China and the United States can work together to check and balance EU PV "double anti"
Abstract The European Commission submitted a "double reverse" proposal regarding China's photovoltaic industry, which faced strong opposition from 18 EU member states. Among them were the UK and Germany, while five countries chose to abstain, and four others, led by France, supported the initiative. Despite this division, the European Commission proceeded with its scheduled preliminary decision on anti-dumping measures. This outcome has drawn significant criticism, raising questions about why Britain and Germany, two key EU players, opposed the move. Is there a conflict between the European Commission and these nations? The answer is no—instead, it appears that they are strategically maneuvering to influence the outcome in favor of China.
The real issue lies in understanding the motivations behind the UK, Germany, and France’s positions. While they publicly support free trade between China and Europe, their actions suggest a more complex game. It seems they are using the "double reverse" mechanism to create pressure on China, pushing for favorable terms in other areas. For example, German companies have heavily lobbied the EU, and it’s unlikely that the European Commission’s decision was made without internal discussions involving key stakeholders like Yingde.
This behavior reflects a broader strategy where EU nations attempt to balance their own interests while maintaining appearances of cooperation. By opposing the "double reverse" plan, they aim to gain sympathy from China and shift responsibility onto the European Commission. However, this logic is flawed—if China accepts such reasoning, it could end up in a situation where no one is held accountable, as all parties claim to be "friendly."
Moreover, high-profile opposition from the UK and Germany may also serve as a bargaining chip. In September 2012, for instance, Germany sought to use the European debt crisis as leverage, claiming to oppose the "double reverse" and urging the EU to support China. Soon after, the EU accepted the investigation. This pattern shows that their stance is often more about negotiation than genuine concern.
France, too, has shown a mixed approach. After securing major contracts during a recent visit to China, it quickly shifted to supporting the "double reverse" in the European Commission vote. Given that France’s energy sector relies heavily on nuclear power, its interest in the photovoltaic market is limited. Therefore, its support likely stems from a desire to negotiate better deals elsewhere.
While international relations often involve trade-offs, the EU’s current position risks overreaching. China, however, has several strong cards to play. A coordinated response, especially with the U.S., could significantly weaken the EU’s efforts. For instance, the June 2013 Xi Jinping and Obama talks hinted at deeper collaboration on climate change and low-carbon development. If China and the U.S. set global standards for photovoltaics and carbon trading, it could force EU industries to adapt or face decline.
Ultimately, the EU’s "double reverse" strategy should be viewed through a global geopolitical lens. Rather than engaging in a damaging trade war, China should seek alliances—particularly with the U.S.—to reshape the industry and secure long-term benefits. The future lies not in short-term disputes, but in building a sustainable and cooperative framework for clean energy development.
Natural Stone Veneer,Micro Fine Cement,High Strength Concrete,Construction Materials
Anshan Lijian Engineering Group Co. LTD , https://www.lijianformwork.com