News

Situation in Central and Eastern European Countries and China-EU Relations

Moderator of the sub-forum session  entitled  Parallel Session 3: Situation in Central and Eastern European Countries and China-EU Relations was dr. Kong Tianping, Senior Research Fellow, Institute of European Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

The participants engaged in in-depth discussions on China-CEEC cooperation in the context of China-EU relations, and business and trade collaboration between China and the CEEC. 

Speakers were:  Valentin Ivanov Katrandzhiev, Head of China Studies Research Unit, Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute; Jasna Plevnik, President of Geoeconomic Forum Croatia; Jelena Gledić, Senior Instructor, University of Belgrade China-CEEC Cooperation: Relationality in International Affairs; Malgorzata Bonikowska, President, Centre for International Relations; Ioannis Kotoulas, Lecturer in Geopolitics, University of Athens; Ivica Bakota , Associate Professor, Institute for Country and Regional Studies, Capital Normal University; Patrycja Zdybel, Vice president, Boym Institute and Konrad Rajca, China-CEE Institute researcher, Asian Forum Employers' Association, Member of the Board

Jasna Plevnik : Europe has changed deeply and that changes  involve risk for the China- CEEC cooperation’s dynamic in 2026 

You can read the full speech by Dr. Jasna Plevnik here.

“China-CEEC cooperation has been for  thirteen years a significant part of China- Europe diplomacy that in this year  has celebrated 50 years of   being progressive and integrative.

From 2017 to 2025 China-CEEC cooperation has been faced with different kinds of obstacles  in Europe, but it succeeded to hold its own way.  It means this model of cooperation has proven to be very resilient and patient.That is not a PR package for China – CEEC cooperation - credible data and the academic research support the claim.

China-CEEC’s strength  is based on two essential things. It has  shown ability to increase its focus on sustainable economic development, cultural cooperation, and people to people friendship. 

Second, the China-CEEC continues  to be a platform of cooperation  for countries of different cultures, ideologies, and political systems. That is a very valuable feature regarding a big tide of divisions in international relations in the last years.

China-CEEC cooperation cannot, at least theoretically, stay aloof  from China’s other mechanisms for strengthening multilateralism and people-centred development in the foreign affairs. It should be understood as a part of Global Governance Initiative(2025), Global Civilisation Initiative (2023), Global Security Initiative (2022),  Global Development Initiative (2021) and  The Belt and Road Initiative (2013).

I am an admirer of all those projects and initiatives which have force to move relations among countries towards peace, connectivity and more multilateral and multi – civilisational world order.

In today’s world politics anything can mean nothing and vice versa

However, we deal with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.

Things are too slowly moving into the direction of peaceful and balanced world order. Because it’s not just current USA Administration’s trade war and unilaterally raising tariffs on almost everyone, and it’s not climate change, and it’s not just Russia- Ukraine war,  war and fragility of Gaza peace, or clashes between Pakistan and Afghanistan. It’s everything of that at once, at the same time that destabilise the world order.

 The world we live in right now — is in a super- dangerous  moment. In today’s world politics anything can mean nothing and vice versa. 

Europe has changed deeply and that changes  involve risk for the China- CEEC cooperation’s dynamic in 2026. 

The question for China-CEEC cooperation’s future, that is by its nature a geoeconomics project, is how the  trade wars will affect China- Europe relations. There is a realistic possibility of  long trade wars globally  and further rise of protectionism in Europe under pretext of security issues.

China- CEEC cooperation will have to deal with deep sense of insecurity that haunts Europe today. 

The war narrative drums across Europe

That new realism dictates Europe to require a substantial increase in a defence spending plus growth of  defence spending for NATO:3,5 % of GDP by 2035.

And if Europe enters in Post Ukraine  war era it will  not stop processes like arming of Europe that the EC calling   ‘Preserving Peace’ roadmap. 

That is part of an EU-wide efforts to  deter and contain  Russia, and even to be ready to fight with it directly by 2030. The EU is eager to build an iron curtain towards Russia. 

The European Commission plans  arming the bloc by issuing billions of euros in loans to fund joint defence projects of EU countries over the next five years. Hungary, Slovakia, and Netherlands have consistently been opposed  to joint borrowing.

The European Commission, whose mandate lasts until 2029, would be even ready to boost spending on defence at the expense of Maastricht macroeconomic criteria. To get extra money national budget deficits could be higher of 3% of gross domestic product ( GDP ). Taking on joint debt to finance the defence industry over the next five years is consistently opposed by some countries such as Hungary, Slovakia, and the Netherlands.

If the EU break Maastricht criteria it could put a pressure on the unity and macroeconomic stability

If the EU break Maastricht criteria it could put a pressure on the unity of the European Union and  the possibility of a big shock of macroeconomic significance in the long run. 

There is a tendency that  process of accession to the European Union prioritizes security over accession criteria.There is  also  discussion about a new enlargement rule  how new members could join the EU without full voting rights. That would ensure fast track for Ukraine.

The EU is under big pressure from the new situation in its strategic relations with the USA too. The United States has made it clear that it wants peace in Europe in order to focus on China denying it development and seeing it as its main rival. The US calls countries it cannot control a threat to its national security.

Chinese tech and export competitiveness is seen as a burden on American companies and 

the current US administration could ask Europe to support that view, as it did in first mandate of President Trump.

From all that, we could see that the challenging times for EU-China relations do not end, and thus for the China-CCEC model of cooperation.

Thank you!"