Illustration: Canva
What is happening?
Last week, senior EU officials, including Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Council President António Costa, traveled to Beijing for the EU–China Summit, marking 25 years of high-level meetings and the 50th anniversary of diplomatic ties. Despite the occasion’s symbolic weight, this year’s summit was one of the shortest on record (excluding pandemic-era videoconferences), underscoring the increasingly fragile state of bilateral relations.
Main agenda items included issues related to economic policy – “leveling the playing field” for European companies, which struggle with market access in China and Beijing’s unfair trade practices related to its overcapacity – and European security, including China’s political and economic support to the Russian Federation as it wages a war of aggression against Ukraine. While the summit led to little progress in these two main areas of concern, the bloc and Beijing reached narrow agreements on climate and rare earths.
What is the broader picture?
Despite limited consensus on major economic and security issues, the summit yielded two concrete outcomes. First, the EU and China issued a rare joint statement on climate cooperation, pledging enhanced collaboration on clean energy, methane reduction, and carbon markets. Second, Beijing agreed to ease restrictions on rare earth exports, a key breakthrough after China expanded its export control regime in April 2025. The deal is vital for European industries dependent on Chinese critical minerals for green and digital transitions.
On other issues, neither side is wearing rose-tinted glasses. Commission President von der Leyen emphasized that bilateral ties were at an “inflection point” and called on both sides to “come forward with real solutions.” Meanwhile, according to the official Chinese readout, President Xi Jinping (習近平) urged the EU to avoid “restrictive economic and trade measures” and to keep its markets open. He also called for joint support of multilateralism and opposition to “unilateralism”—a veiled reference to the United States. Notably, the Chinese readout made no mention of the war in Ukraine, a key issue raised by the EU side.
Tensions remain high. Beijing is frustrated with the EU’s 18th sanctions package against Russia, which included two Chinese banks, while Brussels remains concerned about unfair trade practices that put European companies at a disadvantage. Another clash came over the EU’s exclusion of Chinese firms from public procurement of medical devices. Following the announcement of the latest sanctions package, the Chinese side also scrapped plans for a business roundtable in Hefei, Anhui—a major hub for Chinese quantum computing.
The summit was originally intended to span two days in Brussels, following the last meeting in December 2023 in Beijing. However, the Chinese side is officially represented at the level of premier (currently Li Qiang 李強) during the EU-China Summit. Brussels sought direct access to President Xi, who declined to travel, citing domestic reasons. Symbolically, his refusal to visit the EU underscores China’s self-perceived dominance and reflects Xi’s emperor-like posture, as he expects his counterparts to kowtow to him in Beijing.
Still, the EU continues to harden its stance on China. Earlier this month, von der Leyen accused China of “de facto enabling Russia’s war economy” and warned that China’s “no-limits partnership” with Russia will shape future EU-China relations.
Why does it matter?
Despite diplomatic frost, EU–China relations remain strategically consequential. China is the EU’s third-largest trading partner for goods and services, while the EU remains China’s largest. But economic asymmetries, regulatory disputes, and political mistrust are growing.
More pressingly, China’s tacit alignment with Russia and its central role in global emissions keep it at the center of Europe’s foreign and climate policy debates. Yet with waning strategic influence vis-à-vis the United States, Brussels finds itself in a delicate balancing act—maintaining principled criticism while preserving communication.
In this light, the short, unsatisfying summit is telling. These meetings are less about substance than signaling, representing symbolic diplomacy amid deteriorating trust. Europe may be done with illusions about China, but it is not yet done with engagement.