President Emmanuel Macron’s recent Politico interview from his return flight from China (where he spoke at length with Chinese president Xi Jinping) has triggered a wave of controversy. Macron asserted that “Europe must reduce its dependency on the United States and avoid getting dragged into a confrontation between China and the U.S. over Taiwan.” He warned that if Europe too quickly takes sides with the U.S. in such a conflict, then “we won’t have the time, nor the resources, to finance our strategic autonomy, and we will become vassals.” Cultivating a position of “strategic autonomy” for Europe requires reducing its dependence on the U.S. dollar as the primary currency of trade, as well as its dependence on U.S. energy and weapons. Instead, Europe must seek to develop its own industrial, military, and political independence.
Macron’s comments follow a pattern of dissatisfaction with the United States that the French president has been expressing with greater frequency in recent months. For example, in October, as war-induced energy shortages and high prices threatened Europe with an unusually cold winter, Macron took aim at U.S. energy policy for allowing energy companies to reap “super profits” from the sale of liquefied natural gas to Europe at much higher prices than they sold domestically. From Europe’s point of view, such a policy easily appears to be an opportunistic exploitation of war for the sake of profit.
But the latest comments on the plane from China are a new level of provocative. The mere suggestion that Europe should reduce its dependence upon the international dollar system is nothing short of remarkable, coming from the president of the EU’s largest member state—or any country outside the BRICS bloc for that matter. Yet, as some economists have argued, Europe could stand to benefit much from de-dollarization, and the economic turmoil into which much of Europe was thrown by the war in Ukraine, as well as by the sanctions that the U.S. imposed upon Russian oil, only served to highlight Europe’s crippling dependence upon America. Indeed, the war in Ukraine has revealed to many Europeans the true nature of the global reality which they have long inhabited: Europe is little more than a market for American capital flows and an instrument of American global hegemony—or, to use President Macron’s apt term, a “vassal” of the United States. Consequently, it is also highly significant that France issued a joint statement with China in support of any peace efforts that might be made in Ukraine.
Thus, although Macron’s remarks are in some sense momentous, they are ultimately not surprising given the evident reality of Europe’s place in a world that has long been organized around the interests of a predominantly American ruling class and its allies. Moreover, for conservatives, Europe’s vassalage to the United States has entailed the ongoing destruction of its traditional cultures in favor of a consumer economy, which requires the liberalization of all values that might stand in the way of easy exploitation. The effects of the ‘Americanization’ of Europe are easy to identify: the dissolution of its Judeo-Christian heritage and the destruction of traditional Christian morals, in favor of the fluid ‘woke’ liberalism that permits every man and woman to choose, exchange, and discard ‘identities’ like a consumer in the marketplace. Although he is hardly a conservative, in the past President Macron has criticized ‘woke’ social sciences imported from the U.S. for undermining France’s national and cultural identity. Similarly, Macron’s concern for European (and specifically French) sovereignty reflects a basic conservative instinct, one that was shared by General Charles de Gaulle, which is the desire to preserve the civilizational identity of Europe in the face of unstoppable liberalization and globalization. It is increasingly clear that Europe’s decades-long dependence upon the U.S. is subversive to this very aim—and, strangely enough, the greatest hope for Europe’s preservation may just lie with Communist China.
But Macron’s recognition of this fact comes rather late in the game, and it is predated already by a similar outlook on the part of Hungary and its leaders. Hungary’s relationship to the U.S. has been descending steadily downhill along with its relations to the EU. In an October 2022 interview with Budapester Zeitung, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán repeated his frequent criticism of the EU for being merely a puppet of America and failing to protect European sovereignty:
At the moment, the EU is uncritically adopting the positions of the USA on a one-to-one basis. American interests are simply passed off as European. It is pretended that European interests are identical to those of America. At present, I do not see any striving for sovereignty on the part of the EU or the larger EU countries. Not even on the part of the EU institutions.
Budapest, Beijing, and beyond
Meanwhile, analysts all across the Atlantic have noted that China’s influence in Hungary is deeper than in any other European country, and that a significant number of Hungarian citizens are favorable towards positive relations with China since President Orbán first took office in 2010. Those relations include Hungary’s involvement in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) since 2015, when it became Europe’s largest recipient of Chinese investment. Since then, Hungary has recommitted to its involvement in the BRI after a visit from Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in February, 2023. Under the auspices of the BRI, Hungary and China are collaborating in the construction of a high-speed railway connecting Hungary to Serbia. Additionally, the Shanghai-based Fudan University is opening a satellite campus in Budapest, aided by funding from the Hungarian government. These and other connections which Hungary has sought to forge with China are noteworthy for economic and symbolic reasons, as they bring Hungary into the sphere of influence of the foremost geopolitical opponent of American unipolarity. President Orbán’s endorsement of China’s peace plan for Ukraine is the latest demonstration of the deepening ties between the two countries.
The Communist Party of China, for its part, may see in Hungary a promising ally in its own project of building an alternate world system to that over which America has presided for decades. Hungary’s ‘illiberal’ opposition to the reigning values of the U.S. and the EU make it a valuable partner in China’s plans for the world, which so far find only limited resources and opportunities in the West. But after President Macron’s recent visit to Beijing, it is evident that the prospect of closer ties with France is very much on China’s radar—and understandably so, since the gain of France’s trust would be an immeasurable boon to the extension of China’s influence through Europe and the curtailing of the U.S.’s influence.
Of course, many will object that, should such a possibility run its course, then France, Hungary, and all the nations of Europe would be at risk of becoming ‘vassals’ to China instead of the U.S., thereby exchanging one tyranny for another. This is certainly a danger that must be constantly evaluated. Yet, European leaders must also honestly weigh the concrete benefits that deeper ties with China might bring against the real losses that have already been incurred by Europe’s vassalage to the United States. China has already brought many concrete benefits to the developing world. A number of studies have found that the BRI has indeed had positive economic effects of various kinds in the participating countries, including accelerating economic growth, convergence in regional income disparities, and reduction of shipment times and trade costs. Indeed, compared to the U.S., modern China has demonstrated a capacity for global economic development that cannot be reduced to mere colonial exploitation or debt ensnarement, as it is commonly accused of being by China hawks in the West. Contrary to the narratives pushed by Western global elites, China is responsible for an astounding 45% of global poverty reduction since 1981, both within its own borders and in countries with whom it has forged economic ties. In short, the concrete benefits that China has brought to the developing world are signs of its promise as the prospective builder of the next world order.
Moreover, a recent study from the Cambridge-based Bennett Institute found that, for the first time, China and Russia together enjoy greater popularity in the vastly populous developing world than the U.S., signaling that people across Asia, Africa, and Latin America are largely satisfied with China’s contribution to economic and infrastructure development in their regions. For these reasons alone, European leaders at least have some cause to consider China as a dependable counterweight, if not eventually a full-fledged alternative, to U.S. influence in Europe.
China’s expanding influence, coupled with the U.S.’s exposed self-interest, is defining the battle lines of contemporary geopolitics with increasing clarity. An informal coalition of nations is slowly forming under China’s leadership, who all share a common enemy in the American ruling class. Indeed, China may safely be identified as the new vanguard of a global ‘populist’ uprising against the global liberal elite, lending international coherence to the populist wave that began to sweep the world during the 2010s. If current trends continue, European nations may find it to their advantage to join in such an uprising. A global class war is taking the shape of a clash of civilizations.
Europe Starts Looking to China
President Emmanuel Macron’s recent Politico interview from his return flight from China (where he spoke at length with Chinese president Xi Jinping) has triggered a wave of controversy. Macron asserted that “Europe must reduce its dependency on the United States and avoid getting dragged into a confrontation between China and the U.S. over Taiwan.” He warned that if Europe too quickly takes sides with the U.S. in such a conflict, then “we won’t have the time, nor the resources, to finance our strategic autonomy, and we will become vassals.” Cultivating a position of “strategic autonomy” for Europe requires reducing its dependence on the U.S. dollar as the primary currency of trade, as well as its dependence on U.S. energy and weapons. Instead, Europe must seek to develop its own industrial, military, and political independence.
Macron’s comments follow a pattern of dissatisfaction with the United States that the French president has been expressing with greater frequency in recent months. For example, in October, as war-induced energy shortages and high prices threatened Europe with an unusually cold winter, Macron took aim at U.S. energy policy for allowing energy companies to reap “super profits” from the sale of liquefied natural gas to Europe at much higher prices than they sold domestically. From Europe’s point of view, such a policy easily appears to be an opportunistic exploitation of war for the sake of profit.
But the latest comments on the plane from China are a new level of provocative. The mere suggestion that Europe should reduce its dependence upon the international dollar system is nothing short of remarkable, coming from the president of the EU’s largest member state—or any country outside the BRICS bloc for that matter. Yet, as some economists have argued, Europe could stand to benefit much from de-dollarization, and the economic turmoil into which much of Europe was thrown by the war in Ukraine, as well as by the sanctions that the U.S. imposed upon Russian oil, only served to highlight Europe’s crippling dependence upon America. Indeed, the war in Ukraine has revealed to many Europeans the true nature of the global reality which they have long inhabited: Europe is little more than a market for American capital flows and an instrument of American global hegemony—or, to use President Macron’s apt term, a “vassal” of the United States. Consequently, it is also highly significant that France issued a joint statement with China in support of any peace efforts that might be made in Ukraine.
Thus, although Macron’s remarks are in some sense momentous, they are ultimately not surprising given the evident reality of Europe’s place in a world that has long been organized around the interests of a predominantly American ruling class and its allies. Moreover, for conservatives, Europe’s vassalage to the United States has entailed the ongoing destruction of its traditional cultures in favor of a consumer economy, which requires the liberalization of all values that might stand in the way of easy exploitation. The effects of the ‘Americanization’ of Europe are easy to identify: the dissolution of its Judeo-Christian heritage and the destruction of traditional Christian morals, in favor of the fluid ‘woke’ liberalism that permits every man and woman to choose, exchange, and discard ‘identities’ like a consumer in the marketplace. Although he is hardly a conservative, in the past President Macron has criticized ‘woke’ social sciences imported from the U.S. for undermining France’s national and cultural identity. Similarly, Macron’s concern for European (and specifically French) sovereignty reflects a basic conservative instinct, one that was shared by General Charles de Gaulle, which is the desire to preserve the civilizational identity of Europe in the face of unstoppable liberalization and globalization. It is increasingly clear that Europe’s decades-long dependence upon the U.S. is subversive to this very aim—and, strangely enough, the greatest hope for Europe’s preservation may just lie with Communist China.
But Macron’s recognition of this fact comes rather late in the game, and it is predated already by a similar outlook on the part of Hungary and its leaders. Hungary’s relationship to the U.S. has been descending steadily downhill along with its relations to the EU. In an October 2022 interview with Budapester Zeitung, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán repeated his frequent criticism of the EU for being merely a puppet of America and failing to protect European sovereignty:
Budapest, Beijing, and beyond
Meanwhile, analysts all across the Atlantic have noted that China’s influence in Hungary is deeper than in any other European country, and that a significant number of Hungarian citizens are favorable towards positive relations with China since President Orbán first took office in 2010. Those relations include Hungary’s involvement in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) since 2015, when it became Europe’s largest recipient of Chinese investment. Since then, Hungary has recommitted to its involvement in the BRI after a visit from Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in February, 2023. Under the auspices of the BRI, Hungary and China are collaborating in the construction of a high-speed railway connecting Hungary to Serbia. Additionally, the Shanghai-based Fudan University is opening a satellite campus in Budapest, aided by funding from the Hungarian government. These and other connections which Hungary has sought to forge with China are noteworthy for economic and symbolic reasons, as they bring Hungary into the sphere of influence of the foremost geopolitical opponent of American unipolarity. President Orbán’s endorsement of China’s peace plan for Ukraine is the latest demonstration of the deepening ties between the two countries.
The Communist Party of China, for its part, may see in Hungary a promising ally in its own project of building an alternate world system to that over which America has presided for decades. Hungary’s ‘illiberal’ opposition to the reigning values of the U.S. and the EU make it a valuable partner in China’s plans for the world, which so far find only limited resources and opportunities in the West. But after President Macron’s recent visit to Beijing, it is evident that the prospect of closer ties with France is very much on China’s radar—and understandably so, since the gain of France’s trust would be an immeasurable boon to the extension of China’s influence through Europe and the curtailing of the U.S.’s influence.
Of course, many will object that, should such a possibility run its course, then France, Hungary, and all the nations of Europe would be at risk of becoming ‘vassals’ to China instead of the U.S., thereby exchanging one tyranny for another. This is certainly a danger that must be constantly evaluated. Yet, European leaders must also honestly weigh the concrete benefits that deeper ties with China might bring against the real losses that have already been incurred by Europe’s vassalage to the United States. China has already brought many concrete benefits to the developing world. A number of studies have found that the BRI has indeed had positive economic effects of various kinds in the participating countries, including accelerating economic growth, convergence in regional income disparities, and reduction of shipment times and trade costs. Indeed, compared to the U.S., modern China has demonstrated a capacity for global economic development that cannot be reduced to mere colonial exploitation or debt ensnarement, as it is commonly accused of being by China hawks in the West. Contrary to the narratives pushed by Western global elites, China is responsible for an astounding 45% of global poverty reduction since 1981, both within its own borders and in countries with whom it has forged economic ties. In short, the concrete benefits that China has brought to the developing world are signs of its promise as the prospective builder of the next world order.
Moreover, a recent study from the Cambridge-based Bennett Institute found that, for the first time, China and Russia together enjoy greater popularity in the vastly populous developing world than the U.S., signaling that people across Asia, Africa, and Latin America are largely satisfied with China’s contribution to economic and infrastructure development in their regions. For these reasons alone, European leaders at least have some cause to consider China as a dependable counterweight, if not eventually a full-fledged alternative, to U.S. influence in Europe.
China’s expanding influence, coupled with the U.S.’s exposed self-interest, is defining the battle lines of contemporary geopolitics with increasing clarity. An informal coalition of nations is slowly forming under China’s leadership, who all share a common enemy in the American ruling class. Indeed, China may safely be identified as the new vanguard of a global ‘populist’ uprising against the global liberal elite, lending international coherence to the populist wave that began to sweep the world during the 2010s. If current trends continue, European nations may find it to their advantage to join in such an uprising. A global class war is taking the shape of a clash of civilizations.
READ NEXT
Putting Down Our Parent Civilisation: Do We Live in the West, or Euthan-Asia?
Trump’s Triumph—a Turning Point for Europe?
Pan-Conservativi: A New Global Conservative Reality