China and the United States can work together to check and balance EU PV "double anti"
Abstract submitted for the European Commission's "double-reverse" program targeting China's photovoltaics, 18 EU member states opposed the initiative, including the UK and Germany. Additionally, five countries abstained, while four others, led by France, supported the proposal. Despite this division, the European Commission proceeded with its scheduled preliminary decision on anti-dumping measures. This outcome has sparked widespread criticism. Why would Britain and Germany, two of the EU’s most influential members, oppose a decision that was ultimately approved? Is there a conflict between the European Commission and the UK? The answer is no. Instead, it seems that these countries are trying to manipulate the "double-reverse" process in order to create leverage over China.
In response to the European Commission’s “double-reverse†plan for China’s photovoltaics, 18 EU governments opposed the move, including the UK and Germany. Five more countries chose to abstain, while four—centered around France—supported the initiative. Despite the internal divisions, the European Commission still moved forward with its preliminary decision as planned. This result has been met with significant backlash. The question remains: why did the UK and Germany, key players within the EU, oppose the plan? Could there be an underlying strategic calculation at play?
The answer lies in the complex interplay of national interests and trade dynamics. It’s unlikely that German companies, which filed large-scale “double-reverse†applications with the EU, acted without government support. Similarly, it’s hard to believe that Chinese firms like Yingde were not involved in internal discussions about the decision. So, why would the UK and Germany oppose a decision that ultimately went through? Their stance appears to be a calculated move, aimed at influencing the outcome and creating pressure on the European Commission.
From a geopolitical perspective, the UK, Germany, and France have consistently maintained their positions on the “double-reverse†issue. However, they have also used the EU’s internal procedures to push for more favorable terms from China. The goal seems to be to set up a scenario where, eventually, a trade war could be triggered by the photovoltaic sector. This way, they can claim to act in the interest of free trade while subtly shifting the burden onto the European Commission.
One possible logic behind their high-profile opposition is to gain trust from China and hope that Beijing will accept the “double-reverse†ruling under the guise of “friendship.†The implication is clear: we all contributed, but the Commission didn’t listen, so the blame lies with them. If retaliatory actions follow, it should target the Commission, not the individual countries. This line of reasoning is clearly flawed, yet it reflects the political maneuvering at play.
Moreover, the UK and Germany’s public opposition serves another purpose: it gives them leverage to negotiate with China. In September 2012, for example, the German Prime Minister visited China and urged the EU to oppose the “double-reverse†measure, claiming it would help China during the debt crisis. Soon after, the EU announced it would accept the investigation. This pattern suggests that their positions may not be entirely genuine.
France, too, has shown a similar dynamic. Its president recently signed major contracts with China before supporting the “double-reverse†vote. Given France’s heavy reliance on nuclear energy, its direct benefits from solar power are limited. Therefore, its support likely stems from a desire to use the issue as a bargaining chip, pushing China to make concessions elsewhere.
Despite these complexities, China has several strong cards to play. A strategic alliance with the U.S., particularly in areas like climate change and low-carbon development, could significantly shift the balance. During the Xi-Jinping meeting in early June, one of the topics discussed was how China and the U.S. would address climate change and develop new energy standards. If both nations align on setting global industry benchmarks, it could force the EU to restructure its entire market, leading to significant disruption.
China and the U.S. share common interests in combating climate change, which far outweigh the short-term gains of the PV industry. Whether they can collaborate depends on external factors and internal conditions. Ultimately, the foundation of Sino-U.S. cooperation will always be future benefits, not past disputes.
In this context, it’s crucial to view the EU’s “double-reverse†policy through a broader geopolitical lens. Rather than engaging in a damaging trade war, China should consider joining forces with the U.S. to reshape the global photovoltaic industry. This approach would not only protect China’s interests but also ensure a more balanced and sustainable future for the sector.The start of the shield machine refers to a series of work in which the shield machine is driven from the tunnel door to the undisturbed soil section by using the temporarily assembled pipe segments, Reaction Frame and other equipment of the working shaft. Reinforcement of the starting end, installation of shield machine, starting bracket, assembly of shield machine, installation of reaction frame, shield machine system debugging.
Starting Frame,Shield Launching Frame,Shield Starting Base Structure,Starting Base Frame
Anshan Lijian Engineering Group Co. LTD , https://www.lijianformwork.com