 320.69 427.36 341.87

Denmark 36.75 38.08 40.79 42.47 49.13 53.24 84.37 208.15 82.17 226.11 228.83 246.53 294.85 353.54

Greece 0.38 1.68 1.68 4.23 4.63 5.98 119.79 120.85 119.48 48.08 182.22 242.47 231.02 126.29

Portugal 1.71 1.71 5.02 21.37 33.13 40.38 55.32 60.69 71.42 87.74 110.23 105.93 58.57 45.78

Austria 4.04 4.04 1.55 2.01 24.54 79.46 76.66 201.70 327.99 530.51 851.49 461.63 492.18 675.23

Ireland 29.23 107.77 106.82 139.91 156.83 193.77 323.25 249.72 248.32 573.77 882.63 972.77 1 074.01 1 517.94

Czechia 19.64 32.43 49.34 52.33 66.83 202.45 204.68 242.69 224.31 227.77 164.90 279.23 287.49 1 198.43

Bulgaria 4.74 4.74 2.31 18.6 72.56 126.74 149.85 170.27 235.97 166.07 250.46 171.09 156.81 155.84

Cyprus 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 90.9 94.95 171.26 107.17 109.15 110.05 718.69 845.43 1 061.47 202.74

Belgium 33.98 33.3 56.91 101.01 140.5 230.69 315.01 493.47 519.53 544.03 479.23 326.41 470.95 500.63

Finland 0.94 3.59 9.04 27.25 31 34.03 42.55 58.99 95.07 211.70 213.07 327.54 340.38 306.62

Netherlands 138.76 234.42 335.87 486.71 664.68 1107.92 3193.09 4194.08 20067.13 20587.74 18529.00 19428.99 23854.82 26041.29

Croatia - - - - - 8.63 8.31 11.87 11.82 11.99 39.08 69.08 98.40 252.64

Romania 72.88 85.66 93.34 124.95 125.83 161.09 145.13 191.37 364.80 391.50 310.07 304.62 428.27 313.16

Sweden 146.93 157.59 111.89 1479.12 1531.22 2408.17 2737.71 3012.92 3381.96 3553.68 7307.42 6896.81 8578.69 10601.49

Slovakia 5.1 5.1 9.36 9.82 25.78 86.01 82.77 127.79 127.79 82.77 83.45 99.29 82.74 82.87

Slovenia 1.4 1.4 5 5 5 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 26.86 27.25 40. 09 189.60 46.80

Malta 1.87 4.81 5.03 0.2 3.37 3.37 3.49 5.42 10.45 163.64 164.98 230.49 229.32 172.53

Luxembourg 67.02 122.83 2484.38 5786.75 7081.97 8977.89 10423.76 15666.77 7739.88 8776.60 13936.15 15388.70 13902.21 15995.45

Estonia 1.26 1.26 7.5 7.5 7.5 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.62 56.84 63.33 5.32

Lithuania 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 6.97 12.48 12.48 12.48 15.29 17.13 12.89 9.81 12.23

Latvia 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.94 0.94 1.02 11.70 11.63 16.81

Group 4

Note: Croatia joined the EU in 2013.

Source: 2011 & 2020 Statistical Bulletin of China’s Outward Foreign Direct Investment.

http://aaa.ccpit.org/Category7/Asset/2014/Apr/22/onlineeditimages/file71398159735273.pdf & https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2021-

09/29/5639984/files/a3015be4dc1f45458513ab39691d37dd.pdf

China’s Outward FDI Stock in EU Countries: 2007-2020 (Millions of USD)

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3