EU Strategic Autonomy and the Perceived Challenge of China: Can Critical Hubs Be De-weaponized?

T. Poutala, Elina Sinkkonen, Mikael Mattlin
{"title":"EU Strategic Autonomy and the Perceived Challenge of China: Can Critical Hubs Be De-weaponized?","authors":"T. Poutala, Elina Sinkkonen, Mikael Mattlin","doi":"10.54648/eerr2022015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Geoeconomic competition, supply security vulnerabilities and complex technological dependencies challenge the European Union’s ‘strategic autonomy’. Evolving from more traditional security/ defence notions, a broader definition of strategic autonomy encompasses also economic dimensions. Economic resilience underpins security and defence arrangements. The EU has lacked instruments for protection against ‘predatory’ strategic investments by external actors, and technological dependence on potential strategic rivals. This article analyses two critical hubs, or potential ‘chokepoints’, in the EU’s attempts to achieve strategic autonomy – critical maritime transport infrastructure and 5G – as well as countermeasures developed by the EU. Chinese enterprises have made strategic investments in key EU infrastructure and high-tech industries over the past decade. In response, the EU has established an investment screening framework to screen (authorize, issue condition, prohibit or unwind) inward foreign direct investment (FDI) on security or public order grounds, and activated a mechanism for the enhancement of coordination and cooperation between the Commission and Member States. The EU has also sought to reduce reliance on Chinese suppliers by introducing the ‘5G toolbox’. We argue that the EU aims to ‘de-weaponize’ these two potential chokepoints. However, our article concludes that the political goal of strategic autonomy vis-à-vis external actors is hampered by the competence limitations of the Union to act in critical areas. Ultimately, much of the heavy lifting on implementing EU policy goals still falls upon Members States with varied economic and security interests.\nchokepoint effects, critical hubs, strategic autonomy, interdependence, investment screening, 5G toolbox","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European foreign affairs review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2022015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Geoeconomic competition, supply security vulnerabilities and complex technological dependencies challenge the European Union’s ‘strategic autonomy’. Evolving from more traditional security/ defence notions, a broader definition of strategic autonomy encompasses also economic dimensions. Economic resilience underpins security and defence arrangements. The EU has lacked instruments for protection against ‘predatory’ strategic investments by external actors, and technological dependence on potential strategic rivals. This article analyses two critical hubs, or potential ‘chokepoints’, in the EU’s attempts to achieve strategic autonomy – critical maritime transport infrastructure and 5G – as well as countermeasures developed by the EU. Chinese enterprises have made strategic investments in key EU infrastructure and high-tech industries over the past decade. In response, the EU has established an investment screening framework to screen (authorize, issue condition, prohibit or unwind) inward foreign direct investment (FDI) on security or public order grounds, and activated a mechanism for the enhancement of coordination and cooperation between the Commission and Member States. The EU has also sought to reduce reliance on Chinese suppliers by introducing the ‘5G toolbox’. We argue that the EU aims to ‘de-weaponize’ these two potential chokepoints. However, our article concludes that the political goal of strategic autonomy vis-à-vis external actors is hampered by the competence limitations of the Union to act in critical areas. Ultimately, much of the heavy lifting on implementing EU policy goals still falls upon Members States with varied economic and security interests. chokepoint effects, critical hubs, strategic autonomy, interdependence, investment screening, 5G toolbox
欧盟战略自主与中国的感知挑战:关键枢纽能否去武器化?
地缘经济竞争、供应安全漏洞和复杂的技术依赖性挑战着欧盟的“战略自主性”。从更传统的安全/国防概念演变而来,战略自主的更广泛定义也包括经济层面。经济弹性是安全和国防安排的基础。欧盟缺乏防范外部行为者“掠夺性”战略投资以及对潜在战略竞争对手的技术依赖的工具。本文分析了欧盟试图实现战略自主的两个关键枢纽或潜在的“瓶颈”——关键的海上运输基础设施和5G——以及欧盟制定的对策。过去十年,中国企业对欧盟关键基础设施和高科技产业进行了战略性投资。作为回应,欧盟建立了一个投资筛选框架,以安全或公共秩序为由筛选(批准、发布条件、禁止或解除)外国直接投资,并启动了一个加强委员会与成员国之间协调与合作的机制。欧盟还试图通过引入“5G工具箱”来减少对中国供应商的依赖。我们认为,欧盟的目标是“去武器化”这两个潜在的瓶颈。然而,我们的文章得出结论,欧盟在关键领域采取行动的能力有限,阻碍了相对于外部行为者的战略自主的政治目标。最终,实施欧盟政策目标的大部分重任仍然落在具有不同经济和安全利益的成员国身上。支点效应、关键枢纽、战略自主性、相互依存性、投资筛选、5G工具箱
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信