On May 15, China's Ministry of Justice (MOJ) stated in a notice that the EU's relevant cross-border investigative practices targeting Chinese entities under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) constitute improper extraterritorial jurisdiction measures. No organization or individual may carry out or assist in carrying out such improper extraterritorial jurisdiction measures, the MOJ notice said. This marks the first time China has invoked rules on countermeasures against foreign states' unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction to challenge the EU's actions, a significant move that the EU must approach with caution. The EU has been issuing a series of increasingly stringent trade restrictions against China, unleashing a set of "policy tools" aimed directly at Chinese companies and industries. While these measures may have various "justifications," they are, in reality, protectionist measures disguised as "fair competition" and aimed at "de-Sinicization" under the guise of "de-risking." As a spokesperson for China's Ministry of Commerce warned on Saturday, the EU "has persisted in its wrong course and gone further down the wrong path."

Early last January, China's Ministry of Commerce legally determined that the EU's FSR investigation constituted "barriers to trade and investment." However, since then, instead of curbing its efforts, the EU has intensified its investigations, expanding their scope and deepening their scrutiny. From railway equipment and wind power companies to security inspection equipment and cross-border e-commerce, the frequency and scope of the EU's FSR investigations targeting China far exceed normal limits. Furthermore, in these investigations, the EU has demanded a large amount of unnecessary information about China from Chinese entities, a clear overreach. The MOJ's announcement of legal countermeasures is a powerful safeguard for the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises as well as a firm defense of fairness and justice.

During the legislative process of the Industrial Accelerator Act, the EU proposed imposing numerous restrictive requirements on four strategic emerging industries: batteries, electric vehicles, photovoltaics, and key raw materials, which have been criticized as primarily targeting Chinese companies. Simultaneously, it has established exclusive terms such as "EU origin" and "prioritizing EU manufacturing" in public procurement and public support policies, constituting serious investment barriers and systemic discrimination, and potentially violating fundamental WTO principles such as most-favored-nation treatment and national treatment. This will unfairly increase the localization and compliance costs for foreign investors and contradict the important consensus reached by Chinese and EU leaders on properly handling frictions and differences.

In its draft revision of the EU's Cybersecurity Act and its ban on inverter financing, the EU has adopted more "pan-securitization" measures. For example, it excludes Chinese companies based on subjective and arbitrary "non-technical risk" standards and has even designated China as a "high-risk supplier" without any concrete evidence. This is not a matter of "security considerations," but a typical example of politicizing trade and economic issues and securitizing technological cooperation. While touting itself as the "world's most open market," the EU is simultaneously imposing increasingly stringent restrictions in key areas. While setting ambitious emissions reduction targets in the European Climate Law, it attempts to exclude high-quality green production capacity from China. These contradictory actions not only harm the interests of Chinese companies but also increase the cost of Europe's green transition and damage the EU's own international reputation and business environment.

The EU's series of trade moves against China has backfired. Especially given the current high international energy prices, erecting higher trade barriers against Chinese manufacturing, which could help Europe alleviate its energy and supply chain crises, is clearly unwise. Interdependence is not a risk, and intertwined interests are not a threat. The real risk in China-EU economic and trade cooperation is using the guise of "de-risking" to actually "de-cooperate." China's position on China-EU economic and trade relations is consistent and clear: We have always advocated managing differences through dialogue and consultation, but dialogue requires sincerity, cooperation requires equality, and actions need to move in the same direction. China will never sit idly by while the EU unreasonably suppresses Chinese companies with unilateral tools. The Ministry of Commerce has made its stance clear on the EU's "unilateral" abuse of the FSR, and the MOJ's blocking injunction has drawn a red line. If the EU insists on crossing the line, China will resolutely retaliate in accordance with the law.

A healthy and stable China-EU relationship will not only benefit both sides but also illuminate the world. The key is for the Europe to first establish a correct understanding of China. China and the EU are important economic and trade partners, with their combined economic output exceeding one-third of the global total. Bilateral trade between China and the EU has surged from $2.4 billion at the beginning of diplomatic relations to $828.1 billion in 2025, with deep integration of their industrial chains: China's new energy equipment and electromechanical products have become a timely boost to Europe's green transformation and manufacturing upgrade; Europe's high-end manufacturing and precision instruments are a catalyst for China's move toward the high end of the industrial chain. As two major forces promoting multipolarity, two major markets supporting globalization, and two major civilizations advocating diversity, China and the EU should move toward each other and cooperate to inject more certainty and positive energy into the world.

Hopefully the EU will be more rational and pragmatic, and less politically manipulative; more open and cooperative, and less protectionist. Replacing "walls and barriers" with open cooperation, and properly handling frictions and differences through dialogue and consultation, is the only correct choice for both China and the EU. We hope the EU could meet China halfway, and resolve issues through friendly consultation. This is a responsible attitude toward Chinese and European enterprises and the global economy, and it is the only wise way out.

Source: Global Times