Recommendations ▪ Because Chinese end users can hardly be differentiated by civilian or military end uses, Beijing's behavior poses a challenge to international export controls. China's behavior compels an international response. Multilateral approaches to a solution should be at the forefront. These are effective and allow economic operators to adapt their operations efficiently and effectively. ▪ The Transatlantic partners should intensify to pursue common interests in security policy. German industry recognizes that the states of the liberal-democratic West must adapt to the changed security situation brought about by China’s party-state capitalism. The Transatlantic partners should agree to cooperate closely on controls in the future. A coordinated export control practice could also provide important momentum in multilateral export controls. ▪ In order to retain influence and to increase its power to shape European economic interests, European export controls should urgently be adapted to the changed geopolitical climate. Specifically, German industry therefore calls for a qualification of EU-autonomous controls equivalent to the 0Y521-ECCN Series in the United States. This would ensure a temporary mechanism by which European export controls would remain linked to the processes in the Wassenaar Arrangement. ▪ Qualified EU-autonomous controls would not be uncharted legal territory. As in the United States, European special interventions should include a voluntary commitment to bring such listed items into the Wassenaar process. In this way, political conflicts over EU export controls could be avoided in the future. In addition, it would limit the proliferation of unilateral controls.
Anti-Dumping Measures in Merchandise Trade17 In recent years, increasing numbers of anti-dumping cases have been observed both in the EU and globally. Between October 2008 and October 2020, the EU initiated 146 anti-dumping investigations against 29 countries, an average of twelve investigations per year. The EU is the sixth largest user of anti-dumping investigations within the G20, behind India (544 investigations) and the United States (383). Most of the EU’s investigations (59, or 40 %) were targeted against China. Investigations were also initiated against India (11), Russia (9), Turkey (7), and Indonesia (6); five each against the United States, South Korea, and Taiwan; four each against Thailand and Ukraine. In 75 cases, or 51 percent of cases, definitive anti-dumping measures were imposed on the basis of investigations initiated by the EU. Within the G20, measures were taken in 60 percent of cases.18
17
BDI has published a more detailed position on the anti-dumping measures of the European Union. The paper is available via the following link: https://english.bdi.eu/media/publications/#/publication/news/anti-dumping-measures-of-the-european-union/. 18 Methodology: Each investigation against N countries is counted as N investigations. Russian investigations include all investigations of the Euro-Asian Economic Union (EEU), South African investigations include those of the South African Customs Union (SECU), and Saudi Arabian investigations include those of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Only definitive measures were counted. 18
