Search

Begin New Search Topic European Union Political Geography Asia

61. Is South Korea vulnerable to EU and US carbon border restrictions?

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott and Megan Hogan
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
South Korean exports, especially carbon-intensive products like steel, are increasingly vulnerable to both the European Union’s proposed carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)—set to begin on January 1, 2023—and the proposed Clean Competition Act (CCA) before the US Congress. Schott and Hogan caution that Korean exporters should not count on Korea’s decade-old EU and US free trade agreements (FTAs), nor on the multilateral trading rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO), to protect them from new carbon-based import barriers in key foreign markets. The WTO and the FTAs have broad and loosely defined exemptions for environmental protection. Nor is Korea likely to be shielded by its own cap-and-trade emissions trading system (the K-ETS), because of extensive use of free allowances and large differences between EU and Korean carbon prices. While the threat the EU CBAM poses to Korean exports is imminent, passage of the CCA faces major legislative obstacles. But US imports of Korean steel and other carbon-intensive goods are still subject to climate-related duties at the US border under US unfair trade statutes. The US Department of Commerce has ruled that free allowances issued under the K-ETS (and EU ETS) are implicit subsidies that can be offset by countervailing duties. These charges are in addition to the harsh tariff-rate quotas on imported Korean steel applied under the “national security” authority of Section 232 of US trade law, which are more restrictive than measures imposed against European and other steel exporters. The authors suggest relaxing these US barriers, as they have been for shipments from Europe, in return for Korean participation in the nascent US-EU talks to establish a “Global Arrangement on Sustainable Steel and Aluminum.”
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, European Union, Exports, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, South Korea, and United States of America

62. Europe and the Geopolitics of 5G Walking a Technological Tightrope

Author:
Julien Nocetti
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
The acute Sino-American tensions which started in 2018 have been coupled with controversies around 5G technology, exemplified by the spotlight placed on Chinese equipment manufacturer Huawei and the security risks associated with its use. For Europe, the 5G challenge at the international level is drawing a very complex landscape. Just like artificial intelligence, 5G materializes a very strong geopolitical sensitivity around the control of critical technologies. 5G is indeed critical because of its expected quasi-ubiquitous use, the gradual shift towards network technologies based entirely on software, and the potential strengthening of already dominant players (including digital platforms via cloud services). The United States-China rivalry is limiting the European Union’s room for action, against a backdrop of security considerations and low levels of investment. The continent’s various players (the European Commission, the main European powers, private players such as Nokia and Ericsson) have not adopted a uniform stance, reflecting an entanglement of technological dependencies on China and the United States. Meanwhile, the issue of semiconductors, symbolizing both the technological decline and the renewal of the EU’s ambitions, is fully integrated into the development of 5G. These chips constitute the "muscle" of the system and trigger new geo-economic challenges in which Europe must still find its place.
Topic:
European Union, Internet, 5G, Telecommunications, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

63. The Sino-Lithuanian Crisis: Going beyond the Taiwanese Representative Office Issue

Author:
Konstantinas Andrijauskas
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
The year 2021 marked the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and Lithuania. Instead of commemorative events and customary lofty rhetoric, the bilateral relationship rapidly plunged to a level rarely seen in either country’s foreign policies since the end of the Cold War. Sino-Lithuanian relations remain de facto downgraded to the level of chargé d’affaires, Lithuania’s physical embassy in Beijing is empty, while the southernmost Baltic state continues to withstand China’s multidimensional campaign of diplomatic, discursive and, most importantly, economic pressure. The principal cause behind this diplomatic crisis was the opening of the Taiwanese Representative Office in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius in mid-November 2021. This Briefing will argue, however, that there were other important reasons behind the current state of affairs that had been accumulating over the course of two years. The opening of the Taiwanese Representative Office in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius in mid-November 2021 triggered an unprecedented diplomatic crisis between the People’s Republic of China and Lithuania. China resorted to massive economic coercion measures to pressure Vilnius, such as the freezing of bilateral trade. European multinational companies also reported that Beijing blocked their exports because of Lithuanian components in their products. In late January 2022, the European Union (EU) launched a case at the World Trade Organization against China over discriminatory trade practices against Lithuania. The current crisis must be understood in the broader context of the degradation of the relations between China and Lithuania, but also the EU, since 2019. As such, this crisis is symptomatic of the developing trend in the relationship between the EU and China.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and WTO
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Taiwan, Asia, and Lithuania

64. Processing Trade and Global Supply Chains: Towards a Resilient “GVC 2.0” Approach

Author:
Lucian Cernat
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
In the current global context marked by economic fragility, growing uncertainty and geopolitical conflicts, ensuring the smooth functioning of global supply chains becomes more important than ever. Supply shortages, higher freight costs, higher commodity prices and strong demand increase will trigger inflationary pressures for all economic sectors dependent on global value chains (GVCs). As part of global efforts to enhance the resilience of GVCs, this paper makes the case for a broader discussion about the untapped potential of processing trade, a relatively unknown trade facilitation option available in many countries around the world. Processing trade has been credited with stimulating China’s participation in GVCs, in combination with foreign direct investment (FDI) attraction and industrial upgrading. However, processing trade is not just a Chinese phenomenon. In the EU, significant trade flows (over 200 billion euros in 2021 alone) benefitted from a double-digit trade cost reduction, thanks to the EU processing trade provisions. Different types of processing trade arrangements exist in over 70 countries worldwide (including in the EU), as a way to facilitate the integration of developing countries in global production chains. However, these unilateral schemes have different requirements and co-exist without any attempt to facilitate their inter-operability along complex global supply chains. This paper argues that there is a pressing need for a global reflection on how best to promote a better integration between these national processing trade schemes. One option is to promote a “GVC 2.0” approach that offers key recommendations and best practices for processing trade along GVCs. Such a coordinated “GVC 2.0” trade facilitation initiative would not only make GVCs more resilient for countries that depend on global sourcing for their critical economic activities, but it will also reduce the inflationary effect generated by the unnecessary trade costs associated with GVC activities.
Topic:
Political Economy, European Union, Trade, Resilience, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, and Global Focus

65. Determinants of China's Policy Towards the War in Ukraine

Author:
Marcin Przychodniak
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
China’s position on the war in Ukraine depends mainly on the stabilisation of China’s internal situation before the 20th Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Congress planned for autumn this year. By holding NATO responsible for the conflict, the CCP reinforces its rhetoric about the legitimacy of the rivalry with the U.S. China’s signals on supporting peace negotiations and not helping Russia to circumvent sanctions are intended to protect China from possible Western secondary sanctions. The prospect of further Sino-Russian cooperation should induce the EU to reduce its economic interdependence with China.
Topic:
War, Sanctions, European Union, Rivalry, and Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Ukraine, and Asia

66. A pillar of stability in an unstable world

Author:
Stefania Benaglia and Dylan Macchiarini Crosson
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
The rising centrality of the Indo-Pacific is self-evident. What remains to be defined is the potential role the EU could play, notably as a security actor. Given capacity constraints, the EU’s objectives in the region should focus on credibility and on safeguarding shared interests – for example securing sea lines of communication, an objective also shared by Japan. Hard power remains the preferred language in the Indo-Pacific region. Australia unceremoniously dumping the French contract over US nuclear technology in the AUKUS affair, as well as India’s reluctance to take a position against Russia, a major provider of defence equipment, over its full-blown invasion of Ukraine demonstrate that being able to speak the language of power in a credible and reliable way takes precedence. While the EU will unlikely become a defence security provider à la the United States, it is now clear that it must evolve its global stance. The adoption of the EU Indo-Pacific Strategy and cross-references to it in the EU’s Strategic Compass represent an important milestone for bolstering its security and defence posture. The EU would do well to support its efforts to be a more credible security and defence actor in the Indo-Pacific by upgrading relations with its strategic partners, Japan in primis. Further operational, capabilities development, and industrial cooperation with Japan must be considered and reinforced by triangulation with other strategic partners in the region.
Topic:
Security, European Union, Political stability, and Cooperation
Political Geography:
Japan, Europe, and Asia

67. Europe’s Area of Maritime Interest in Northeast Asia

Author:
Philip Shetler-Jones
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
Participation in the monitoring of UN sanctions on North Korea is Europe’s most prominent operational contribution to Indo-Pacific security, but is also characterised by a fragmented, bilateral approach that contradicts the trajectory of recent European policies that strive for a more meaningful and coordinated investment in this area. A coordinated European presence in the region built around the sanctions monitoring task is within reach, and steps taken to achieve it would dramatically enhance the policy coherence and impact of European action on Northeast Asian security.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, European Union, and Maritime
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, and North Korea

68. North Korea’s Covid-19 Outbreak: An Opening for Engagement?

Author:
Lorenzo Mariani and Leonardo Bruni
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In January 2020, in response to the novel coronavirus, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK; North Korea) closed its borders and for the next two years claimed it had not experienced a single case of Covid-19. However, on 12 May 2022, North Korea disclosed a severe domestic outbreak and in the following weeks began reporting millions of cases of “fevers” and several deaths.[1] Pyongyang’s admission was initially interpreted as a veiled request for international assistance as the country is particularly vulnerable due to its zero per cent vaccination rate, inadequate healthcare system and chronic food insecurity. However, as with previous attempts during the height of the pandemic, offers of aid and vaccines from the Republic of Korea (ROK; South Korea), the US, international organisations (IOs) and multilateral initiatives like COVAX received no response; most likely due to suspicion of the aid being politicised.[2]
Topic:
Health, Foreign Aid, European Union, Economy, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Asia and North Korea

69. Forging European Unity on China: The Case of Hungarian Dissent

Author:
Ties Dams
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
EU Member states can be divided on China, even on issues such as human rights. Often singled out as an agent of division is the Hungarian government of prime minister Viktor Orbán. Hungarian dissent begs the question: how can the EU move forward on China given Hungary’s strategy of obstructive dissent? European cooperation ought not wait for unanimity, nor should it rely on value-politics: member states should play the power game to circumvent or break lingering impasses. Member States should support setting up a 27+1 Forum as the main platform for European China-policy, form a leading group tackling strategic corruption and corrosive capital, and initiative a track 1.5 dialogue on China with Germany and the Visegrád Countries.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Corruption, Human Rights, and European Union
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, and Hungary

70. Growing stronger together: Towards an EU–ASEAN digital partnership?

Author:
Maaike Okano-Heijmans and Brigitte Dekker
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
In December 2021, the EU and Singapore launched talks towards a digital partnership agreement that could prove a building block for broader EU–ASEAN cooperation. This Report assesses the strategic value of increased cooperation in the field of digital connectivity, also acknowledged in the EU’s Indo-Pacific strategy of September 2021, and considers the practical challenges and opportunities of stronger ties between the two blocs and their member states in this increasingly important realm. The authors argue that three domains could form the basis of a future, shared, EU–ASEAN approach to digital connectivity: (1) digital infrastructure; (2) data governance and digital trade regulation; and (3) the digital economy and financial technologies (fintech). A bloc-to-bloc approach should run in parallel with strengthened ties by the EU and its member states with specific ASEAN member states. Together, these building blocks will serve EU and ASEAN long-term interests, promoting economic competitiveness and inclusive growth, as well as openness, transparency and freedom in the digital realm.
Topic:
European Union, Partnerships, ASEAN, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, and Singapore