Financial Analysis Report: US-China Trade Rivalry and EU Relations

This report provides a comprehensive financial analysis of the escalating trade rivalry between the United States and China, examining its impact on the European Union and the broader global landscape. It delves into the historical context of this rivalry, highlighting the shift in China's economic status and the responses from the US and EU. The report explores the interplay of values, global orders, economic and geopolitical factors, and strategic autonomy in shaping transcontinental relationships. It analyzes areas of potential compromise and cooperation, emphasizing the need for a cohesive transcontinental policy to address instability and protect Western ideals. The report also discusses the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic and examines the roles of innovation, human rights, and international institutions in this complex interplay, concluding with recommendations for improved coordination and strategic autonomy within the EU and the USA in regards to China.

Financial Analysis

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Technical and hence economic control is a central factor of global competitiveness between the
United States and China, while rivalry powers goes far further than just the market. For instance,
the Covid-19 epidemic is a fresh and unique factor in the conflict between China and the United
States. Besides that, what are the disease outbreak’s consequences for the European Union and
the transcontinental friendship? As report addressed, technical rivalry between the United States
and China may have either a destructive or healing impact on transcontinental ties. A fresh and
cohesive transcontinental policy relating to China is required in order to deter instability. This
report discusses and examines a range of fields beyond innovation wherein the European Union
and the United States might and therefore should reach a compromise. But every such research
starts by acknowledging the need to protect Western ideals, by building a wider transcontinental
discussion on commerce and Chinese investment, by establishing a mutual view of China's
defense and paramilitary problems, and, eventually, by moving towards behavioral change in
China on matters of transcontinental mutual interest.

Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................4
MAIN BODY..............................................................................................................................................4
CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................................................10
REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................................11

INTRODUCTION
U.S. trade rivalry with China increased under the Obama regime, as the U.S. struggled with the
effects of China's transformation from a developing nation to the 2nd biggest economy. As result
of the U.S. "influence in Asia" or America's "Pacific Generation," the Obama government has
taken actions like establishing a 12-nation Trans-Pacific Alliance (later recanted by the trump
regime) and strengthening Military power and security arrangements in the Indo-Pacific region.
Even so, it was the American government that proclaimed an period of great rivalry with China,
imposed punitive tariffs toward Beijing, and has become more militarily involved in Europe by
threatening towards Chinese economic investment , especially in the technical domain (Liu and
van den Bergh, 2020). Both the EU and the USA are trying a rule-based, fair contest to make
China act in a manner that matches more favorably with the Eastern understanding of world
order; however they try to do so in totally various ways with some very various instruments.
While transcontinental connections are under pressure, Europe stays far similar to the USA in
terms of common values, political and social models and network security. There are some
aspects upon which EU countries do not generally agree, but where, aside from innovation and
defense, they may come to a compromise in China's strategies.
MAIN BODY
Values and global orders:
EU do not see China's rise to significant influence as a key issue. Europe agrees that China is a
theocratic dictatorship, established through Beijing’s rule, with ideals that are very distinct from
those held by the USA and EU. The transcontinental strategy to China must also support liberal
ideals, like personal liberty, the legal system, independence of speech and of the press, and the
respect for human rights. All parts of the Pacific Ocean must make competitiveness for soft
influence a core part of their strategy. At the outset of the openness of the USA to China in the
1970s, principles were not a core consideration for most U.S. politicians. They were not a

priority for the EU powers either, but this shifted drastically with the 1989 crackdown on Hong
Kong (Goulard, 2020). Over the last 20 years of Sino-American involvement, the US has been
frustrated that contact with China has not contributed to greater Chinese financial and trade
liberalization, as the number of Chinese international students studying in the USA & EU has
increased. Transcontinental politicians have assumed that the invention of the internet and
computerization could become a force for openness in China, instead of a mechanism for broader
economic domination of culture, as has happened under Xi Jinxing. For China, innovation has
produced more power and persecution, best illustrated in detention and re-education camps for
Uyghur’s Muslim people in Xinxiang and the increasing network of Uyghur’s.
One field of principles wherein the USA & EU should work around is the question of human
rights and laws. It's not going to be convenient. To begin with, the United Nations doesn't even
have a common agenda, since certain EU countries vary in their priorities against China. It has
stopped the parliament from taking strong roles in the protection of the environment in China,
particularly in the case of Taliban s right-education centers or demonstrations in Hong Kong or
Tibet The USA is taking a more constructive role in calling out human rights concerns in China,
bring awareness to Chinese AI firms using face detection technologies to support the security
council (Geeraerts, 2019). The U.S. in December 2019. The senate passed a bill which would
fine responsible parties for violations of human rights against the Uyghur’s and ban shipments of
software that China uses in its Xinjiang secret prisons. This is not only regimes that have to
answer the issue of principles when it comes to ties with China, and also businesses and non -
governmental organizations. U.S. — Vice-President Mike Pence made this comment specifically
by saying that "too many united states international corporations have swung to the appeal of
China's capital and economies by trying to silence not only criticisms of the ruling party, but also
positive manifestations of American ideals.
The USA & EU should work more closely together and get the China held by the USA and other
foreign organizations. China is seeking to mould and bend these institutions to their principles
and desires (especially by avoiding scrutiny of China) using this techniques like "culture of a
common future for humanity" and "democratization of global relationships." China is working
hard to bring its "principles" to civil rights and other problems within the UN system via the
foreign terms. As per Krystine Lee and Alexander Sullivan, "those words intentionally weaken

an agreement on fundamental human rights. " However, in order to undo this attempt, the USA
must reclaim a greater role in the rules-based global order that it established and that the
American government has eroded. It is crucial to reform China's externally and internally
actions, with U.S.-EU coordination focused on improving China’s behavior impacting U.S. and
European concerns (Que, Awuah-Offei and Chen, 2019).
Economics and Geopolitics:
In order to set its geopolitical goals, subsequent EU policies have begun to enhance Europe's
wish to attain EU geopolitical freedom and even direct "independence," as this refers to the
needs of Europe. At current, it remained a target, not a fact, born of an order to express
diplomatic significance announced the approval of the UK to exit from the EU and the trump
administration in the USA (Li and Liu, 2019). French President Emmanuel Macron reiterated
this wish by saying that Europe has been grappling for the first period with the leader of the free
world, who "does not share our vision of a EU project," as EU is faced with the growth of china
and the totalitarian turn of Greece and turkey. Europe is now deteriorating as a result of technical
political upheaval and BREXIT management, which was "inconceivable 5 years earlier," Macron
stated. There is indeed a major possibility that we will politically and socially vanish in the long
term, or at least that we're no doubt be in charge of our destiny. I think that's quite profound.
Covid-19's financial and political consequences put much increasing pressure on the EU
initiative, putting its sustainability at higher risk.
However, it is simpler than achieved to achieve EU national sovereignty – others have claimed it
to be "a temporary phenomenon. In terms of defense language, but far from gaining European
national sovereignty. Interventions of Permanent organized collaboration (PESCO), a small
European legal fund (EDF) and an integration and defense project management mechanism were
adopted, which also generated confusion by possible overlap with NATO throughout the U.S.
Government (Min, Lee and Aoshima, 2019). On the military side, in relation to the USA, EU
usually see the rise of China into a future powerhouse, a probable (but actual) risk, but do not
regard it as militarily actual, even as France and Britain waterways are not military force visible
in the Pacific within the scope of the southern north Maritime free navigation service. Yet
diplomatic relationship between Russia and German countries are constantly troubling or how
the Chinese element strengthens Russia in Germany. Whereas, military force as well as in other

ways, Japan is searching for a big global alliance to contain China, European nations are not too
enthusiastic on the notion.
There should also be a robust interactive and technical autonomy discussion in the USA and the
EU. "In the modern era, those that handle emerging technology are progressively capable of
shaping fiscal, social and political results," the Center for public policy of the European
parliament reports. Under this backdrop. In order to achieve this autonomy, a Europe-wide
strengthened technological industry will be required, particularly in the AI market that has been
lagging behind, might it be reliant on the 'international intervention and influence of key
technologies, as well as of vital technology suppliers and vital services (Chowdhry and
Felbermayr, 2020). The increasing geopoliticalisation of innovation will mean a conceptual shift
for strategy autonomy. The USA needs to embrace Europe's objective of enhanced political and
virtual sovereignty, which could be called 'strategic responsibility' or 'co-accountability' in
embrace of the principle more generally in other EU nations, such as the nations of the Baltic and
Core EU Union.
European Strategic Autonomy:
There is not an effective level of Trans Atlantic policy activity which is associated with country
China. It is seen that China has the opportunity for managing transatlantic relations and working
upon European unity. There is both European Union as well as United States which are
managing cognizant off amount for change and it is used for recognizing the changes in behavior
of China. There are several issues which are considered from both the sides. It is seen that Trans
Atlantic relationship and the collaboration between Australia as well as Japan was introduced in
Beijing on managing a proper agenda. In order to complete this agreement, there were some
recommendations for Europe as well as United States. Both these states were having a proper
deal in which China Has to search origin change (Onyusheva, Naing and Zaw, 2019). There are
Trans Atlantic dialogue involved in the Europe and United States which have the problem in
managing companies as well as in public. There is Trans Atlantic dialogue with Indy dismantling
of China which is one of the most important parts of the project. There was de escalation of trade
and in this United States as well as Europe was re forming as well as upgrading the WTO. It was
seen that there were disputes resolutions as well as mechanisms which are adopted for
developing the world of Ridge it'll age. Within the dialogue of perceptions among Chinese

military, it was considered that driver common ground among Europe and these issues included
trade and climate change. It was related to Trans Atlantic Corporation within the fields. Main
objective of Europe voice related with the geopolitical perspective on policies associated with
China and Europe. It is seen that European Union voice consisting of various investments related
to Europe and United States. It has enhanced the intelligence sharing within both the countries.
Europe as well as United States has developed an agreement for controlling military and dual use
exports for Cold War style technology transfer rules and regulations.
The European start project autonomy consists of rain enforcement of strategic autonomy. The
main sovereignty is involved in managing interest of Europe vain setting the strategic priorities.
There is evolution of goals and reality which are considered from a desire for proving the
geopolitical relevance. Europe is a country which is famous for dealing with in the other
countries. In context of US President, it was seen that there is rise of China as well as
authoritarian who turned into Russia as well as Turkey. It was concluded that Europe has to
weaken the internal political instability and has to manage the folk for reaching potential internal
political instability. There are various risks when these policies have to run in long term. There
are several political as well as economic implications of COVID-19 and these are placed for
managing The European projects effectively. There is great risk which has to be faced while
managing European projects. There is several strategic autonomy which is easily managed
because of the start Jack field as well as defense for managing the whole project. This was
started in European defense fund and there was a scheme developed in order to enhance the
integration as well as defense project coordination (Liu, Wu and Wan, 2019). There were
permanent structured Corporation initiatives that have developed in order to maintain the
administration. It has led to duplication of the potential outcomes. It was saying that the military
dimension working within US was not effective and Europeans Were watching China's growth.
There was no case where it was seen that British as well as French vessels verb present between
framework for free navigation operations. Never military relations among Russia as well as
China and these were involved in reinforcement among Europe. Japan has to look for broad
international coalition in order to obtain China and manage the military work. Within the
military area, it was seen that Europe has to manage the statements which it has given with
China. It was considered that European Union has a combination of military exercises and these
are also related with China. There were different examples which provide an explanation

regarding Gulf of Aden. These projects were associated with best level of coordination for
Chinese as well as European forces. There were various geopolitical contexts which were
associated with Gulf of Aden and managing the Mediterranean Sea (Larres, 2020). Due to this,
there was interest developed among China. They have to pay a lot of attention towards the US
military regarding China. There was European strategic autonomy which has to be managed
effectively for keeping the government of US in longstanding desire. There was US
administrations operational flexibility which introduced the perceiving of Washington as seeking
for decoupling the security relationship. It is important for Europe to develop various capabilities
and managing to enhance the collaboration and coordination. European Union and United States
is managing older discourse on digital as well as technological sovereignty and establishing
political strategy. It is seen that in the 21st century there are various digital technologies used and
they have impacted upon societal, political as well as economic consequences of any project. In
the scenario of present project, it was seen that geopolitics of technology-has a strong overview
regarding the controlling Key. There were chances of critical infrastructure as well as essential
services.
It was considered that support Is required for maintaining the global connectivity as well as
politics. It was included that there is need of identification of cyber security as well as the
informatization regarding the cyber security for managing the modernization. It was considered
that there is controlling as well as managing the information effectively within the China. It is
seen that when there is managing of Europeans as well as US then there is need of Corporation
among the strategies (Diaconu, 2019). It is considered that US government has to manage the
emphasizing upon China for this successful evaluation of project. There is need of managing the
challenges as well as opportunities for addressing the alliance in proper manner. It is considered
that there are basically 6 main issues within the companies that include Chinese investment,
deployments, cyber security, Afghanistan Russia China relations, infrastructure and these all
have major impact upon the global expansion of China. There are several discussions about
China entering into European and American market and there is a policy convergence developed
in order to manage technological, economic, geopolitical as well as ideological concept. There
are various areas in which growth in relationship among China as well as Russia is present start
have helped to manage the operational partners effectively and enhancing the respect among
each other. There is need to enhance relationship and manage the suppliers of economic concept

because this will help to lead a good operation among international institutions. This is seen that
military relationship of Russia China is also increasing and this has resulted in depending upon
Russian military less because of the technologies. There were few leaders of Europe like Macron
who have provided the strategic plan for pulling Russia towards Europe and not a share.
There were other issues related to European countries managing sale of military or dual
capability technology. In context of this, European Union has to manage the placing of policy
makers and revive link the export restrictions. There was interdependence regarding the Europe
and re introduction of body in terms of economy. It was seen that export controls were able to
manage because of the conventional as well as dual use of goods and technologies. There was
multilateral export control regime in which there was participation of various states. It is seen
that did cooperation of partner among the policy approach with Europe for worse focusing upon
finding a balance that will lead to achievement of aims and objectives (González and Veron,
2019). There were United States as well as European unions and these were involved in
managing the common ground for policies. It was considered that China was raised among the
major power of central and for doing so, Democratic freedom and expression was introduced for
managing the approach. It was seen that American disappointment were involved in interacting
with China and reaching economical as well as political liberalization. China has seeing that
liberal democracy was inefficient and it has resulted in the development of Chinese Communist
party. There were several anti government protests among Hong Kong city and this has resulted
in China to become the third largest market because of Apple. There was a regime in Hong Kong
which was started on the topic that whether foreign companies should be allowed to do business
according to their principles or not.
CONCLUSION
From the above discussion, it is analyzed that there is positive approach of Europe towards
China. There were several states which have focused upon Chinese investments and imports in
the year 2008. On the other hand, needs and demands of Europe word more for doing business
with China. They wanted Chinese companies to have a proper policy approach in which there is
cooperation partner strategy included. This created lot of negotiating partner conflict and fights
and at last it was decided that pursuit of technological leadership as well as systematic rivalry
was promoted by using various models of governance.

REFERENCES
Liu, F. and van den Bergh, J.C., 2020. Differences in CO2 emissions of solar PV production
among technologies and regions: Application to China, EU and USA. Energy Policy,
p.111234.
Goulard, S., 2020. The Impact of the US–China Trade War on the European Union. Global
Journal of Emerging Market Economies, 12(1), pp.56-68.
Que, S., Awuah-Offei, K., Demirel, A., Wang, L., Demirel, N. and Chen, Y., 2019. Comparative
study of factors affecting public acceptance of mining projects: Evidence from USA,
China and Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 237, p.117634.
Li, X. and Liu, A.Y., 2019. Business as usual? Economic responses to political tensions between
China and Japan. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 19(2), pp.213-236.
Min, Y.K., Lee, S.G. and Aoshima, Y., 2019. A comparative study on industrial spillover effects
among Korea, China, the USA, Germany and Japan. Industrial management & data
systems.
Chowdhry, S. and Felbermayr, G., 2020. The US-China trade deal: How the EU and WTO lose
from managed trade (No. 132). Kiel Policy Brief.
Geeraerts, G., 2019. The EU-China partnership: balancing between divergence and
convergence. Asia Europe Journal, 17(3), pp.281-294.
Onyusheva, I., Naing, C.T. and Zaw, A.L., 2019. The Us-China Trade War: Cause-Effect
Analysis. The EUrASEANs: journal on global socio-economic dynamics, (1 (14)), pp.07-
15.
Liu, L., Wu, T. and Wan, Z., 2019. The EU-China relationship in a new era of global climate
governance. Asia Europe Journal, 17(2), pp.243-254.
Diaconu, M., 2019. Business R&D investments in the EU: Main dynamics and economic
effects. Theoretical & Applied Economics, (4).
González, A. and Veron, N., 2019. EU Trade Policy amid the China-US Clash: Caught in the
Cross-Fire?. Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper, (19-13).
Larres, K., 2020. Trump’s trade wars: America, China, Europe, and global disorder. Journal of
Transatlantic Studies, 18(1), pp.103-129.