Belgium Urges EU to Save Industry by Getting Tough on China

Why It Matters

Shielding key industries is essential for preserving European manufacturing competitiveness and reducing dependence on China’s state‑backed export model. The debate signals a potential shift toward more protectionist trade policies within the EU.

Key Takeaways

• Belgium urges EU to shield chemicals, pharma from Chinese oversupply
• EU trade deficit with China hit €360 bn (~$390 bn) last year
• Proposed Industrial Accelerator Act would favor EU firms over Chinese suppliers
• EU may accept short‑term hardship to counter Chinese market flooding
• EU summit June 18‑19 set to decide on a strategic China plan

Pulse Analysis

The growing trade imbalance between the EU and China has become a flashpoint for policymakers in Brussels. While European imports from China surged, exports have faltered, pushing the bloc’s deficit to roughly $390 billion last year. Industries such as chemicals, pharmaceuticals, automotive and critical minerals are especially vulnerable, as Chinese firms benefit from economies of scale and state subsidies. Belgium, traditionally a moderate voice, is now championing a more assertive stance, urging the Commission to prioritize sectors where rapid, targeted measures can restore a level playing field.

If the EU moves forward with protective legislation, the most visible tools could include the Industrial Accelerator Act and revisions to the Cybersecurity Act. The former would give preferential treatment to EU‑based manufacturers in public procurement, effectively sidelining Chinese competitors that lack a trade agreement with the bloc. Meanwhile, the Cybersecurity Act aims to exclude Huawei from telecom supply chains, reflecting broader security concerns. Chinese officials have already signaled a willingness to retaliate, warning of counter‑measures that could affect European exporters in China. Policymakers therefore face a delicate calculus: short‑term pain versus long‑term strategic autonomy.

The upcoming summit on June 18‑19 will test the EU’s ability to forge a cohesive strategy. A unified approach could bolster Europe’s industrial resilience, encourage investment in domestic R&D, and reduce reliance on external supply chains. Conversely, a fragmented response may leave individual member states exposed to both market distortions and diplomatic fallout. As global supply chains realign, the EU’s decision will reverberate beyond Europe, influencing how other trading blocs manage their own exposure to China’s expansive export model.