EU's China Move Risks Shattering the Vital Transatlantic Alliance Against Beijing

The European Parliament’s latest move to wrap up talks with Beijing over lifting sanctions on its members has sent ripples of concern across the Atlantic. This development, reported by a spokesperson for the EU’s lawmaking body, suggests a thaw in relations with China at a time when the West can least afford to show weakness. For those who value national security and economic resilience, this decision smells like a capitulation to Beijing’s relentless push for global dominance. It’s a step that could unravel years of hard-won unity against China’s authoritarian ambitions.

The sanctions in question stem from a tit-for-tat exchange after the EU targeted Chinese officials over human rights abuses in Xinjiang. China’s retaliatory sanctions on European lawmakers were a bold flex, meant to intimidate and divide. Now, as the EU edges toward normalizing relations, it risks sending a message that Beijing’s strong-arm tactics work. The timing couldn’t be worse, with China deepening ties with Russia and exploiting global trade tensions to expand its influence.

From a perspective rooted in American strength and security, this move by Brussels is not just a diplomatic misstep; it’s a strategic blunder. The United States, under President Trump’s renewed leadership, has doubled down on confronting China’s economic and military rise. Yet, the EU’s apparent willingness to ease sanctions threatens to undermine that effort, creating cracks in the transatlantic alliance that Beijing is all too eager to exploit.

Make no mistake: lifting these sanctions isn’t about fostering peace or cooperation. It’s about Beijing buying leverage and the EU selling out its principles for short-term economic gains. The stakes are high, and the consequences could reshape the global balance of power.

For Americans, the EU’s flirtation with lifting sanctions on China hits close to home. China’s state-driven economic model, marked by intellectual property theft and industrial overcapacity, threatens U.S. jobs and innovation. From semiconductors to electric vehicles, Beijing’s subsidies and predatory pricing have already distorted global markets. Easing sanctions risks giving Chinese firms freer access to European markets and technology, creating loopholes that could weaken U.S.-led efforts to secure critical supply chains.

The geopolitical fallout is even more alarming. China’s support for Russia in the Ukraine conflict has raised red flags, with the EU itself labeling Beijing a “decisive enabler” of Moscow’s war machine. By softening its stance, the EU risks emboldening China to further align with adversarial regimes, from Iran to North Korea. This isn’t just a European problem; it’s a direct challenge to American security interests, particularly in the Indo-Pacific, where tensions over Taiwan loom large.

Historical precedent backs this concern. When the EU briefly considered lifting its arms embargo on China in the early 2000s, U.S. policymakers sounded the alarm over potential technology transfers that could bolster Beijing’s military. The embargo stayed, thanks to transatlantic resolve. Today, that same resolve is needed to prevent a sanctions rollback from opening the door to Chinese advances in AI, quantum computing, and other dual-use technologies.

Advocates for engagement with China might argue that dialogue and trade can temper Beijing’s ambitions. They point to the EU’s massive trade deficit with China—€516.2 billion in imports versus €230.3 billion in exports in 2023—as proof that economic ties demand cooperation. But this view ignores the reality: China’s economic leverage is a weapon, not a bridge. Normalizing relations without addressing human rights abuses or Beijing’s support for Russia only deepens Europe’s dependency and weakens the West’s hand.

At the heart of this debate lies a moral failure. The EU’s original sanctions targeted Chinese officials linked to the Uyghur crisis in Xinjiang, where forced labor and cultural erasure have drawn global condemnation. By easing restrictions without securing meaningful concessions, the EU risks legitimizing these atrocities. It’s a gut-wrenching signal to victims that their suffering takes a backseat to trade deals and diplomatic niceties.

The United States has taken a firm stand on this front, with bipartisan support for the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and sanctions targeting Chinese firms complicit in human rights abuses. The EU has its own forced labor bans, but enforcement remains spotty, and the push to lift sanctions suggests a wavering commitment. Those who champion human rights in Brussels argue that engagement can lead to reform, but history shows otherwise. China’s crackdown in Hong Kong and its defiance of international norms prove that Beijing responds to strength, not appeasement.

The European Parliament’s insistence that the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment remains frozen until China lifts its sanctions on EU officials is a small consolation. It’s a reminder that Beijing’s punitive measures still sting. But if the EU truly valued its principles, it would demand reciprocal action on Xinjiang and beyond before even considering a sanctions rollback. Anything less is a betrayal of the values the West claims to uphold.

The path forward demands a recommitment to transatlantic unity. The United States and EU must present a united front, aligning on sanctions, export controls, and investment screening to counter China’s influence. President Trump’s administration, with its focus on America First, has made clear that economic and military competition with China is non-negotiable. The EU must decide whether it stands with its allies or risks becoming a weak link in the Western alliance.

Sanctions, when coordinated and enforced, have proven their worth. The multilateral sanctions on Iran and North Korea, while imperfect, have raised the cost of rogue behavior. In contrast, unilateral measures often falter, as seen in the limited impact of sanctions on Venezuela. The EU’s potential retreat on China sanctions threatens to repeat this mistake, handing Beijing a victory it hasn’t earned.

The EU’s “de-risking” strategy, which seeks to reduce dependencies without fully decoupling, is a step in the right direction. But it’s not enough. Without a firm commitment to human rights, security, and alliance cohesion, de-risking becomes a hollow buzzword. The United States must press its European partners to hold the line, ensuring that any engagement with China comes with ironclad conditions.

Ultimately, the EU’s talks with Beijing are a test of resolve. Will Europe prioritize its economic interests and strategic autonomy, or will it stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States to confront a shared challenge? The answer will shape not just transatlantic relations but the future of the free world.