The United States announced new tariffs on exports from China and 59 other countries on Friday, July 24, 2026, citing forced labor concerns.
The new trade regime, announced by US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, targets imports linked to forced labor. Under the new rules, countries that have already implemented forced labor import bans—including the European Union, Canada, and the United Kingdom—will face a lower tariff rate of 10 per cent. Other major trading partners, such as India and Japan, are subject to a higher rate of 12.5 per cent.
China is facing the highest rate of 12.5 per cent. This move replaces a temporary global duty introduced earlier this year by President Donald Trump, following a February US Supreme Court ruling that had limited the president’s authority to impose broad trade levies.
Beijing’s Reaction to Unilateral US Measures
The Chinese government has condemned the tariffs, with Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian describing them as unilateral actions. Beijing warned that such restrictions could reignite global trade tensions, noting that these measures threaten a trade truce reached in October last year following a meeting between Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.
We oppose all forms of unilateral tariff measures, …
Lin Jian, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson
According to reporting, Beijing frequently uses language emphasizing sovereignty and non-interference, while opposing hegemonism and power politics
.
The European Union’s Diplomatic Deadlock
Brussels finds itself caught in a geopolitical squeeze. While an EU spokesperson suggested the US tariffs were “in line” with a previous trade deal, the internal reaction has been more volatile. One senior European parliamentarian described the levies as crazy
, and several continental powers have voiced frustration.
The timing is particularly precarious. The EU recently imposed a $1 billion fine on Google, a move that has added further strain to the transatlantic relationship. Simultaneously, the European Parliament remains deadlocked over how to handle China, even as delegations continue to visit Beijing.
The struggle is best summarized by a sentiment reported by Euronews: The EU is between a rock and a hard place.
Economic Erosion and the “De-risking” Strategy
The EU’s anxiety is not merely diplomatic but rooted in a shrinking industrial footprint. In 2025, China’s goods trade surplus with the EU reached approximately 360 billion euros, an imbalance that continued to widen into early 2026. EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič warned following talks in Brussels on June 29 that the trend of rising Chinese exports paired with shrinking European market share in China is not sustainable.
Germany serves as the primary example of this economic shift. In 2025, German goods exports to China hit their lowest level in a decade. More specifically, German car exports to China fell by 66 percent compared to 2022 levels.
This decline has forced Brussels to adopt a strategy of “de-risking.” In 2023, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen argued that while decoupling from China was not viable, Europe must reduce risk while maintaining engagement. This approach reflects a shift in how the EU views China: no longer just a market, but a systemic rival
competing in essential sectors including electric vehicles, batteries, chemicals, and clean-tech supply chains.
Competing Visions of Global Governance
Beyond trade deficits, a deeper conflict exists over who defines the rules of global trade. While the EU anchors its international role in multilateralism and international law—as defined in its 2016 Global Strategy—China is increasingly seeking to shape global governance through its own channels.
This is evident in the 2024 FOCAC Beijing Action Plan, which shifted China’s focus from massive infrastructure deals toward small yet beautiful
projects and governance exchange. By promoting alternative models of governance and contesting established hierarchies, China challenges the rules-based order that Europe considers central to its own global standing.
The current situation leaves the EU with a difficult calculation: it must align with US security and labor standards to avoid higher tariffs, yet it cannot afford to sever the economic ties that are already eroding its industrial capacity. Whether the EU can maintain this “de-risking” balance while the US and China escalate their direct trade war remains the primary uncertainty for Brussels.
Worth a look
