(Deutsche Welle Chinese website) "Handelsblatt" commented that although the EU's status in negotiations with China is deteriorating, after all, China cannot do without the European market. Therefore, now may be the EU's last chance to take a tough stance. This comment titled "Give up your illusions, it's time to take a tough stance against China" reads
"In discussions about China policy, one can often hear a saying: Germany only needs to correct the mistakes of its own economic policy, and all its problems with China, its troublesome partner, competitor and institutional rival, will be solved. There is no doubt that Germany does need reforms, but China's dominant position in the export market and supply chain, as well as the price pressure caused by China on some German companies, are by no means contradictions that can be solved through reforms.
In addition, in order to improve the business environment, it is also essential to establish a corresponding trade protection framework. Only in this way can the impact caused by China's industrial policy and the low RMB exchange rate be alleviated. The low RMB exchange rate has actually acted as a subsidy. The issue of protecting European markets will also be discussed at the G7 summit in Evian, France.
The introduction of targeted protective tariffs can be an effective policy tool. The advantage of this kind of tariff is that the level of the tax rate can be negotiated, it can be put into use in a targeted manner, and when necessary, it can be lowered or canceled as a result of negotiation. At the same time, we must also be aware that the implementation of tariffs may increase costs for consumers and companies that need Chinese products, and may also trigger countermeasures from China. In view of this, the introduction of tariffs must strictly determine the scope of application, provide sufficient reasons, and clearly define the categories. The ever-changing tariffs initiated by US President Trump obviously do not meet the above standards. "
"Business Daily" commented that leaders of EU member states should encourage Brussels to use countervailing, anti-dumping and other policy tools against China, and implement protective measures for specific industries. At the G-7 summit and the EU summit, there should also be discussions on taking tough measures against China.
"The timing is very appropriate to do this now. There is no doubt that the status of negotiations with China is no longer what it used to be. This can be noticed from the previous visit of the German government delegation to China. As a 'little partner', although Germany is received friendly, the sense of distance and indifference is also very obvious.
But on the other hand, as European companies' export pressure further intensifies and their market share in China continues to decline, Europe's negotiating position will become even worse. The more European companies lose value creation and market share in key industries, the less Europe will have at the negotiating table. In view of this, the existing, weakened negotiating position may just be the best negotiating position that Germany can have. Therefore, such an opportunity should never be missed.
Of course, there is no need to launch a ‘trade war’ for this. On the contrary, the strategy of firmly safeguarding the interests of the country and the EU should be understood by China, after all, that is what they do. What's more, China is also highly dependent on the European market and will never give up this market easily. "
“The global shift to Chinese AI will be a disaster for the United States”
Neue Zurich Zeitung commented that Washington has completely banned foreign citizens from accessing Anthropic's most advanced models on the grounds of national security. This sends a very clear signal: when core interests are involved, the United States will not distinguish between allies and non-allies, and is prepared to exclude other countries in the world from American cutting-edge technology:
"If global companies turn to artificial intelligence developed in China, it will undoubtedly be a disaster for Washington. U.S. high-tech companies are investing hundreds of billions in building artificial intelligence computing centers and injecting vitality into the sluggish U.S. economy. In the next few years, these companies must obtain high returns, but to achieve this goal, these companies must occupy the global artificial intelligence market.
In other words, the cost of pursuing an ‘America only’ policy in the field of artificial intelligence is something Trump cannot afford. On the contrary, Washington needs to cooperate internationally with its allies and jointly determine the rules for the safe use of artificial intelligence. For example, it can learn from the success of the Know Your Customer identity verification mechanism, which banks use to combat fraud and money laundering. Although this type of mechanism is not perfect, it is much more reasonable than a complete ban. No matter what model is ultimately adopted, unilateral actions by the United States are not a long-term solution.
For years, American politicians and entrepreneurs have been emphasizing the need to win the competition with China in the field of artificial intelligence. They firmly believe that whether the United States can maintain its advantages in the economic and military fields in the future will depend on the outcome of artificial intelligence competition. However, you must know that whoever reaches the podium at the end is the winner of the competition. With its latest model, Anthropic had won a stage victory for the United States, but instead it was punished: the company was forced to press the ‘emergency stop button’. "
