“If the EU chooses the wrong electricity market design, investments in the transformation of the energy sector could collapse for years,” warns Kristian Ruby. In an interview with Manuel Berkel, the secretary general of Eurelectric argues for more care in reforming the electricity market and explains what long-term electricity contracts would mean for industry and private households.
Elon Musk sees himself as the savior of freedom of expression on Twitter. But what currently happens on the platform has little to do with that. Twitter recently blocked journalists’ accounts and banned links to other platforms. Brussels now harshly criticizes this as well. “There are red lines. And sanctions, soon,” wrote Commission Vice President Věra Jourová (on Twitter, of course). But the EU currently has hardly any instruments to rein in Musk, as Falk Steiner reports.
Fu Cong is China’s new EU ambassador. In his first public opinion piece since arriving in Brussels, he looks ahead to relations between the EU and the People’s Republic. He said the meeting between China’s President Xi and EU Council President Michel was a “positive signal” for future cooperation and he wanted to advance the common interests of both sides in Belgium.
Mr. Ruby, can the EU make the electricity market “fully fit for a decarbonized energy system” in just a few months, as the heads of state and government call for?
The EU should distinguish between crisis measures and a new electricity market design. I think the idea of solving the price problem for the next few winters with a structural reform of the electricity market is a wrong approach.
Many European governments want to decouple the price of electricity from the rapidly rising gas price. Is that not understandable from the point of view of industry and consumers?
The question is whether electricity market reform can be achieved quickly. We have a gas crisis, but we are rampaging around in the electricity market with many different interventions. If the EU has a gas problem, it should first exhaust all possibilities to tackle high gas prices. Europe would have to get to the root of the problem and ensure that gas is traded at reasonable prices. LNG is difficult to regulate. The Commission should focus on renegotiating the price with countries that supply gas to the EU via pipelines.
So you don’t see any need for a new electricity market design?
We are not against electricity market reform in principle, but it must be done carefully. I find it very worrying how quickly a decision will be made on a new market design. Imagine if the financial industry was told we are creating completely new rules but don’t have the time to investigate the consequences. The Commission should give the energy industry, the industry and academia more time to consult on its reform proposal and do a detailed impact assessment.
What, then, could be the consequences of a stumbled reform?
If the EU chooses the wrong electricity market design, investment in the transformation of the energy sector could collapse for years. That’s a big risk. After all, we have a consensus that electricity as an energy source is the structural solution for both decarbonization and Europe’s energy independence. To transform the electricity system, the EU needs to attract €100 billion of capital by the mid-40s per year. How do you think an American pension fund will react if Europe fails to achieve electricity market reform with a long-term horizon? Will institutional investors pour billions into a chaotically regulated market? Or will they say, in the US, we are now even getting incentives for our investments via the Inflation Reduction Act?
The Greek government has proposed creating separate markets for renewable and fossil-fuel power producers. Consumers should thus benefit more from the low generation costs of wind and solar energy.
I can only warn against the Greek model. It may contain good ideas. But it means far too radical a change in far too short a time. Because of the emergency measures that the Council has already decided on, we already have a huge mess in the electricity sector. It is clear that politics has to do something in such a crisis. But the problem is that measures are decided at the European level and, on top of that, the member states do whatever they feel like. The EU countries have introduced different caps for skimming revenues from electricity generation, even though there is a uniform European regulation. This is not the way to make European policy.
What do you think a new electricity market design should look like?
We have presented an initial reform proposal based on three additional pillars using the current wholesale market as a starting point. One core idea is to strengthen the long-term marketing of renewable energies. Actually, it’s quite mundane: We need to invest in capital-intensive technologies that will be in operation for more than 30 or 40 years. For an investor, therefore, it is a good start to know what will come back to his account in the next ten to 15 years. The same logic applies to power plants and storage facilities.
On the EEX, producers and professional buyers already have the option of hedging electricity prices for up to ten years. So far, however, the market has made little use of this option.
Exactly, so far, the market for long-term derivatives is not very liquid. There are three reasons for this: Many EU states already finance renewable energies via long-term contracts for difference. Second, until now, many market participants expected that electricity prices would continue to fall. Therefore, they did not want to commit to supposedly high prices. Thirdly, in many EU countries, it is not legally possible for energy suppliers to offer long-term supply contracts to household customers. Why then should they hedge for ten years?
Why then should long-term derivatives play such a central role?
In the electricity market, we have a structurally different world due to the energy crisis. We can no longer be sure that electricity prices will keep falling. In addition, many industrial customers want to invest directly in renewable energies and financially secure these long-term PPAs.
And what would household customers have to gain from long-term contracts?
Private households can simultaneously participate in the market-based financing of renewable energies and benefit from their low costs in the long term. All EU countries should therefore make it possible for electricity suppliers to offer contracts with a term of several years. So far, many European countries limit electricity contracts to one or two years. With long-term secured financing for renewable energies, the European energy market would be better prepared for externally caused crises in the future. Longer-term electricity contracts can have advantages for consumers.
When Twitter changed its terms of service late last week, it was followed almost simultaneously by the suspension of several journalists’ accounts. Elon Musk sees his privacy violated by tweeting the data of his private plane. Musk’s plane is equipped with a publicly trackable identifier like all civilian aircraft. But the eccentric multi-billionaire and Twitter owner unceremoniously had the platform’s rules of use changed. And he did so in such a way that tweets about his plane would be inadmissible. Musk allegedly wanted to make it more difficult for stalkers to follow his family.
On Friday, links to Mastodon instances were also blocked, in some cases completely. Serious links were provided with warnings about allegedly harmful content. Links to other platforms were also banned and technically suppressed. Musk was subjected to harsh criticism.
He argued that no publisher would allow advertising for competing products in its environment. However, Musk’s lawyers should have conveyed this to him relatively quickly: His interpretation of Twitter as a press medium would entail quite different legal consequences. Among other things, duties of care with regard to content. In any case, the policy disappeared again almost silently at the beginning of this week.
Musk, who was supposedly going for freedom of expression on Twitter, earned protest notes from a wide range of officials from the EU. The German Foreign Ministry said it “had a problem.” This meant the suspension of the accounts of several journalists, as a spokesman explained at the government press conference. Otherwise, the ministry does not comment on Twitter. The Federal Ministry of Justice said that the subordinate Federal Office of Justice was examining very closely what Twitter was doing now in relation to the Network Enforcement Act. As has been the case for weeks.
The sharpest comments came from Brussels: Commission Vice President Věra Jourová said the EU’s Digital Services Act requires respect of media freedom and fundamental rights. “This is reinforced under our Media Freedom Act.” Jourová wrote – on Twitter, of course: “There are red lines. And sanctions, soon.”
But sanctions of the kind Jourová has in mind are unlikely for the time being. As a “very large online platform” (VLOP), Twitter will fall under the Commission’s DSA supervision in the foreseeable future, provided that more than 45 million users still access the platform each month. But the first of the obligations that will come into force in the course of the year do not relate to the provider’s behavior toward users. They only relate to the implementation of transparency requirements and cooperation regulations with the supervisory authorities so that they can first get a picture.
The actual stricter regulations will not come into force until this process has been completed and it is officially clear which supervisory authority is responsible for which players. Thus, further relevant duties would take effect in the summer of 2023 at the earliest. And even the regulations of the DSA are not necessarily sharp swords for the actions of the Twitter ruler.
The regulations of the Digital Markets Act would be stricter. But these will hardly apply to Twitter: Twitter simply lacks market power. The regulators would have to be very creative in their interpretations. After all, the criteria in Article 3 of the DMA for when a provider is a gatekeeper must all be met at the same time. But this already fails because of the value of the company. After all, a market value of €65 billion or sales of €6.5 billion in the European Economic Area is a far cry from reality for the platform.
What could actually make a difference is the Media Freedom Act, which is currently being discussed. The EU Commission’s proposal also contains regulations for how online platforms deal with journalistic content. The MFA is intended to set limits on the operators’ deletion and blocking options here. In Jourová’s proposal, these are at most hinted at. But in the further procedure surrounding the MFA, this could be tightened up considerably if the Parliament and member states support it.
But that, in turn, is a long way off – no entry into force is expected before 2024. If the MFA comes into force at all, which is not certain. What the MFA proposal does contain today, however, is an obligation to sit down and talk with professional media.
Fittingly, Parliament President Roberta Metsola has very similar ideas. Metsola’s invitation to Musk to the plenary session of the European Parliament has already been sent out. Whether Musk will accept the invitation is still open. For the time being, he would have nothing to fear from a trip to Brussels in his private jet.
Amazon avoids a fine. In exchange, the US company has made concessions in two antitrust investigations by the Commission. “Today’s decision sets out new rules for how Amazon does business in Europe,” said Margrethe Vestager, the competition commissioner in charge of the case, on Tuesday. According to the decision, Amazon can no longer abuse its dual role as a marketplace and as a competitor to sellers in that marketplace. The company would have to change its use of data, the selection of sellers when placing offers in the Buy Box and the conditions for access to Amazon Prime.
If Amazon does not comply with the agreement and, in the Commission’s view, continues to abuse its dominant position, the EU can impose a fine of up to ten percent of its annual global turnover. On Monday, the Commission had opened an investigation against Meta and closed another case against Google and Meta.
The Commission had initiated the formal investigation procedure against Amazon in July 2019. The issue was whether the company was exploiting its dual role by using the non-public data of marketplace sellers to optimize its own business activities. On Nov. 10, 2020, the Commission notified Amazon of its objections.
In parallel, on Nov. 10, 2020, the Commission initiated a second investigation into the criteria according to which Amazon awards the Buy Box and according to which sellers are allowed to offer their products as part of Prime. The accusation was that Amazon favors its own offers or sellers who use Amazon’s logistics and shipping services.
To address the Commission’s competition concerns in both proceedings, Amazon submitted a set of commitments: The Commission market tested these in the summer of 2022 to determine whether the commitments would address the competition concerns. The commitments are:
An Amazon spokeswoman said the company has been working constructively with the Commission and is pleased to have addressed the Commission’s concerns, even though Amazon “continues to disagree” with several of the European Commission’s preliminary assessments. vis
On the early morning of 10 December, I stepped off the Hainan Airlines flight and set foot in Brussels in the brisk midwinter. I am no stranger to this city. During previous visits to EU headquarters on matters related to arms control and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, I had the chance to know many EU colleagues and established good working relations with them. I was told that it is by advocating diversity, inclusion, dialogue and compromise that the EU has witnessed the steady development of European integration. I sincerely hope that these principles can find their expression in my future work.
Despite the cold weather in Europe, I am still excited about beginning my new role as the 15th Chinese ambassador to the EU, a bloc of the most advanced economies and a pioneer in regional integration. Representing China and its interests, my mission here is to act as a bridge that enhances understanding and mutual trust and facilitates practical cooperation between China and the EU, including its member states.
Three things have given me confidence in fulfilling my responsibilities:
First, China stays committed to the path of peaceful development. A clear and important message from the recent 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China is the continuity and stability of China’s internal and external policies. Internally, China will follow the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, put people front and center, and deepen reform and opening up. Externally, China will continue to uphold world peace and promote common development, and work with other countries in building a global community with a shared future.
A China marching toward modernization will bring more opportunities to the EU and the wider world. Looking into the future, the fundamentals sustaining China’s prosperity and steady growth remain unchanged. Our determination to pursue high-standard opening up remains unchanged, and so is the bright prospect of the China-EU relationship.
Second, there is high-level political support for an enhanced China-EU relationship. Early this month, I had the honor to attend in Beijing President Xi Jinping’s meeting with President Charles Michel where the two leaders reached agreement on a wide range of issues. President Xi expressed the hope that the EU could become an important partner in China’s pursuit of modernization and profit from the opportunities presented by China’s huge market and its efforts to advance institutional opening up and deepen international cooperation.
The meeting between the two leaders sent a positive signal of enhancing mutual trust, building consensus and deepening cooperation, thus setting a clear direction for the future of China-EU relations.
Third, there are strong underlying forces that will drive China-EU relations in a positive direction. China and the EU are the world’s two major forces, markets and civilizations. In face of the complex and turbulent international situation, the two sides should and could work hand in hand in bringing stability back to the world. The decades-long relationship shows that China and the EU are partners rather than rivals.
Despite our apparent differences, the two sides share extensive common interests and can accomplish many great things together. In this connection, upholding the comprehensive strategic partnership following the principle of mutual benefit, managing differences through dialogue and embracing multilateralism serve the interests of both China and the EU as well as the broader global community.
The moment I got off the plane, I saw the sun rising on the horizon. As people often say in China, confidence is more precious than gold. I’m ready to translate my confidence into real action and join EU colleagues in implementing the agreements reached between the two leaders to ensure the steady and sustained development of China-EU relations.
The Chinese Mission to the EU and I look forward to reaching out to EU partners and interlocutors from all sectors with an open heart and open arms. We hope to increase communication, expand practical cooperation and build a bridge of friendship and cooperation between China and the EU.
“If the EU chooses the wrong electricity market design, investments in the transformation of the energy sector could collapse for years,” warns Kristian Ruby. In an interview with Manuel Berkel, the secretary general of Eurelectric argues for more care in reforming the electricity market and explains what long-term electricity contracts would mean for industry and private households.
Elon Musk sees himself as the savior of freedom of expression on Twitter. But what currently happens on the platform has little to do with that. Twitter recently blocked journalists’ accounts and banned links to other platforms. Brussels now harshly criticizes this as well. “There are red lines. And sanctions, soon,” wrote Commission Vice President Věra Jourová (on Twitter, of course). But the EU currently has hardly any instruments to rein in Musk, as Falk Steiner reports.
Fu Cong is China’s new EU ambassador. In his first public opinion piece since arriving in Brussels, he looks ahead to relations between the EU and the People’s Republic. He said the meeting between China’s President Xi and EU Council President Michel was a “positive signal” for future cooperation and he wanted to advance the common interests of both sides in Belgium.
Mr. Ruby, can the EU make the electricity market “fully fit for a decarbonized energy system” in just a few months, as the heads of state and government call for?
The EU should distinguish between crisis measures and a new electricity market design. I think the idea of solving the price problem for the next few winters with a structural reform of the electricity market is a wrong approach.
Many European governments want to decouple the price of electricity from the rapidly rising gas price. Is that not understandable from the point of view of industry and consumers?
The question is whether electricity market reform can be achieved quickly. We have a gas crisis, but we are rampaging around in the electricity market with many different interventions. If the EU has a gas problem, it should first exhaust all possibilities to tackle high gas prices. Europe would have to get to the root of the problem and ensure that gas is traded at reasonable prices. LNG is difficult to regulate. The Commission should focus on renegotiating the price with countries that supply gas to the EU via pipelines.
So you don’t see any need for a new electricity market design?
We are not against electricity market reform in principle, but it must be done carefully. I find it very worrying how quickly a decision will be made on a new market design. Imagine if the financial industry was told we are creating completely new rules but don’t have the time to investigate the consequences. The Commission should give the energy industry, the industry and academia more time to consult on its reform proposal and do a detailed impact assessment.
What, then, could be the consequences of a stumbled reform?
If the EU chooses the wrong electricity market design, investment in the transformation of the energy sector could collapse for years. That’s a big risk. After all, we have a consensus that electricity as an energy source is the structural solution for both decarbonization and Europe’s energy independence. To transform the electricity system, the EU needs to attract €100 billion of capital by the mid-40s per year. How do you think an American pension fund will react if Europe fails to achieve electricity market reform with a long-term horizon? Will institutional investors pour billions into a chaotically regulated market? Or will they say, in the US, we are now even getting incentives for our investments via the Inflation Reduction Act?
The Greek government has proposed creating separate markets for renewable and fossil-fuel power producers. Consumers should thus benefit more from the low generation costs of wind and solar energy.
I can only warn against the Greek model. It may contain good ideas. But it means far too radical a change in far too short a time. Because of the emergency measures that the Council has already decided on, we already have a huge mess in the electricity sector. It is clear that politics has to do something in such a crisis. But the problem is that measures are decided at the European level and, on top of that, the member states do whatever they feel like. The EU countries have introduced different caps for skimming revenues from electricity generation, even though there is a uniform European regulation. This is not the way to make European policy.
What do you think a new electricity market design should look like?
We have presented an initial reform proposal based on three additional pillars using the current wholesale market as a starting point. One core idea is to strengthen the long-term marketing of renewable energies. Actually, it’s quite mundane: We need to invest in capital-intensive technologies that will be in operation for more than 30 or 40 years. For an investor, therefore, it is a good start to know what will come back to his account in the next ten to 15 years. The same logic applies to power plants and storage facilities.
On the EEX, producers and professional buyers already have the option of hedging electricity prices for up to ten years. So far, however, the market has made little use of this option.
Exactly, so far, the market for long-term derivatives is not very liquid. There are three reasons for this: Many EU states already finance renewable energies via long-term contracts for difference. Second, until now, many market participants expected that electricity prices would continue to fall. Therefore, they did not want to commit to supposedly high prices. Thirdly, in many EU countries, it is not legally possible for energy suppliers to offer long-term supply contracts to household customers. Why then should they hedge for ten years?
Why then should long-term derivatives play such a central role?
In the electricity market, we have a structurally different world due to the energy crisis. We can no longer be sure that electricity prices will keep falling. In addition, many industrial customers want to invest directly in renewable energies and financially secure these long-term PPAs.
And what would household customers have to gain from long-term contracts?
Private households can simultaneously participate in the market-based financing of renewable energies and benefit from their low costs in the long term. All EU countries should therefore make it possible for electricity suppliers to offer contracts with a term of several years. So far, many European countries limit electricity contracts to one or two years. With long-term secured financing for renewable energies, the European energy market would be better prepared for externally caused crises in the future. Longer-term electricity contracts can have advantages for consumers.
When Twitter changed its terms of service late last week, it was followed almost simultaneously by the suspension of several journalists’ accounts. Elon Musk sees his privacy violated by tweeting the data of his private plane. Musk’s plane is equipped with a publicly trackable identifier like all civilian aircraft. But the eccentric multi-billionaire and Twitter owner unceremoniously had the platform’s rules of use changed. And he did so in such a way that tweets about his plane would be inadmissible. Musk allegedly wanted to make it more difficult for stalkers to follow his family.
On Friday, links to Mastodon instances were also blocked, in some cases completely. Serious links were provided with warnings about allegedly harmful content. Links to other platforms were also banned and technically suppressed. Musk was subjected to harsh criticism.
He argued that no publisher would allow advertising for competing products in its environment. However, Musk’s lawyers should have conveyed this to him relatively quickly: His interpretation of Twitter as a press medium would entail quite different legal consequences. Among other things, duties of care with regard to content. In any case, the policy disappeared again almost silently at the beginning of this week.
Musk, who was supposedly going for freedom of expression on Twitter, earned protest notes from a wide range of officials from the EU. The German Foreign Ministry said it “had a problem.” This meant the suspension of the accounts of several journalists, as a spokesman explained at the government press conference. Otherwise, the ministry does not comment on Twitter. The Federal Ministry of Justice said that the subordinate Federal Office of Justice was examining very closely what Twitter was doing now in relation to the Network Enforcement Act. As has been the case for weeks.
The sharpest comments came from Brussels: Commission Vice President Věra Jourová said the EU’s Digital Services Act requires respect of media freedom and fundamental rights. “This is reinforced under our Media Freedom Act.” Jourová wrote – on Twitter, of course: “There are red lines. And sanctions, soon.”
But sanctions of the kind Jourová has in mind are unlikely for the time being. As a “very large online platform” (VLOP), Twitter will fall under the Commission’s DSA supervision in the foreseeable future, provided that more than 45 million users still access the platform each month. But the first of the obligations that will come into force in the course of the year do not relate to the provider’s behavior toward users. They only relate to the implementation of transparency requirements and cooperation regulations with the supervisory authorities so that they can first get a picture.
The actual stricter regulations will not come into force until this process has been completed and it is officially clear which supervisory authority is responsible for which players. Thus, further relevant duties would take effect in the summer of 2023 at the earliest. And even the regulations of the DSA are not necessarily sharp swords for the actions of the Twitter ruler.
The regulations of the Digital Markets Act would be stricter. But these will hardly apply to Twitter: Twitter simply lacks market power. The regulators would have to be very creative in their interpretations. After all, the criteria in Article 3 of the DMA for when a provider is a gatekeeper must all be met at the same time. But this already fails because of the value of the company. After all, a market value of €65 billion or sales of €6.5 billion in the European Economic Area is a far cry from reality for the platform.
What could actually make a difference is the Media Freedom Act, which is currently being discussed. The EU Commission’s proposal also contains regulations for how online platforms deal with journalistic content. The MFA is intended to set limits on the operators’ deletion and blocking options here. In Jourová’s proposal, these are at most hinted at. But in the further procedure surrounding the MFA, this could be tightened up considerably if the Parliament and member states support it.
But that, in turn, is a long way off – no entry into force is expected before 2024. If the MFA comes into force at all, which is not certain. What the MFA proposal does contain today, however, is an obligation to sit down and talk with professional media.
Fittingly, Parliament President Roberta Metsola has very similar ideas. Metsola’s invitation to Musk to the plenary session of the European Parliament has already been sent out. Whether Musk will accept the invitation is still open. For the time being, he would have nothing to fear from a trip to Brussels in his private jet.
Amazon avoids a fine. In exchange, the US company has made concessions in two antitrust investigations by the Commission. “Today’s decision sets out new rules for how Amazon does business in Europe,” said Margrethe Vestager, the competition commissioner in charge of the case, on Tuesday. According to the decision, Amazon can no longer abuse its dual role as a marketplace and as a competitor to sellers in that marketplace. The company would have to change its use of data, the selection of sellers when placing offers in the Buy Box and the conditions for access to Amazon Prime.
If Amazon does not comply with the agreement and, in the Commission’s view, continues to abuse its dominant position, the EU can impose a fine of up to ten percent of its annual global turnover. On Monday, the Commission had opened an investigation against Meta and closed another case against Google and Meta.
The Commission had initiated the formal investigation procedure against Amazon in July 2019. The issue was whether the company was exploiting its dual role by using the non-public data of marketplace sellers to optimize its own business activities. On Nov. 10, 2020, the Commission notified Amazon of its objections.
In parallel, on Nov. 10, 2020, the Commission initiated a second investigation into the criteria according to which Amazon awards the Buy Box and according to which sellers are allowed to offer their products as part of Prime. The accusation was that Amazon favors its own offers or sellers who use Amazon’s logistics and shipping services.
To address the Commission’s competition concerns in both proceedings, Amazon submitted a set of commitments: The Commission market tested these in the summer of 2022 to determine whether the commitments would address the competition concerns. The commitments are:
An Amazon spokeswoman said the company has been working constructively with the Commission and is pleased to have addressed the Commission’s concerns, even though Amazon “continues to disagree” with several of the European Commission’s preliminary assessments. vis
On the early morning of 10 December, I stepped off the Hainan Airlines flight and set foot in Brussels in the brisk midwinter. I am no stranger to this city. During previous visits to EU headquarters on matters related to arms control and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, I had the chance to know many EU colleagues and established good working relations with them. I was told that it is by advocating diversity, inclusion, dialogue and compromise that the EU has witnessed the steady development of European integration. I sincerely hope that these principles can find their expression in my future work.
Despite the cold weather in Europe, I am still excited about beginning my new role as the 15th Chinese ambassador to the EU, a bloc of the most advanced economies and a pioneer in regional integration. Representing China and its interests, my mission here is to act as a bridge that enhances understanding and mutual trust and facilitates practical cooperation between China and the EU, including its member states.
Three things have given me confidence in fulfilling my responsibilities:
First, China stays committed to the path of peaceful development. A clear and important message from the recent 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China is the continuity and stability of China’s internal and external policies. Internally, China will follow the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, put people front and center, and deepen reform and opening up. Externally, China will continue to uphold world peace and promote common development, and work with other countries in building a global community with a shared future.
A China marching toward modernization will bring more opportunities to the EU and the wider world. Looking into the future, the fundamentals sustaining China’s prosperity and steady growth remain unchanged. Our determination to pursue high-standard opening up remains unchanged, and so is the bright prospect of the China-EU relationship.
Second, there is high-level political support for an enhanced China-EU relationship. Early this month, I had the honor to attend in Beijing President Xi Jinping’s meeting with President Charles Michel where the two leaders reached agreement on a wide range of issues. President Xi expressed the hope that the EU could become an important partner in China’s pursuit of modernization and profit from the opportunities presented by China’s huge market and its efforts to advance institutional opening up and deepen international cooperation.
The meeting between the two leaders sent a positive signal of enhancing mutual trust, building consensus and deepening cooperation, thus setting a clear direction for the future of China-EU relations.
Third, there are strong underlying forces that will drive China-EU relations in a positive direction. China and the EU are the world’s two major forces, markets and civilizations. In face of the complex and turbulent international situation, the two sides should and could work hand in hand in bringing stability back to the world. The decades-long relationship shows that China and the EU are partners rather than rivals.
Despite our apparent differences, the two sides share extensive common interests and can accomplish many great things together. In this connection, upholding the comprehensive strategic partnership following the principle of mutual benefit, managing differences through dialogue and embracing multilateralism serve the interests of both China and the EU as well as the broader global community.
The moment I got off the plane, I saw the sun rising on the horizon. As people often say in China, confidence is more precious than gold. I’m ready to translate my confidence into real action and join EU colleagues in implementing the agreements reached between the two leaders to ensure the steady and sustained development of China-EU relations.
The Chinese Mission to the EU and I look forward to reaching out to EU partners and interlocutors from all sectors with an open heart and open arms. We hope to increase communication, expand practical cooperation and build a bridge of friendship and cooperation between China and the EU.
