Gabriel G. Tabarani
As the United States and China continue their bitter contest for global primacy, Europe finds itself in an uncomfortable, if not untenable, position. The continent is neither a bystander nor a passive recipient of the consequences of this rivalry. Instead, the European Union (EU) is a critical third actor, shaping and shaped by the choices of Washington and Beijing. Yet Europe’s stance is marked by ambivalence, hesitation, and the perennial challenge of unity among its 27 member states. The future of the global order may depend as much on how Europe calibrates its path between the two giants as on what Washington or Beijing themselves do.
The first truth is that Europe cannot afford to be a mere appendage of American strategy. For decades, Europe’s security has been underwritten by Washington through NATO, a dependence made only starker by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Yet Europe’s relationship with China is not defined by tanks and missiles, but by trade flows, supply chains, and technological dependencies. While the United States frames China as its systemic rival and security threat number one, the EU sees China as an awkward mix: a partner, competitor, and systemic rival all at once. This divergence of perceptions inevitably creates friction in transatlantic cooperation.
Washington’s expectations of Europe remain high—sometimes unrealistically so. American strategists hope for coordinated restrictions on Chinese technology transfers, solidarity on sanctions, and a willingness to align diplomatically on sensitive issues such as Taiwan. But Europe’s bandwidth is limited. Militarily, the EU is not prepared to assist the United States in an Asian conflict. At best, it can ensure stability on its own continent while Washington turns its gaze eastward. Economically, Europe has begun to “de-risk” from China, but its dependence on Chinese imports—from rare earths to solar panels—makes a clean break neither possible nor desirable. The blunt truth is that Europe’s China policy will never be a carbon copy of Washington’s.
For its part, Beijing sees Europe as both a weak link and a prize. Chinese leaders calculate that the transatlantic relationship is too strained, and American reliability too uncertain, for Europe to consistently side with Washington. By exploiting divisions within Europe and between Europe and the United States, Beijing hopes to ensure continued access to the EU’s vast market while dulling European criticism of its political and security agenda. Its tactics are as predictable as they are effective: offering incentives to individual European states, threatening economic retaliation against EU-wide policies, and deepening its alignment with Russia to raise the costs of European pushback.
The irony is that Beijing’s strategy has backfired in recent years. Its “no limits” partnership with Vladimir Putin has alarmed Europe, reinforcing the perception that China is an enabler of Russia’s war machine. Its aggressive economic statecraft—restricting exports of critical minerals, flooding European markets with subsidized goods, and weaponizing dependencies—has hardened attitudes in Brussels and beyond. Far from wooing Europe away from Washington, China has pushed it closer. The EU has launched investigations into Chinese electric vehicle and e-commerce firms, sanctioned Chinese banks aiding Russia, and excluded Chinese companies from key public contracts. European leaders increasingly speak of an “inflection point” in relations with Beijing.
Yet Europe’s response remains uneven. Some member states, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, take a hawkish line, seeing China through the prism of security and sovereignty. Others, including powerful economies like Germany, are torn between strategic caution and economic pragmatism. Europe’s vaunted “strategic autonomy” remains more aspiration than reality, undermined by internal divisions and the gravitational pull of U.S. power. This disunity is precisely what Beijing exploits, and what Washington fears.
Where does this leave Brussels? The EU’s ideal scenario is a triangular balance: maintaining its indispensable alliance with Washington while managing a stable, if competitive, relationship with Beijing. But this balancing act is fraught with contradictions. Europe cannot detach from the United States without jeopardizing its security; nor can it sever ties with China without crippling its economy. The challenge, then, is to craft a middle path—“de-risking” but not decoupling, aligning with Washington when interests overlap but preserving the freedom to act independently when they diverge.
This is easier said than done. Consider digital regulation: Europe may ban TikTok on privacy grounds with little coordination with Washington, showing independence. But when it comes to semiconductor controls or sanctions on Russia, European and American policies are intertwined. Similarly, Europe’s green transition depends on Chinese solar technology, even as it investigates Beijing’s unfair trade practices. Such contradictions will not disappear. They must be managed.
For Washington, the lesson is clear. Demanding lockstep alignment from Europe on China is a recipe for disappointment. Instead, the United States should welcome a Europe that strengthens its own resilience, reduces economic vulnerabilities to Beijing, and speaks with a more unified voice—even if that voice does not always echo Washington’s. A confident, self-reliant Europe is far more valuable to America than a hesitant, divided one.
For Brussels, the imperative is equally stark. Europe must resist being merely reactive—pulled one way by Washington and another by Beijing. Instead, it should articulate a proactive vision for the global order: rules-based, open, and fair. This means leading on reforming global trade norms, pushing back against coercive economic practices, and championing multilateral diplomacy. It also means investing in its own defense and technological capacity, so that its choices are driven by strategy rather than dependence.
Ultimately, Europe’s role in the U.S.-China rivalry will not be determined by Washington or Beijing, but by Europe itself. Will it continue to stumble between unity and division, or will it seize the moment to become a shaper rather than a spectator of global competition? History suggests that Europe moves slowly, but when pushed to the brink, it can surprise with boldness. The transatlantic alliance, the future of globalization, and the stability of the international order may hinge on whether Europe rises to this challenge.
This article was originally published in Arabic on the Asswak Al-Arab website
Photo Caption
