EU Trade Clout Could Expose Cracks in China’s Economic Model, Senior MEP Warns

The European Union’s vast consumer market of 450 million people gives Brussels significant leverage over Beijing, and mounting trade pressure could ultimately test the stability of China’s economic model, according to a senior European lawmaker who oversees the bloc’s parliamentary relations with China.

Engin Eroglu, a German liberal member of the European Parliament and chair of the Parliament’s delegation responsible for China relations, made the remarks in a wide-ranging interview, arguing that the EU holds more cards in its dealings with Beijing than is commonly acknowledged. Eroglu suggested that China’s economic framework carries inherent vulnerabilities that sustained external commercial pressure could bring to the surface.

The comments come at a particularly tense moment in EU-China relations, marked by ongoing disputes over trade imbalances, European tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, and broader concerns about market access and unfair subsidies. Brussels has grown increasingly assertive in its approach to Beijing, seeking to reduce strategic dependencies while maintaining a trading relationship worth hundreds of billions of euros annually.

Questioning China’s Claims to Global Economic Leadership

Eroglu went further by challenging the narrative that China represents an inevitable and superior alternative to Western-style economic governance. According to reports of the interview, he described China’s development model as fundamentally flawed, pushing back against Beijing’s frequent assertions of economic invincibility and its growing influence among nations seeking alternatives to the liberal international order.

The MEP’s position reflects a broader shift in thinking within European institutions, where the early enthusiasm for engagement with China has given way to a more cautious and at times confrontational posture. The EU has in recent years introduced a series of instruments designed to shield its industries from what it characterises as distorted competition, including anti-subsidy investigations and foreign subsidy regulations that scrutinise Chinese firms operating on the continent.

At the heart of Eroglu’s argument is the idea that the EU’s purchasing power constitutes a form of geopolitical leverage that European policymakers should not hesitate to deploy. With nearly half a billion consumers, the single market remains one of the most attractive destinations for Chinese exports, and any meaningful restriction of that access would carry significant consequences for Chinese manufacturers and, by extension, for domestic employment and economic output in China.

Critics of a more confrontational approach warn that escalating trade tensions risk triggering retaliatory measures that could harm European exporters, particularly in sectors such as luxury goods, automobiles, and agricultural products, where China represents a major growth market. They also caution that pushing Beijing too hard could accelerate its pivot toward alternative partnerships, reducing EU influence in the longer term.

Nevertheless, the mood within the European Parliament appears to be shifting toward a harder line. Eroglu’s remarks signal that at least part of the legislative body is prepared to test the limits of economic interdependence as a diplomatic tool, betting that the asymmetries in the trade relationship ultimately favour the European side. How far the European Commission is willing to follow that logic in its ongoing negotiations and trade policy decisions remains to be seen.