At the United Nations General Assembly, there were not many people expecting surprises, and the leaders of all countries came to power, saying they wrote a three-month speech, listened to polite applause, and the media was just routine reporting.
But as soon as everyone thought this diplomatic meeting was a passage, Trump suddenly appeared, as if he had crushed the original conference script. he did not turn, did not paddle, directly transformed the United Nations speech desk into the "America Priority" extension, a blow to the EU and multilateral system.
Twenty-four hours later, when European Commission President von der Leyen met with senior Chinese officials, his attitude changed visibly to the naked eye.
From the previous "institutional opponent" to "dialogue and cooperation" instantly, the tone is so gentle that people wonder if the script has been changed. What kind of psychological turning point did the EU experience overnight? Whose cheese did Trump's "performance" touch?
Trump "lifted the table" and the EU's sense of security disappeared overnight
Trump's speech can be said to be "straight to the chase", but the mountain is so steep that many people are scared to listen to it. He directly criticized the European Union by name, saying that the United States has been paying for Europe in recent years, while Europe is getting closer and closer in trade with China while receiving a large amount of military aid.
Isn’t that “eating American food, thinking about Chinese dishes”?
Trump said for an hour that his core meaning was “America will not be exploited anymore.”
This sounds unfriendly, but for the EU, it’s more deadly than the words themselves because it’s not a policy disagreement, but a question of the entire transatlantic relationship.
The United States has always been the security backer of the European Union. From NATO to intelligence sharing, almost all defense systems are inseparable from the support of the United States. Trump is now saying that the United States doesn't want to support this safety net anymore.
The European Union representatives at the scene obviously did not expect Trump to be so “direct”.The Politics magazine even used “Europe’s fear replay” to describe the atmosphere, meaning it was clear: people thought Trump was already “the past style” and now found that he might be “the future style”.
This reflects the question that the EU has been avoiding: If the United States really doesn't want to take care of it, who will Europe rely on to guard its borders?
Research by the German Marshall Fund has long pointed out that if the United States reduces its strategic investment, the EU will need to spend hundreds of billions of euros more on defense every year to fill the vacancy. It's not only a matter of money, but also a matter of organization, technology and command system. The "strategic dependence" formed in Europe for decades cannot be broken just by saying it.
But what's even more troublesome is that the EU can't "rely on death" the United States economically. As early as a few years ago, China has become one of the EU's largest trading partners in goods. From auto parts to high-end equipment, from green energy to digital technology, the economic connection between Europe and China is deeper than many people think. Once the security backer is unstable and the economic bridge is cut off, the EU will really become a "wall grass"-it will fall down when the wind blows.
Von der Leyen's "face change" is not a show of goodwill but a risk aversion
On the second day of Trump's speech, von der Leyen's performance when meeting with high-level Chinese officials was like a different person. In the past, she called China an "institutional rival" on many occasions, emphasized "de-risking", and constantly put pressure on China on issues related to Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and supply chain independence.
But this time, her words were all about "cooperation", "dialogue", "climate change" and "peace role", and in Xinhua news agency reports, she also mentioned in particular expressing "appreciation for the role of China in global affairs."
Without looking at the consequences, some might think that the EU has suddenly transformed, but in fact, it’s more like a diplomatic “emergency brake.”
Of course, von der Leyen won't suddenly be "pro-China". Her turn is an actuarial political reaction. Trump's words made her realize that the chessboard on which the EU relies to maintain balance has been turned over, and now it has to be rearranged.
This time the "face change" is for the avoidance, but also for self-saving. The EU cannot be guilty between the two sides. Trump has just put out the "don't want to take me cheap" gesture, if Von der Leyen is still tough on the Chinese side, then the EU is like pushing the two great powers away.
Under the current background of weak economic recovery, high inflation, and unresolved energy crisis, if there is another problem in China-EU relations, it may be a "multi-line collapse" for the EU.
The EU cannot find another Chinese market in the short term, nor is it possible to quickly rebuild a supply chain apart from China.
Moreover, China's investment in new energy, digital transformation, green finance and other fields also coincides with the EU's transformation direction. If we continue to be tough on China at this time, we will only lose support in key strategies.
Von der Leyen, of course, knew what these bills meant. Her turn was to give the EU a little diplomatic breathing space, and also a quick response to Trump's "top-down speech."She didn't come to China, but to the United States and said: "If you don't care, I have to find a personal conversation."
The next step in China-EU relations depends on how far the EU can go
Von der Leyen's "smile diplomacy", China, of course, can see. But China did not fall lightly. China has long been accustomed to the "changing gestures" between the great powers, and the judgment of the EU is never to watch a speech, but to see if action can follow.
In other words, the goodwill that the EU has released to China is more of a tactical adjustment than a strategic change.
China sees this thoroughly. China welcomes cooperation, but the bottom line is also very clear, and the principles that should be adhered to are not allowed. Especially when it comes to core interests such as sovereignty, security and the right to development, no matter how hot the cooperation is, it is impossible to exchange them.
The problem is that the EU itself is not a piece of iron.
France and Germany may be more inclined to strategic autonomy, but Eastern European countries have a natural dependence on the United States. Von der Leyen represents the European Commission, but her diplomatic route is always restricted by internal games.
More importantly, as long as the Russian-Ukrainian conflict continues, the EU will not be able to get rid of its security dependence on the United States. This dependence is not only military but also psychological. The EU has screamed for years of "strategic autonomy", but so far has not seen several decent military-industrial joint projects land.
On the contrary, China has shown stability and endurance in this process. No matter how the outside world changes, China has always insisted on opening up to the outside world, deepening multilateral cooperation and building a new type of international relations. This kind of stability is what many countries need most in the current situation.
The future China-Europe relations, in fact, does not depend on China's attitude, but whether the European Union itself can really go out of a vision, a bottom line, a strategic depth path.If as in the past, while talking with China to cooperate, while following the United States to blockade, the relationship is destined to go not far.
A “United Nations” drama, depicting the bottom line of the international game
Trump's performance at the UN, like it or not, can't be ignored. With unadorned language, he exposed the essence of international politics-there are no eternal friends or eternal enemies, only eternal interests.
Von der Leyen’s turn was not a “conscience discovery” either, but an immediate response to this change in interest pattern.
This "diplomatic variation" is more like a mirror, allowing the whole world to see clearly the real situation of the EU in the game of great powers: on the one hand, it wants to maintain security ties with the United States, on the other hand, it can't do without economic cooperation with China. The strategy that both ends want is the most unstable after all.
The key to the future of Sino-European relations is not what a meeting has said, but whether the EU can actually get out of the inertia of "following America" thinking and truly learn to seek independent space in complex patterns.
For China, the door to cooperation is always open, but it will never sacrifice the bottom line for the sake of "face-saving projects".
A wave of the United Nations, revealing the fact that the global order is being rebuilt. Who can stand firm in the storm, who can take the lead in the future world pattern.