The geopoliticization of EU trade policy - Beyond the rhetoric

Since the adoption of the EU Global Strategy of 2016, most authors agree that the EU has reached a turning point, moving toward a geopolitical union (Biscop 2018; Nicosia 2019; Rabinovych & Novakova 2019). Indeed, the mission statement of the European Commission President Von der Leyen in 2019 to lead a ‘geopolitical commission’ seems to affirm this perception of a pragmatic shift in the EU's external posture. This recent trend has opened up a significant trade-foreign policy nexus debate within academic and policy circles on whether the 'geopolitical turn' has also affected the EU trade policy, creating a 'geopoliticization' of EU trade (e.g. Meunier and Nicolaidis, 2019; Bossuyt, Orbie and Drieghe, 2020; Beattie, 2020; Orbie, 2021). The current uncertainty around this question is further amplified by the ambiguity and underdefined nature of the 'geopoliticization' concept, exemplified by the plethora of concepts present in today’s debates (geo-economics; geopoliticization; weaponization or securitization of trade etc.). Building on the broader question of my current PhD research (To what extent and how does the ‘geopoliticization of trade’ manifest itself in EU-China relations?), this pilot project will already take an initial step toward better conceptualising ‘geopoliticization of trade’. Specifically, the paper will look at the European Commission’s recent initiative to launch an Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI), tackling economic coercion from for example China, Russia or the U.S. Although the ACI could be seen as a clear example of the operationalisation of ‘geopoliticization of EU trade’, significant opposition to the proposal from open-trade minded EU member states has recently emerged, risking to water down the Commission’s proposal. Therefore, the ACI provides for an interesting initial case study to better conceptualise ‘geopoliticization of EU trade’ from an analytical perspective. To do this, the project will conduct a discourse analysis of a set-up of policy debates surrounding the ACI proposal in the European Parliament, specialised media and civil society dialogues. By conducting this analysis, the project will aim to 1) explore the conceptualisation of ‘geopoliticization of trade’ through 2) an empirical study of the ACI instrument. References - Beattie A., Trade Secrets newsletter, Financial Times, (1 June 2020) - Biscop S., European Strategy in the 21st Century: New Future for Old Power, (Abingdon: Routledge, 2018), - Bossuyt F., Orbie J., Drieghe L. “EU external policy coherence in the trade-foreign policy nexus: foreign policy through trade or strictly business?”. Journal of International Relations and Development 23, (2020): 45–66. - Meunier S. and Nicolaidis K. “The Geopoliticization of European Trade and Investment Policy” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 57, (2019): 103–113. - Nicosia L. “In Search of a European Strategy? From a Normative to a Pragmatic Approach”, E-international Relations, 3 December 2021. accessed 29 December 2020. https://www.e-ir.info/2019/12/03/in-search-of-a-european-strategy-from-a-normative-to-a-pragmatic-approach/ - Orbie, J. (2021). EU Trade Policy Meets Geopolitics: What About Trade Justice?. European Foreign Affairs Review, 26(2), 197-201. - Rabinovych M. and Novakova Z., “Paradigmatic change with much continuity? EU's approach to values in external policies in the age of contestation”, Global Affairs 5, no.1 (2019): 73-79.