Read on Twitter
A Thread: One key "false narrative"/disinformation complaint from Brussels towards Beijing: China is exploiting the crisis to divide and undermine the EU, via its medical supplies and alleged accompanying propaganda. In my opinion, this claim is not rooted in facts. https://twitter.com/niubi/status/1253713154930085888
Brussels's claim can be found at a special report by the EEAS, EU's foreign ministry, which repeatedly seeks to debunk these lines: "The EU has failed to handle the crisis – the EU is a disaster for Europe" https://euvsdisinfo.eu/eeas-special-report-disinformation-on-the-coronavirus-short-assessment-of-the-information-environment/
"The EU is not ready to provide urgent support to its Member States – instead, they have to rely on external support (e.g., Italy), with China mentioned most often as the source of such assistance"; "China is coming to rescue the EU as Brussels abandons EU Member States."
My argument is all of these *originated* and evolved in the West, not China; and no Chinese official, diplomat, media or scholars said, "propagandized" anything (at least at any noticeable level) to that effect. There is simply no record of Beijing saying such things
A turning point of the narrative regarding coronavirus in EU comes at March 10, when Maurizio Massari, the Italian permanent representative to the European Union, published a commentary on Politico, which was explosive https://www.politico.eu/article/coronavirus-italy-needs-europe-help/
"Italy has already asked to activate the European Union Mechanism of Civil Protection for the supply of medical equipment for individual protection. But, unfortunately, not a single EU country responded to the Commission's call. Only China responded bilaterally. " Massari wrote
That was picked up by mainstream media, including @FT @washingtonpost @guardianwhile on the same or the next day. The stark contrast between Beijing and Brussels was highlighted even earlier by commentators on Twitter, for example:
for example, the same night as Massari published his piece https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1237453505532776449
All were retweeted or liked hundreds of times, and there are many more tweets on March 10, more than enough to beaming a message to their Twitter followers, and by extension the agenda-setting gatekeepers who disproportionately have the power to shape the public discourse in EU.
Commentary on Foreign Policy, on March 14, punched even harder: "In a shameful abdication of responsibility, fellow countries in the European Union have failed to give medical assistance and supplies to Italy during an outbreak. China is filling the void." https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/14/coronavirus-eu-abandoning-italy-china-aid/
Earlier, there were already warning signs flashing against Brussels.
CNN published an analysis entitled Europe's coronavirus outbreak is exposing -- and fueling -- its rifts on Feb 27 https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/27/europe/europe-coronavirus-rifts-analysis-intl/index.html
CNN published an analysis entitled Europe's coronavirus outbreak is exposing -- and fueling -- its rifts on Feb 27 https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/27/europe/europe-coronavirus-rifts-analysis-intl/index.html
Politico ran a report entitled Europe fails to help Italy in coronavirus fight on March 5 https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-aims-better-control-coronavirus-responses/Making
Making matters worse for Brussels was a March 6 emergency meeting of EU health ministers, about which a Reuters report summarized in its title EU fails to persuade France, Germany to lift coronavirus health gear controls. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu/eu-fails-to-persuade-france-germany-to-lift-coronavirus-health-gear-controls-idUSKBN20T166
Throughout the process, there was no word from Chinese officials, diplomats, scholars or media with even remotely comparable effects as those of Maurizio Massari, Yaroslav Trofimov, Jeremy Cliffe or Elisabeth Braw.
It's certainly impossible to go through every opinion of every Chinese who at the time were predominantly occupied by the troubles at home, but the fact remains there is no known, comparable Chinese contribution to those narratives now fiercely disparaged by Brussels.
It is also telling that among the extensively sourced and linked commentaries from the nine experts (ALL of them European) featured in the April 6 ChinaFile Conversation, none point to any Chinese content with comparable effects to those cited above. https://www.chinafile.com/conversation/what-does-coronavirus-mean-eu-china-relations
The first Chinese experts team - and the first batch of medical supplies - did not arrive in Italy until the night of March 12, two full days after Maurizio Massari's bombshell brought big publicity/political damage, to Brussels.
In those 48 plus hours, Brussels and other European capitals, despite their close proximity to Rome and already harsh criticism, still failed to rush to get ahead of Beijing, thousands of miles away in the East.
The inconvenient truth is that nobody, either in EU or elsewhere, would ever say out in the open that Beijing should not have sent medical supplies before Brussels, Paris or Berlin. Instead, China is now scapegoated for that. Had Beijing responded to Rome's call for help later
Had Beijing responded to Rome's call for help later than Brussels, there probably would not have been such a "false narrative".
In addition, how the Western press and analysts see or view the facts is not under Beijing's control or responsibility.
a double standard behind this: when mainstream Western news media and think tanks question EU unity, it's free speech or constructive criticism, but even a whiff - in this case, nothing - from China would be condemned as state-peddled false narrative seeking to destabilize the EU
That Brussels - and many others in Europe - now conveniently omitted the timeline and blamed China is a testament to their anxiety of EU unity, and a deficit of trust towards Beijing on its engagements with the European Union.
In spite of years-long vows of China's support for a more integrated and stronger EU, there are deep suspicions in EU with Beijing's "true intentions". ... https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1725508.shtml
The suspicions are that China's vows are only diplomatic, that China is in fact trying to "divide and rule" Europe(just as in the coronavirus case of Italy), especially through the China-CEEC (Central and Eastern European Countries) framework, aka "17+1".
At least 3 arguments to dissuade suspicions. First, an integrated and strong EU is in line with China's stated global strategy that China wants a multipolar world. Brussels is an important polar, absent which the world would be unfortunately and dangerously reduced to a duoplay.
2nd, an integrated European market - in the jargon of Brussels, the Internal Market - is easier for business. It's easier to use the euro instead of franc, mark, and lira at the same time. It's easier to have products mass-produced to one set of rules instead of 27 standards...
Last but not least, the suspicions downplayed, if not willfully ignored, China's contribution to European integration by engaging CEEC. Ironically, the Chinese involvement that irks Brussels most is infrastructure projects such as roads, ports, and railways...
...the infrastructures that China facilitated in those regions. But those infrastructures figuratively link CEEC (17 out of "17+1") more closer to Western Europe than to China thousands of miles away, a fact of geography.
All roads lead to Brussels much more than to Beijing.
Infrastructure first and foremost sped up personnel and goods movement among Europeans. No doubt China as a trade powerhouse would benefit from better transportation and logistics, but not nearly as much as Europeans.
Infrastructure first and foremost sped up personnel and goods movement among Europeans. No doubt China as a trade powerhouse would benefit from better transportation and logistics, but not nearly as much as Europeans.
With closer links in travel and supply chain, CEEC would be drawn closer to the orbit of Brussels. To put it more bluntly from a security perspective, whose tanks would be more likely to ride those roads? Aren't they those of NATO, not the PLA from thousands of miles away?
China wishes to develop good relations with CEEC, NOT at the expense of the EU. It is saddening to see that some wise minds in Brussels and beyond appear to believe CEEC is a zero-sum game playground that their relations with Brussels and Beijing are somewhat mutually exclusive
