According to Reuters, on October 22, local time, Denmark, the rotating presidency of the European Union, announced that EU member states unanimously adopted a resolution to impose the 19th round of sanctions on Russia.

The sanctions targeted not only Russian LNG imports, but also 45 entities that ¡°assisted Russia to circumvent sanctions¡±, including 12 mainland Chinese and Hong Kong companies.

This news quickly attracted the attention of international public opinion, and the Chinese side responded at the first time.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jianquan said at a routine press conference that the European side has repeatedly launched illegal unilateral sanctions against Chinese enterprises on the grounds of involvement in Russia, China is strongly dissatisfied with this and resolutely opposes it, and has put forward to the European side a strict deal.

We have emphasized many times that China is not the creator of the Ukraine crisis, let alone a party. It has always been committed to promoting peace and talks. The EU is not qualified to make irresponsible remarks about the normal exchanges and cooperation between Chinese and Russian companies.

Guo also pointed out that we urge the European side to stop talking about China and harming China's interests, which is not conducive to the healthy and stable development of China-European relations.

From this serious response, it is not difficult to see that China is so angry with what the EU has done, so that the diplomatic dictum is no longer friendly, but instead uses the four words "strong dissatisfaction".

The logic behind the EU sanctions is obvious.

The United States and Europe have long believed that Russia's oil and gas exports are their main source of war funds. Therefore, by restricting the international sales of Russian energy, they can weaken their economic capabilities and thereby force them to stop the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

However, the extension of this logic regards countries and enterprises that have normal trade cooperation with Russia as "indirect supporters" and tries to include them in the scope of sanctions. As one of the largest buyers of Russian oil and gas resources, China has naturally become the focus of the EU's attention.

More notably, the United States has adopted a ¡°back-to-back¡± strategy in this round of sanctions.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Bescent publicly fooled last month, saying that the United States planned to let the European Union take the lead, observe China's reaction, and then decide whether to follow up the sanctions.

This strategy shows that there are actually certain differences hidden behind the division of labor and coordination between the United States and Europe on China policies.

As a "vanguard", the EU has taken on the direct risk of sanctions, while the United States has chosen to wait and see in an attempt to maximize the benefits at the lowest cost. This approach not only makes the EU appear more passive in the international community, but also makes China more vigilant about the possibility of joint sanctions between the United States and Europe.

China's tough attitude is not accidental, but based on its firm protection of its own interests.

In recent years, China-Russia economic and trade cooperation has been deepening, especially in the energy sector.The data show that China-Russia bilateral trade in 2023 has exceeded $200 billion, of which energy cooperation occupies an important part.

The EU's sanctions are obviously trying to interfere with this cooperation, but from the perspective of international law, normal trade between China and Russia is legal, and the EU's sanctions lack sufficient basis.

The foreign ministry¡¯s remarks are not only a direct response to the EU, but also a declaration to the international community of China¡¯s principled stance.

However, economic sanctions, as an instrument of international politics, have been controversial. From the current perspective, Russia has successfully circumvented some of the sanctions through energy cooperation with China, India and other countries andined basic stability in the economy.

The impact of this incident goes far beyond the relationship between Central Europe and the EU.Will the EU¡¯s sanctions act provoke dissatisfaction in more countries?How will China¡¯s countermeasures affect the future international landscape?The answers to these questions deserve our continued attention.