Article 10 - The good geopolitical trade actor? The European Union’s discursive justification of the Anti-Coercion Instrument
Keywords:EU trade policy, Geopolitics, Anti-Coercion Instrument, China, Othering
Traditionally, the EU has presented itself as a normative trade actor, as opposed to other geopolitical trading powers. However, today, it is increasingly recognized that the EU is undergoing a geopolitical turn which also manifests itself in its trade policy. Yet, confusion remains regarding what a ‘geopolitical EU trade policy’ entails and how the EU sells this new perspective in its trade policy. This article contributes to the ongoing debate on this topic by investigating how the European Commission discursively justifies its geopolitical turn in trade. Methodologically, we analyze EU trade discourse with particular attention for othering strategies. Empirically, we study a most-likely case of ‘geopoliticization of trade’, namely the Commission’s initiative to launch an Anti-Coercion Instrument, by analyzing the most important EU documents covering the ACI so far and EU statements on the ACI in relevant media. We find that the Commission distinguishes a ‘defensive’ and ‘offensive’ variant of geopoliticization of trade, whereby the former is conceived as ‘good’ and pursued by the EU, while the latter is seen as ‘bad’ and employed by non-EU trading powers. This diverges from previous EU trade discourses since the 2000s, which portrayed the EU as transcending geopolitics – a normative power pursuing free trade and multilateralism – and other powers as essentially geopolitical – self-interested, protectionist, and regionalist. The EU’s new othering strategy legitimizes the EU’s geopolitical turn in trade, by simultaneously turning away from its previous, ‘naively’ normative trade discourse, while also contrasting the EU’s trade policy to the ‘offensive’ geopolitical trade from ‘bad’ trade actors.
Adriaensen, Johan, and Evgeny Postnikov. 2022. A Geo-Economic Turn in Trade Policy?. Palgrave Macmillian. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81281-2
Ahrens, Bettina. 2018. “Normative power Europe in crisis? Understanding the productive role of ambiguity for the EU’s transformative agenda.” Asia Eur J 16, 199–212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-018-0507-8
Allenbach-Ammann, János. 2022. “Bringing a gun to trade negotiations.” Accessed 27 October, 2022. https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/bringing-a-gun-to-trade-negotiations/
Allenbach-Ammann, János. 2022. ”EU member states clip Commission wings in anti-coercion tool discussions.” Accessed 6 December, 2022. https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/eu-member-states-clip-commission-wings-in-anti-coercion-tool-discussions/
Baetens, Freya, and Marco Bronckers. 2022. “The EU’s Anti-Coercion Instrument: A Big Stick for Big targets.” Accessed 27 October, 2022. https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-eus-anti-coercion-instrument-a-big-stick-for-big-targets/
Beattie, Alan. 2019. “Brussels reheats an old tool for a new trade war.” Accessed 27 October, 2022. https://www.ft.com/content/828f35b6-49e6-11e9-8b7f-d49067e0f50d
Beattie, Alan. 2020. “Trade Secrets newsletter.” Accessed 27 October, 2022. https://channels.ft.com/en/tradesecrets/air-miles/
Biscop, Sven. 2018. European Strategy in the 21st Century. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429427442
Biscop, Sven, Tobias Gehrke, and Bernard Siman. 2022. “Tanks versus Banks: Russian Military versus EU Geoeconomic Power.” Security policy briefs, Egmont Institute.
Busch, Marc. 2022. “Europe’s anti-coercion instrument is a wake-up call for the global economy.” Accessed 12 December, 2022. https://thehill.com/opinion/international/3257222-europes-anti-coercion-instrument-is-a-wake-up-call-for-the-global-economy/
Weiler, Joseph. 2020. “Europe Must Learn Quickly to Speak the Language of Power: Part I.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.ejiltalk.org/europe-must-learn-quickly-to-speak-the-language-of-power-part-i/
Bossuyt, Fabienne, Jan Orbie, and Lotte Drieghe. 2020. “EU external policy coherence in the trade-foreign policy nexus.” JIRD 23.
Cooper, Robert. 2000. The Post-Modern State and the World Order. Demos.
Damro, Chad. 2012. “Market power Europe.” Journal of European Public Policy, 19(5), 682-699. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2011.646779
Derous, Marjolein. 2018. “Problematizations in the EU’s external policies: the case of Singapore as the other.” Asia Eur J 16, 423–437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-018-0517-6
Diez, Thomas. 2004. “Europe's others and the return of geopolitics.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17:2, 319-335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0955757042000245924
Diez, Thomas. 2005. “Constructing the Self and Changing Others: Reconsidering Normative Power Europe.” Millennium, 33(3), 613–636. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298050330031701
Diez, Thomas, and Ian Manners. 2007. “Reflecting on normative-power Europe.” Power in world politics, 173.
Duchêne, François. 1972. “Europe's Role in World Peace.” In: Mayne, Richard (ed.) Europe Tomorrow: Sixteen Europeans Look Ahead. London: Fontana.
Deepak, Raju. 2022. “Proposed EU Regulation to Address Third Country Coercion - What is Coercion?.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.ejiltalk.org/proposed-eu-regulation-to-address-third-country-coercion-what-is-coercion/
De Ville, Ferdi, and Gabriel Siles-Brügge. 2018. “The Role of Ideas in Legitimating EU Trade Policy.” In Handbook on the EU and International Trade, Edward Elgar.
De Ville, Ferdi. 2019. “Naïve no longer? The hardening of EU trade policy discourse and practice towards China and its limits.” Paper Presented at the 2019 Politicologenetmaal, Antwerp University.
De Ville, Ferdi. 2022. “The European Union’s unilateral turn in trade policy.” Paper presented at the 2022 ECPR Joint sessions, Antwerp University.
European Commission. 16 June 2020. “Speech by Commissioner Phil Hogan at Launch of Public Consultation for EU Trade Policy Review – Hosted by EUI Florence.” News.
European Commission. 2021c. “Strengthening the EU’s autonomy – Commission seeks input on a new anti-coercion instrument.” News Archive, Brussels 23 March 2021.
European Commission. 2021g. “Commission Staff Working Document Impact Assessment Report, accompanying the document ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union and its Member States from economic coercion by third countries.” SWD (2021)371, Brussels, 8 December 2021.
European Commission. 2021d. “Commission Staff Working Document. Executive Summary of the Impact Assessment Report, accompanying the document ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union and its Member States from economic coercion by third countries.” SWD (2021) 372, Brussels, 8 December 2021.
European Commission. 2021e. “EU strengthens protection against economic coercion.” News Archive, Brussels, 8 December 2021.
European Commission. 2021f. “Questions and Answers: Commission proposal for an Anti-Coercion Instrument.” Press Release 2021/6643, Brussels, 8 December 2021.
European Commission. 2021b. “Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council.” Regulation COM2021/0406, Brussels, 8 December 2021.
European Commission. 2021a. “Trade Policy Review – An Open, Sustainable and Assertive Trade Policy.” COM2021/66 final, Brussels, 18 February 2021.
EU Parliament. 2019. “Free trade or geo-economics? Trends in world trade.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EXPO_IDA(2019)639306
EU Parliament. 2020. “The Von der Leyen Commission’s priorities for 2019-2024.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2020)646148
Felbermayr, Gabriel. 2018. “Trumpian Turn in EU Trade Politics and the Silence of Germany.” EconPol Opinion 6.
Gebhard, Carmen, and Per Martin Norheim-Martinsen. 2011. “Making Sense of EU Comprehensive Security Towards Conceptual and Analytical Clarity.” European Security 20(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2011.564613
Global Times. 2021. “EU flexes muscle with ‘anti-coercion’ bill, risks being hijacked by Lithuania.” Accessed 12 December 2022. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1241041.shtml
Hackenbroich, Jonathan. 2022. “The EU’s geo-economic revolution.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://ecfr.eu/article/the-eus-geo-economic-revolution/
Helwig, Niklas, and Mikael Wigell. 2022. “The EU’s quest for geoeconomic power.” FIIA Briefing Paper. March 2022/334.
Heron, Tony, and Gabriel Siles‐Brügge. 2012. “Competitive liberalization and the ‘Global Europe’ services and investment agenda: Locating the commercial drivers of the EU–ACP economic partnership agreements.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 50(2), 250-266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2011.02220.x
Hoekman, Bernard, and Michel Kostecki. 2001. The political economy of the world trade DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/019829431X.001.0001
system: The WTO and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hornát, Jan. 2019. “Transatlantic ‘Othering’: European External Action Identity and the Trump Administration.” Studia Europejskie-Studies in European Affairs, 1, 27-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33067/SE.1.2019.02
Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal Mouffe. 2014. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. London: Verso Books.
Jacobs, Thomas, and Jan Orbie. 2020. “Discourse theory as a novel approach for research on EU trade policy.” In: Bigo, Didier, Thomas Diez, Evangelos Fanoulis, Ben Rosamond, and Yannis A. Stivachtis. The Routledge Handbook of Critical European Studies (pp. 254-266). London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429491306-18
Jacobs, Thomas, Niels Gheyle, Ferdi De Ville, and Jan Orbie. 2022. “The Hegemonic Politics of ‘Strategic Autonomy’ and ‘Resilience’: COVID-19 and the Dislocation of EU Trade Policy.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13348
Jensen, Sune Qvotrup. 2011. “Othering, identity formation and agency.” Qualitative studies, 2(2), 63-78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v2i2.5510
Jiwani, Yasmin, and Richardson John E. 2011. “Discourse, ethnicity and racism.” In: Van Dijk, Teun. Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 241-262) London: Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446289068.n12
Keukeleire, Stephan. 2002. “Au-delà de la PESC. La politique étrangère structurelle de l’Union européenne.” Bruylant.
Keukeleire, Stephan. 2003. “The European Union as a diplomatic actor: internal, traditional, and structural diplomacy.” Diplomacy and Statecraft, 14(3), 31-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09592290312331295556
Keukeleire, Stephan, Vincent Kronenberger, and Jan Wouters. 2004. EU Structural Foreign Policy and Structural Conflict Prevention. The European Union and Conflict Prevention : Policy and Legal Aspects ; 2004; Pp. 151 - 172. TMC Asser institute; Den Haag. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-539-1_7
Kommerskollegium. National Board of Trade Sweden. 2022. “Analysis: the EU Proposal for an Anti-Coercion Instrument.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.kommerskollegium.se/en/publications/reports/2022/the-eu-proposal-for-an-anti-coercion-instrument/
Langan, Mark, and Sophia Price. 2021. “Migration, development and EU free trade deals: The paradox of Economic Partnership Agreements as a push factor for migration.” Global Affairs, 7(4), 505-521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2021.1969669
Manners, Ian. 2002. “Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms?.” JCMS: Journal of common market studies, 40(2), 235-258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00353
Manners, Ian. 2009. “The Social Dimension of EU Trade Policies: Reflections from a Normative Power Perspective.” European Foreign Affairs Review, Issue 5, pp. 785-803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/EERR2009053
Meunier, Stéphanie, and Kalypso Nicolaidis. 2019. “The Geopoliticization of European Trade and Investment Policy.” JCMS 57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12932
Moens, Barbara, and Jakob Hanke Vela. 2021. “EU flexes geopolitical muscle with new trade weapon.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-newest-trade-tool-allows-brussels-to-hit-back-hard-against-economic-blackmail/
Moens, Barbara. 2022. “Free traders fear EU risks going over to the dark side with new superpower.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.politico.eu/article/free-traders-fear-eu-dark-side-new-superpower/
Moens, Barbara, and Hans von der Burchard. 2022. “Europe First: Brussels gets ready to dump its free trade ideals.” Accessed 7 December 2022. Europe First: Brussels gets ready to dump its free trade ideals - POLITICO Pro.
Newman, Edward, and Cristina G. Stefan. 2020. “Normative Power Europe? The EU's Embrace of the Responsibility to Protect in a Transitional International Order.” JCMS, 58: 472– 490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12953
Nicosia Luca. 2019. “In Search of a European Strategy? From a Normative to a Pragmatic Approach.” E-IR.
Lau, Stuart, and Barbara Moens. 2022. “China’s trade attack on Lithuania exposes EU’s powerlessness.” Accessed 27 October 2022. https://www.politico.eu/article/china-trade-attack-on-lithuania-exposes-eu-powerlessness/
Orbie, Jan, and Ferdi De Ville. 2020. “Impact of the Corona Crisis on EU Trade Policy: Our Five Cents to the Debate.” CEUS.
Orbie, Jan. 2021. “EU trade policy meets geopolitics: what about trade justice?.” European Foreign Affairs Review, 26(2), 197-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/EERR2021015
Pace, Michelle. 2005. The politics of regional identity: meddling with the Mediterranean. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203414521
Peterson, John. 2007. “EU Trade Policy as Foreign Policy: Does Strategy plus Activity= Strategic Action?.” EUSA.
Pilegaard, Jess. 2009. “and Never the Twain Shall Meet? An Institutionalist Perspective of EU Trade and Development Policies.” Routledge.
Poletti, Arlo, and Daniela Sicurelli. 2018. The political economy of normative trade power Europe. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78864-7
Rabinovych, Maryna, and Zuzana Novakova. 2019. “Paradigmatic change with much continuity?.” Global Affairs 5(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2019.1584538
Schmitz, Luuk, and Timo Seidl. 2022. “As Open as Possible, as Autonomous as Necessary: Understanding the Rise of Open Strategic Autonomy in EU Trade Policy.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13428
Storey, Andy. 2006. “Normative Power Europe? Economic Partnership Agreements and Africa.” Journal of Contemporary African Studies. 24. 331-346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02589000600976646
Tekin, Beyza Ç. 2010. Representations and Othering in Discourse: The construction of Turkey in the EU context (Vol. 39). John Benjamins Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.39
Wagnsson, Charlotte, and Maria Hellman. 2018. “Normative Power Europe Caving In? EU under Pressure of Russian Information Warfare.” JCMS, 56: 1161– 1177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12726
Weyand, Sabine. 2022. “The Double Integration Doctrine, a Conversation With Sabine Weyand.” Groupe d’études géopolitiques. Accessed 27 October 2022. https://geopolitique.eu/. https://geopolitique.eu/en/2022/01/31/thedouble-integration-doctrine-sabine-weyand/.
Young, Alasdair, R. 2019. “Two wrongs make a right? The politicization of trade policy and European trade strategy.” JEPP 26(12). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1678055
Young, Alasdair, R., and John Peterson. 2014. “Trade Policy as Foreign Policy, Parochial Global Europe: 21st Century Trade Politics.” Oxford, 2014; online edn, Oxford Academic. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579907.001.0001
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Perspectivas - Journal of Political Science
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors must be sure that they have permission to reproduce copyright material, prior to submitting their articles to this Journal.
Authors must secure permission if they have permission to reproduce figures, tables, or any extract from the text of another source. This applies to direct reproduction as well as to any derivative reproduction.
In assigning copyright, authors retain their right to use their own material elsewhere, provided that the Journal is acknowledged as the original place of publication, and the Editorial Team is notified in writing in advance.
Further information on copyright policy please contact email@example.com