- hace 3 horas
¿Cómo evitar una guerra comercial con China? Los eurodiputados debaten en The Ring
¿Se avecina una guerra comercial con China? En esta edición de nuestro programa semanal de debate The Ring, Sakis Arnaoutoglou (S&D) y Nicolás de la Parte (PPE) debaten sobre lo que podría ser uno de los temas más trascendentales de la agenda política de la UE.
MÁS INFORMACIÓN : http://es.euronews.com/2026/05/07/como-evitar-una-guerra-comercial-con-china-los-eurodiputados-debaten-en-the-ring
¡Suscríbete a nuestro canal! Euronews está disponible en 12 idiomas
¿Se avecina una guerra comercial con China? En esta edición de nuestro programa semanal de debate The Ring, Sakis Arnaoutoglou (S&D) y Nicolás de la Parte (PPE) debaten sobre lo que podría ser uno de los temas más trascendentales de la agenda política de la UE.
MÁS INFORMACIÓN : http://es.euronews.com/2026/05/07/como-evitar-una-guerra-comercial-con-china-los-eurodiputados-debaten-en-the-ring
¡Suscríbete a nuestro canal! Euronews está disponible en 12 idiomas
Categoría
🗞
NoticiasTranscripción
00:08Hello and welcome to The Ring, Euronews' weekly debate show broadcasting from the European Parliament here in Brussels.
00:16I'm Stefan Grobe.
00:17On The Ring, members of the European Parliament go face-to-face on some of the biggest issues facing Europe.
00:24Today, we want to talk about EU trade relations with China, which risk becoming so bad that the European economy
00:32may be seriously hit.
00:34Luis Alberto has more.
00:38Trade tensions between China and the European Union are escalating after Beijing called on EU member states to revise the
00:45bloc's proposed Made in Europe legislation.
00:49The draft proposal of the European Commission seeks to tighten the rules for foreign companies that want to participate in
00:56EU public procurement contracts or benefit from investment opportunities.
01:00The initiative, which aims to bolsters Europe's industrial capacity, was met with criticism by China's Commerce Ministry,
01:07who affirmed that if the EU, quote, insists on this punishment and treats China's enterprises in a discriminatory manner, Beijing
01:14would respond with countermeasures.
01:16In other words, retaliation.
01:19While Europe is trying to navigate a world of aggressive tariffs by Trump's administration,
01:23is it heading toward a full-scale trade conflict with China, or can it still strike a balance between protection
01:29and cooperation?
01:32A lot to unpack here for our contenders, and here they are.
01:39Sakis Arnautoulou, a Greek MEP from the Socialists and Democrats Group.
01:43He is a member of the Delegation for Relations with the People's Republic of China in the European Parliament.
01:48Advocating a pragmatic approach to global tensions, he cautions against escalation and said,
01:53Europe must remain open to cooperation with China, but it cannot remain naïve.
01:58We need a relationship based on fairness, reciprocity and transparency.
02:02The aim is not confrontation.
02:05Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, a Spanish MEP from the Central Right European People's Party.
02:10A career diplomat, he served as ambassador of Spain to NATO.
02:13As an MEP, he is a member of the Committee on Security and Defense.
02:17A strong transatlanticist with a geopolitical outlook, he warns about the global power shift driven by Beijing,
02:23stating, China's export restrictions are an escalation of the weaponization of trade policies.
02:28We have to confront this in a smart way.
02:31That means we cannot decouple from China, but we have to de-risk.
02:36So let me welcome to the ring Sakis Anautoglu and Nicolás Pascual de la Parte.
02:41Great to see you, and thanks for coming on the show.
02:45Thanks for having us.
02:46So, the aim of the ring is to offer our viewers a glimpse at European Parliament debates,
02:52so you should feel right at home here on set.
02:56Are you ready?
02:57I am.
02:58Yes, indeed.
02:58Okay, let's start with the thing that made headlines just a few days ago.
03:02When Brussels presented its made-in-Europe proposals to strengthen our industrial base,
03:08China reacted with unusual harshness, threatening retaliation.
03:13Should we now be scared, Sakis?
03:16Of course not.
03:17I mean, what we did was actually the logical thing to do, because China started it.
03:22I mean, it started some kind of a weird, let's say, unfair competition,
03:27an unfair trade that we have to answer back,
03:29because otherwise we're not going to be able just to defend our industry
03:32and defend what we actually have reached so far.
03:36This prosperity that the European Union has, 27 countries together,
03:40this is not something that you can achieve just like that.
03:43So we have our methods, and so we're going to defend our methods.
03:47Niklas, this is a proposal coming from the European Commission.
03:51Is it dead on arrival after all these debates we had?
03:56I agree with my colleague.
03:57I think that the initiative from the Commission is based on the principle of reciprocity.
04:03That means that we have to relate with China on a real basis
04:08and to demand from them the same treatment as we deliver to them.
04:13So far, China has been taking selectively some norms of the World Trade Organization
04:19and disregarding other rules.
04:21From now on, I think that we have to keep with them a fair, transparent relationship
04:26based on reciprocity and nothing else.
04:28So the Commission has taken a much more assertive stance towards China recently.
04:34Is this the way to go forward?
04:35There is no other way to go forward because, as I said before,
04:40and it's a critical situation geopolitically where we also have a lot of new challenges to face.
04:48And if we don't find a solution or we won't deal with that now,
04:52because some people and some would say that Europe has been naive so far,
04:58so we had to start at it years ago just to find some kind of solutions
05:03in a way that we're not going to bring us in this difficult situation.
05:07So it's the only way, I think.
05:09That's my opinion.
05:09Tough on China, the right way?
05:11Not tough on China, realistic on China.
05:13So far, we have been dealing with them in a way that it is not any more sustainable.
05:19As I said before,
05:20China is disregarding some rules of the World Trade Organization.
05:24They subscribe to it,
05:25but they pick up selectively what benefits them and disregard those who doesn't.
05:30China has to get used to deal with the European Union
05:33and with all the international partners on a basis of reality and reciprocity.
05:37And what we are trying to do now is to send a clear message to China.
05:41We want to engage with you.
05:42We want not a dependency relation.
05:45We want a relation on the same footing.
05:47But please be transparent.
05:49Please respect the international law
05:51and don't use commerce and trade as a coercive weapon against anybody.
05:55The Chinese have said that Made in Europe
05:57is just a vehicle to reduce China's influence.
06:01I mean, they're right here, right?
06:03In a way.
06:04I mean, everybody's right from his own position, let's say.
06:07But the way they just manage to do things,
06:11a little bit secretive and a little bit, you know,
06:14the way they just proceed the whole time
06:16is just a way that we cannot let it happen.
06:20As I said, we're not against China.
06:24We have to be clear.
06:25We want China as a partner.
06:27I'm not saying that we don't need China.
06:29And China needs us.
06:30So we're a huge market.
06:31So China needs also to consider that if it loses us,
06:34then it's going to have problems also.
06:36Do we want another China?
06:39We don't want another China.
06:41I mean, it's very difficult to say.
06:43China is exactly what it is.
06:44We have to adapt, and they have to adapt both sides
06:48because reciprocity is the main thing.
06:50Well, adapting is a nice word, Nicolas,
06:54because it's ironic.
06:55The Chinese are accusing us of doing things,
07:00practices that China does at home
07:03or is promoting at home.
07:04For example, restricting access to key industries,
07:09limiting public procurement,
07:10pursuing aggressive industrial policies
07:13that support and finance strategic sectors.
07:17So why should we not hit back?
07:20The reality is that the access to the public procurement
07:22in China is nearly zero for European enterprises
07:26because there are a lot of obstacles,
07:28a lot of restrictions, legal and non-legal.
07:30In addition to this, they use a kind of a state-run economy
07:34in which they have a state-run banks
07:36which give financing to the enterprises
07:40at zero cost, zero financial cost,
07:43so that they can dump us out of the market.
07:46And once they have the monopoly of this product,
07:48they increase the prices.
07:49They have done it many times.
07:51Aluminium, steel, batteries, electric cars,
07:55they follow all the same pattern.
07:57They can have financing at privileged rates,
08:01obviously, because all the banks in China are a state-run.
08:04It is the Communist Party who decide
08:05where the money goes to.
08:07And once they dump us out,
08:08because they can compete with lower prices,
08:11they increase the prices
08:12when they have the monopoly of the market.
08:14It cannot continue like that.
08:15So is that what we call de-risking?
08:17De-risking, of course.
08:18I mean, we cannot depend on...
08:20We want to have a trade engagement with China,
08:23obviously in a transparent manner,
08:25but not to depend on them in strategic inputs.
08:30And so far, we still depend in many sectors on them,
08:34mainly on rare earths, critical minerals,
08:37and so on and so forth.
08:38We should reduce this dependency
08:40in order to have a fair relationship.
08:43Doesn't de-risking mean also protectionism?
08:47I mean, we're dealing with a country here.
08:50I mean, we have to deal with a country
08:52where we need to play nice,
08:53but the country is not sharing our set of values.
08:56Isn't that the poor problem?
08:57Okay, that's a new era
08:59that everybody wants to rule the world in a way,
09:02I mean, as far as the trade is concerned.
09:04But it doesn't mean that we,
09:07Europe, has to let it happen
09:08the way that some countries want it.
09:12To protect your values,
09:14to protect your principles is not bad,
09:15because if you just let China do what it wants,
09:19then there's a huge possibility
09:22in the coming years
09:23that the cheap products
09:24are going to be affordable
09:26for the citizens of Europe
09:27because we're not going to be jobs,
09:28they're not going to be industries
09:31in order to produce things.
09:32So we have to face it
09:34and we have to see
09:35are we going to let it happen
09:36the way the Chinese want it
09:38or are we going to enforce our industry
09:41so that the citizens,
09:42the European citizens,
09:43are going to be able,
09:44in the long-run basis,
09:46be able to produce and buy products
09:49from wherever they want.
09:49So if we, as Europeans,
09:52as a union,
09:54act as a sovereign bloc,
09:56the way China acts
09:58as a sovereign country,
10:00doesn't that make
10:00a trade war inevitable?
10:02Not at all.
10:03I think that once we are able
10:06to act united
10:07vis-à-vis China,
10:09we will have a better standard
10:14to deal with them.
10:15I mean, China is always trying to divide us.
10:17China prefers to deal with us
10:19on a bilateral basis.
10:20And it's fair.
10:21They try to get benefit
10:23dealing bilaterally with all of us.
10:25We have to offer
10:26a common,
10:28consensual strategy
10:28vis-à-vis China,
10:29which is not either offensive
10:31or defensive.
10:32It is fair.
10:33We ask for fairness
10:34and to,
10:35I mean,
10:35we have to be clear.
10:36In China,
10:3730, 40 years ago,
10:38had no technology at all.
10:39I mean,
10:40we, Europeans
10:41and the Americans,
10:42we have been exporting
10:43and transferring to them
10:44a lot of technology
10:46because it was a request
10:47from them.
10:47You could not invest in China.
10:49You could not sell in China
10:50unless you transfer technology.
10:52And they have benefited
10:53from this transfer
10:54in order to compete with us,
10:57disregarding sometimes
10:58the World TV,
10:59WTO rules.
11:00All right.
11:01So let me stop you
11:03just here
11:03as we're getting
11:04warmed up right now.
11:10Now it's time
11:11for our viewers
11:11to get a real flavor
11:13of the European Parliament Chamber
11:14where members
11:15ask each other questions.
11:17And sometimes
11:18it can get heated.
11:20That means
11:21it's time
11:21for you guys
11:22to challenge
11:23each other directly
11:24just as you do
11:25in the hemicycle
11:26behind us.
11:27So let's get started.
11:29Sake is
11:30fire off.
11:31So I just wanted
11:31to ask Michael
11:32because
11:33EPP
11:34I mean
11:34says sometimes
11:35all the time
11:36we have to
11:37enforce interest
11:38to which I agree
11:38but I have the feeling
11:40that the citizens
11:41the everyday citizens
11:42for EPP
11:43is not
11:46included
11:47the way that should.
11:48So if the market
11:49works so well
11:50why the citizens
11:51the European citizens
11:52are complaining still?
11:54Because I mean
11:54because the market
11:55is working well
11:57when the participants
11:58in the market
11:59wants to play fair
12:00the Chinese
12:01have not played fair
12:02so far.
12:03Sometimes they do
12:04sometimes they don't
12:05and the only request
12:06we demand from them
12:08is that they have
12:09to respect
12:10all the WTO rules
12:11and to deal with us
12:12on a fair basis.
12:13That is all.
12:14The market
12:15normally
12:17reassigns
12:17or readjust
12:18the differences
12:19but in this time
12:21not because China
12:21is not
12:22a normal
12:24commercial partner.
12:25it is
12:26a state
12:27capitalism
12:28in which
12:28the communist
12:29party
12:29takes decisions
12:30on its own
12:31that normally
12:32in our countries
12:32is taken by the market.
12:33This is the difference.
12:35Follow up.
12:36Sakis.
12:37And what about
12:37the wages
12:38are stagnated
12:39and so there is
12:40no prospect
12:41that the wages
12:42are going to be
12:43to be reasoned
12:44the way that
12:45you sometimes
12:47you say
12:47in the European
12:48Parliament
12:49that you are
12:50going to be able
12:50to raise wages
12:52in a way
12:53according to your plan
12:54but I don't think
12:55that it's possible
12:55the way that
12:57geopolitically
12:57is what's going on
12:58at the moment.
12:59Well I think
12:59that wages
13:01are dependent
13:02on the
13:02international markets.
13:04I mean
13:05capitals
13:05jobs
13:06and wages
13:07travel across the world
13:09and it's very difficult
13:10to fix a wage
13:11in Europe
13:11which is not competitive
13:12vis-à-vis China
13:13vis-à-vis the US.
13:15Nowadays
13:15we have not to compete
13:16among ourselves
13:17in Europe
13:17as used to be the case.
13:19Now we have to
13:19compete internationally
13:21very toughly
13:22with the US
13:23with China
13:23and with other competitors.
13:24The wages
13:25will be the result
13:26of many factors
13:27as you know.
13:28It's not a question
13:29for us Europeans
13:29to decide
13:30which is the perfect
13:31level of wage.
13:33The wage is the result
13:33of income
13:34of technology
13:36of the workforce
13:38training
13:38of input
13:40of the prices
13:41of the raw materials
13:42of many things.
13:43But it's clear
13:44that in an international
13:45trade scenario
13:47the competition
13:48will be much tougher
13:49than before
13:50and the wages
13:51will reflect
13:52this reality.
13:52Okay,
13:53Nicolas,
13:54carry on
13:55and ask
13:55Sakis a question.
13:56Well,
13:58I have a couple
13:58of them.
13:59I mean,
13:59to what extent
14:00can the gulliness
14:02to engage
14:03in dialogue
14:04as you say
14:04with China
14:05be interpreted
14:06as a lack
14:07of firmness
14:08in the face
14:09of unfair trade
14:10practices?
14:10We always have to try.
14:12I mean,
14:13the dialogue
14:13must always be here
14:14because otherwise
14:16misunderstandings
14:17can crop up
14:18in a way
14:18that cannot
14:19be reversible.
14:20So I think
14:21we have to stick
14:22on our values.
14:23I have to,
14:24I mean,
14:25I've been in contact
14:25with Chinese people
14:26and stuff
14:27and they're also
14:28willing to understand
14:29but we have to
14:30make clear
14:31that it's not
14:33that we have,
14:34we're targeting China.
14:36This is absolute
14:37what we should do.
14:39We just want
14:40to protect
14:41our values
14:42within a dialogue
14:44that can bring us
14:45closer and closer
14:47for the benefits
14:47of our nations.
14:49Follow up?
14:50Yes.
14:51In the European Union,
14:52if the European Union
14:53does not respond
14:54with strong measures
14:56toward China,
14:57what alternatives
14:58do you propose
14:59to prevent
15:00the loss
15:00of competitiveness
15:01in key sectors
15:03such as
15:03electric vehicles,
15:05for instance?
15:05Yes,
15:05we've already
15:06tried it
15:07with Mercosur,
15:07for example,
15:08just to find
15:09some other markets
15:10but we have to
15:10be very careful
15:11because EPP
15:11is a little bit
15:13too open
15:14to markets
15:15but we have to
15:16also take into
15:17consideration
15:17that we have
15:18citizens,
15:19we have producers
15:20that might
15:21be affected
15:23by those openings
15:24to other markets.
15:25Yes,
15:26to opening
15:26to other markets
15:27it's necessity,
15:29it's necessary
15:29but not
15:30with every cost.
15:32All right,
15:34well,
15:34we've heard
15:35the views
15:35from our guests
15:36now it's time
15:37to bring in
15:38a new voice.
15:42For our quote
15:44of the week
15:44I would like
15:45to bring in
15:45Maro Sefkovic,
15:46the EU commissioner
15:47for trade
15:48and economic security.
15:49A few days ago
15:50he told Euronews
15:51how he believes
15:53we should deal
15:53with China.
15:55Take a listen.
15:55we are not interested
15:56in any trade wars
15:57and I made it clear
15:58from the day one
16:00and I engaged
16:01from the day one
16:02with our Chinese
16:03counterparts.
16:04I was in Beijing,
16:05we had a meeting
16:05with Vice Prime Minister
16:07and I'm in regular
16:08contact with my
16:09counterpart.
16:10We cannot have
16:11a trade deficit
16:12of 1 billion euros
16:13a day.
16:14We cannot have
16:15a deficit
16:15of 360 billion
16:17a year.
16:18It's simply
16:18unsustainable.
16:19I think what we need
16:20is indeed
16:21strategic patience,
16:22lots of courage
16:23to deal with
16:24the difficult issues
16:25because the war
16:26is easy to declare
16:27but it's very difficult
16:28to stop.
16:30And therefore,
16:30I think
16:31what we need
16:32is to have
16:33regular structured
16:34talk
16:35also with China.
16:37I would say
16:37crystal clear
16:38that we would
16:40fight a tooth and nail
16:41for every European job,
16:42for every European company,
16:44for every European sector
16:44if we see
16:45that they are treated
16:46unfairly.
16:47That's our job.
16:48So,
16:49we need strategic patience
16:50and a lot of courage.
16:52Do you agree with him?
16:53Yes,
16:54I do.
16:54The point with China
16:55is that they have
16:56an overproduction,
16:57a yearly overproduction
16:58and the commissioner
16:59has pointed out
17:00of around
17:00600,000 million euros
17:03a year.
17:04Why?
17:04Because there is
17:05no domestic demand
17:06because they don't
17:07have a welfare state.
17:09Then the Chinese,
17:10they save much more
17:10than us
17:11because they don't
17:12have any future
17:14sustained by any kind
17:15of subsidies
17:15coming from the state.
17:17Then they don't
17:18spend as much
17:18as they could.
17:19They save a lot
17:20and that's why
17:21the national demand
17:21doesn't absorb
17:22the overcapacity
17:23of the China economy
17:25and this overcapacity
17:25is sent abroad
17:27and this imbalance
17:28we have to correct.
17:29Sakis,
17:29where do you come down
17:30on this
17:30hearing the commissioner?
17:33I think our viewers
17:34have to understand
17:36that patience,
17:37of course,
17:38it's necessary
17:38but on the other hand
17:39we also,
17:40as we said,
17:41strategically
17:42we have to go on.
17:43Europe has
17:44very many benefits
17:46but for me
17:48it's the only mistake
17:49that Europe
17:49still is doing
17:50is to take decisions
17:51very slowly
17:52and we need to
17:54just accelerate
17:54all this stuff
17:55because otherwise
17:57the United States
17:58and China
17:58that matter
17:59I mean
18:00the decision making
18:01is so fast
18:03that we cannot
18:03follow up
18:04so I think
18:05we need to accelerate
18:06everything
18:07in order just to
18:07cope up with
18:08all the situation
18:09globally.
18:09The commissioner
18:10also said
18:11that a trade
18:12deficit
18:12of 360 billion euros
18:14is unsustainable
18:15economically
18:16and politically.
18:18How can we
18:18prevent it
18:19from ballooning
18:20further?
18:21Is that even
18:21possible,
18:22of course it is.
18:24I mean
18:24they have to
18:25open their market
18:25not only
18:26the private market
18:27but the public
18:28procurement market
18:29that so far
18:30as I said before
18:31is nearly closed
18:32because of so many
18:33restrictions.
18:34Second,
18:34they have to
18:36play
18:36the game
18:38with the same rules.
18:39They cannot have
18:40this kind of
18:41subsidized
18:41help
18:42and assistance
18:44to the enterprises
18:45to compete abroad.
18:46These subsidies
18:47have to disappear
18:48and they have to
18:48compete on the same
18:49level of fairness.
18:50And third,
18:51they have to
18:52not to
18:55overproduce
18:55things that
18:56they cannot
18:57consume at home
18:57and they have to
18:58sell abroad.
18:59I mean,
18:59it's a kind of
19:00many factors
19:00that we have to
19:01balance.
19:01And of course
19:02we have to be
19:03more aggressive
19:04and more competitive
19:05in the Chinese market.
19:06Of course it is
19:07possible.
19:07If you invest
19:08in your industry
19:09and you just
19:10don't want to
19:10have your
19:11green transition
19:12only by importing
19:14products from
19:15abroad,
19:15especially from
19:16China,
19:16then you
19:17in the end
19:18are going to
19:19end up
19:20outsourcing jobs
19:21and having
19:22no jobs
19:23at all
19:23but taking
19:24all the
19:25products
19:25especially from
19:26China.
19:26This is going
19:26to be a huge
19:27imbalance
19:28so we need
19:29to be very
19:29careful and
19:30we can
19:31change the
19:31whole rhythm
19:33towards
19:34European...
19:34Of course we have to
19:35invest in the
19:35right industry.
19:36Exactly.
19:37Lots of stuff
19:38to talk about here.
19:39Let's take a break
19:39on The Ring
19:40right now.
19:41We'll be back
19:41with more
19:42after this.
19:43Don't go away.
19:53Welcome back to
19:54The Ring,
19:55Euronews' weekly
19:56debate show from
19:57the European
19:57Parliament.
19:58I'm Stefan Grobe
19:58and I'm joined by
19:59Sakis Anautoglou,
20:01a socialist from
20:02Greece and
20:02Nicolas Delaparte
20:04from the European
20:05People's Party
20:05from Spain.
20:07At this point,
20:08let's remind
20:08ourselves how big
20:10an economic power
20:10China is and how
20:11important our trade
20:13with that country
20:14is.
20:15So, China
20:15recorded a 1.2
20:17trillion global
20:18trade surplus
20:19in 2025.
20:21The EU's trade
20:22deficit with China
20:23reached roughly
20:24360 billion last
20:26year.
20:27China accounts
20:28for 560
20:30billion euros
20:31in EU goods
20:32imports last
20:34year, making it
20:35the EU's largest
20:36import partner.
20:37And EU imports
20:38from China increased
20:39by 6.5%
20:41year-on-year
20:42in 2025.
20:44So, calls
20:45for rebalancing
20:46have for the most
20:47part gone unheard,
20:49right?
20:50Is that a debt
20:51concept, Sakis?
20:53You know,
20:54I mean,
20:54seeing all this,
20:55it's terrifying
20:56when you hear
20:56all these numbers
20:57because actually,
21:00when I read it
21:01and whether the viewers
21:02see it,
21:03I mean,
21:03sometimes it's a huge
21:05imbalance in how
21:05we're supposed
21:06to cope up with it.
21:07but it is
21:10possible
21:11and it is
21:11some kind
21:12of a way
21:13of bringing
21:14it back,
21:15taking the
21:16measure that we
21:16set.
21:17Otherwise,
21:18it's going to be
21:18huger,
21:19the differences
21:21in the next
21:22couple of years.
21:24Niklas,
21:24to what extent
21:25is EU policy
21:27towards China
21:28being shaped
21:29by pressure
21:30from the United
21:31States?
21:32Because this is
21:33a player we cannot
21:34forget here.
21:35I think that we
21:36have to have
21:37our own autonomous
21:38foreign policy
21:39and trade policy.
21:40I would like
21:41to have a kind
21:42of common approach
21:43with the United
21:43States to go
21:44hand-in-hand
21:44vis-à-vis China,
21:45but we have to
21:46defend our own
21:47interests and our
21:48own identity
21:50features.
21:51Hopefully,
21:51with the United
21:52States,
21:52but we have,
21:53as I said,
21:54to keep our
21:55own approach.
21:56That means
21:57a couple of
21:57things.
21:58We have said
21:59before that what
22:00is the homework
22:00that the Chinese
22:00have to carry out,
22:01but we,
22:02on our side,
22:03we have also
22:03our homework to do.
22:05We have to be
22:05more competitive
22:06in many disruptive
22:07technologies in which
22:09there is a catching-up
22:09need for the
22:10European Union,
22:11whether artificial
22:12intelligence,
22:13counting computing,
22:13robotics,
22:15the data on the
22:17cloud,
22:18biotechnology.
22:19It's not only
22:20to request the
22:21Chinese to trade
22:22fairly.
22:22It is also for us
22:24to be more
22:24competitive.
22:25We need to do
22:26our homework.
22:27Is that also
22:28signing the
22:29U.S.
22:29trade deal?
22:31We need to be
22:33very careful.
22:33when voices
22:35like today's
22:36voice from the
22:37other part
22:37of the
22:38Atlantic,
22:39I mean,
22:40send different
22:41messages.
22:41Okay.
22:42You know,
22:43Mr. Trump
22:43did one
22:44very good
22:45thing.
22:45It brought
22:46together the
22:48European countries
22:49more quickly
22:50than it
22:51happened before.
22:52So I think
22:53it's a very
22:53nice lesson
22:54and it's a
22:56huge opportunity
22:57just to take
22:57advantage of all
22:58this.
22:58do you agree
22:59that Trump,
23:01I might say
23:02Putin as well,
23:03are kind of
23:04helping us
23:05to get unified
23:06on trade policy?
23:07Yes, somehow
23:07both of them
23:08are external
23:09federators.
23:10And we perhaps
23:11should set up
23:12a monument to
23:13both of them
23:13because they are
23:14reinforcing the
23:15unity and the
23:16coherence of the
23:17European Union.
23:17when you talk
23:17about Trump.
23:18Be careful what
23:19you wish for.
23:19No, that's the
23:21point.
23:21I think that,
23:22I mean,
23:22the European Union
23:23normally reacts
23:24before crisis in a
23:26way that it
23:26doesn't normally
23:27do.
23:28The point now
23:29is that,
23:30as my colleague
23:31has said,
23:31time is of the
23:32essence.
23:32We don't have
23:33too much time
23:33to react because
23:34things are
23:35happening at
23:36a pace,
23:36at a break
23:37and we have
23:39to react
23:39quickly.
23:40We have to
23:42set up a
23:43clear strategy
23:43towards China
23:45which is not
23:45aggressive,
23:46which is not
23:46defensive.
23:47It is fair
23:48and we have to
23:49demand from them
23:49something that
23:50we have to do
23:51here at home
23:52as well.
23:52Time is of the
23:53essence.
23:54Yes.
23:54And now it's
23:55time to move
23:55on.
23:56to our
23:57fifth and
23:58final round.
24:02And now I want
24:03to do something
24:04different.
24:04I'm going to ask
24:05you a set of
24:06questions and
24:07you can only
24:07answer whether
24:08yes or no.
24:10All right.
24:10So I guess I
24:11start with you.
24:12Is access to
24:13the Chinese
24:13market still
24:14essential for
24:15Europe's
24:15economic growth?
24:16Yes.
24:17Yes,
24:18indeed.
24:19Okay.
24:20Were the
24:21EU's tariffs
24:22on Chinese
24:22electric vehicles
24:24worth the
24:25risk of
24:25retaliation?
24:27Yes.
24:29Yes,
24:30indeed.
24:30But I think
24:32the Chinese
24:33need to
24:33understand that
24:34we're not
24:34focusing on
24:35targeting China.
24:36We just
24:37try to protect
24:38our values.
24:38Okay.
24:39Long yes.
24:41Would you buy
24:41a Chinese car
24:43if it's
24:43considerably
24:44cheaper than
24:44a European
24:45one?
24:46I would.
24:47I mean,
24:48I'm not
24:48saying no,
24:48but the
24:49thing is
24:49that because
24:51if you don't
24:51have the
24:52money,
24:52you have to
24:53do something.
24:54Okay.
24:54But on the
24:54other hand,
24:55yes,
24:56I would.
24:56Yes,
24:56you would.
24:57Nicholas.
24:58It depends on
24:58the quality,
24:59not only of the
25:00price.
25:00The quality for me
25:01is very important.
25:02And I think
25:02that European
25:03cars are better.
25:03All right.
25:04Are WTO
25:05mechanisms
25:06still effective?
25:08Yes and no
25:09in a way,
25:10but we have to
25:11let's to
25:11reform some
25:12because some
25:13of them are
25:14old and,
25:15you know,
25:16things are
25:16changing very
25:16rapidly.
25:17Right now,
25:18mechanisms are
25:19effective,
25:19yes or no?
25:20Not entirely.
25:21Okay.
25:22Is the EU's
25:23new industrial
25:24policy compatible
25:25with open
25:26trade principles?
25:27Of course.
25:28That is one
25:29of our main
25:29objectives.
25:30Yes.
25:31Good.
25:32Indeed.
25:32Are bi-European
25:34measures a
25:35necessary
25:35correction?
25:41Yes,
25:42in a way.
25:43A definite
25:43may be,
25:44but yes.
25:45Okay.
25:46Now,
25:47squeezed between
25:48Trump's
25:48America and
25:49China,
25:50should Europe
25:50become more
25:51protectionist?
25:52Not at all.
25:54No,
25:55we don't need
25:56to be protectionist,
25:57more protectionist
25:58to bring protectionism.
25:59Stay open,
26:00but very careful.
26:01Okay.
26:02Can Europe
26:03realistically
26:04compete with
26:05China's state-backed
26:07industrial scale
26:08without similar
26:10subsidies?
26:11No.
26:12We cannot compete,
26:14but we have to
26:14force them to
26:15abide by the
26:16international rules,
26:18not for us to
26:19disregard the
26:19international rules.
26:20Okay.
26:21Finally,
26:21was there anything
26:22over the last
26:23half hour that you
26:25agree with your
26:26opponent?
26:26Well,
26:27actually,
26:27we have agreed on
26:28many things
26:29most of the time
26:30because we have
26:31a very sensitive
26:32approach.
26:33We expect from
26:34China
26:34fairness,
26:36reciprocity,
26:37and good
26:38awareness in
26:39international trade.
26:40And we are ready
26:41to offer them
26:41the same.
26:42That's why we
26:43share very much
26:44our approach.
26:45I don't think
26:46that there is
26:46space for
26:47disagreement
26:47nowadays when
26:49we have
26:49something in
26:50common just
26:51to protect and
26:52save our
26:53industry and
26:53our European
26:54citizens.
26:55So, for me,
26:55I've agreed also
26:56in many, many
26:57things with my
26:58colleague.
26:58Okay.
26:59So, we have
26:59common ground
27:00here between
27:00the People's
27:01Party and
27:02the Socialists.
27:03Fantastic.
27:04Well, it's good
27:04for Europe.
27:05That's good
27:05for Europe.
27:06Right.
27:06And that
27:08final answer
27:09brings us to
27:09the end of
27:10this edition
27:10of The Ring.
27:11Thanks again
27:12to Sakis,
27:13Anna Autoglou,
27:14and Nicolas
27:14de la Parte
27:15for a lively
27:16conversation here
27:17from the
27:17European Parliament.
27:18Thanks to
27:19our audience
27:19at home.
27:20If you like,
27:21you can continue
27:22the conversation
27:22by sending us
27:23your comments
27:24to thering
27:25at
27:26euronews.com.
27:27That's it
27:28for today.
27:29I'm Stefan Grobe.
27:30Take care
27:30and see you
27:31soon on
27:32euronews.
Comentarios