In recent years, China’s 16+1 cooperation framework has emerged as a critical component of Beijing’s foreign policy strategy, mainly due to recent conflicts between China and both the United States and the European Union. This initiative, which forms a coalition between China and 16 Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs), has become very significant as recent global events have transformed the international landscape. Established in 2012, the 16+1 format was initially seen as a minor aspect of China’s diplomatic efforts as its focus mainly was on expanding its influence in the South China Sea, bringing the vision of the Belt and Road Initiative to reality and its deteriorating relationship with Japan. However, its importance has grown substantially as China faces mounting challenges from both Washington and Brussels. The policy serves multiple purposes for Beijing, including expanding economic influence by expanding the Belt and Road Initiative into the CEECs, countering Western pressure, and potentially causing conflicts between EU member states.
Initiative’s Goals
One of the primary reasons the 16+1 policy has gained prominence is its role in promoting Chinese economic interests in Europe. Beijing has sought alternative markets and partners as trade tensions escalate between China and the United States. The CEECs offer attractive opportunities due to their strategic location at the crossroads of Europe and Asia and their generally more favourable attitudes towards Chinese investment compared to many Western European nations. The economic focus areas of the 16+1 framework include trade, investment, infrastructure development, transportation connectivity, finance, agriculture, science & technology, healthcare, education and culture. These sectors align closely with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which aims to create vast trade routes connecting China with other parts of Asia, Europe, and Africa. By integrating the CEECs into BRI projects, China can expand its economic footprint in Europe while bypassing potential obstacles from more sceptical Western European countries.
Moreover, the 16+1 format allows China to pursue a divide-and-conquer strategy within the European Union. By offering individual CEECs preferential treatment and investment opportunities, Beijing hopes to cause divisions within the EU bloc and undermine Brussels’ ability to present a united front against Chinese economic practices. This approach has shown some success, with several CEECs occasionally prioritising Chinese interests over EU policies. The political implications of the 16+1 policy have become increasingly significant as tensions between China and the West escalate. Beijing sees the framework as a means to counter the growing pressure from Washington and Brussels. Chinese officials have emphasised that improved ties between China and the EU are crucial in light of potential shifts in U.S. foreign policy under President Trump. This rhetoric reflects Beijing’s efforts to drive a wedge between the EU and the United States, potentially weakening the transatlantic alliance that has been a cornerstone of Western foreign policy for decades.
Current Progress
Many of China’s economic promises to the region have failed to actualise, with flagship Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects like the Belgrade-Budapest railway stalled due to non-compliance with EU regulations. As of late 2017, only a few China-financed infrastructure projects had been completed in CEEC. Chinese investment in the region remains less than Western EU states, totalling around €6.7 billion, which has remained stagnant since 2017. Criticism from Brussels and Western European nations viewing the format as divisive has led China to reportedly reduce the frequency of summits with CEEC, potentially shifting from annual to biennial meetings. The 16+1 framework will likely continue but become less intensive. China may focus more on bilateral talks rather than multilateral engagements through the platform.
This shift presents an opportunity for the EU to align member states’ China policies and promote its regional connectivity initiatives. While the 16+1 initiative aimed to boost economic cooperation, its limitations and controversies have ultimately led to a re-evaluation of China’s engagement strategy with Central and Eastern Europe.
Challenges and Issues
Furthermore, the effectiveness of China’s strategy remains uncertain. While the 16+1 framework has increased trade and investment flows between China and CEECs, many participants feel the economic benefits have been limited compared to expectations. While Greece became a full member of China’s 17+1 mechanism in 2019, Lithuania withdrew in 2021 due to a lack of benefits, leading to diplomatic tensions with China. Estonia and Latvia left in 2022. The Czech Republic has been inactive since March 2023. Romania shifted its focus away from China’s projects after a government change in 2015. Infrastructure investments continue in countries like Serbia, Croatia, and Poland. China’s trade volume with Central and Eastern European Countries reached $67.98 billion in 2017, with accumulated investment exceeding $8 billion across industries. However, some members have become increasingly critical of China’s influence in Europe and in response, the EU strengthened its engagement with CEECs through other frameworks like the Berlin Process. Brussels emphasises that 16+1 cooperation should complement rather than compete with EU-China relations, communicating that European leaders are wary of allowing China to exploit divisions within the organisation.
Rising Importance
Despite the difficulties, the 16+1 initiative is still essential for China’s overarching geopolitical strategy. With growing tensions with the United States, Beijing views this initiative as necessary to enhance its European influence and counter American efforts to isolate China economically. Furthermore, the policy acts as a platform for Chinese diplomatic strategies, enabling Beijing to apply its techniques in its interactions with smaller countries and potentially use the gathered insights in different areas. Therefore, China’s 16+1 initiative has become essential to Beijing’s foreign policy strategy in a rapidly evolving global landscape. Confronted with challenges from the United States and the European Union, China views this initiative as vital for enhancing its economic clout, mitigating Western pressures, and possibly creating divisions within the EU. As the international political arena continues to change, the significance of the 16+1 initiative is expected to increase, acting as a key arena in the ongoing contest among significant powers for influence in Europe and beyond.
