China and EU Foreign Ministers Hold Four-Hour Talks: China's Blunt Message Leaves EU Feeling Uneasy

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi recently held a strategic dialogue with the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell. As more details of the meeting emerge, it appears the talks were far from smooth.

The meeting between the foreign ministers of China and the European Union

The four-hour-long discussions between the Chinese and EU foreign ministers were marked by a noticeable tension.

According to reports, China was unusually direct in its statements, particularly regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict, which reportedly left several European diplomats in attendance taken aback.

China made it clear to Borrell that it has not provided Russia with military or financial support related to the conflict, and bluntly stated that if it had, the war would have already ended. This assertion aligns with previous statements made by China at the UN Security Council, where it emphasized that if China were supplying military aid to Russia, the situation on the battlefield would look very different.

It’s not hard to imagine the shock and disbelief among Western officials upon hearing such remarks.

Sources indicate that China's tone toward Europe during the talks was unusually straightforward.

Regardless of how Europe perceives it, China certainly has the standing to make such statements. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has shattered many preconceived notions—Russia is not as powerful as many assumed, and NATO is not as intimidating as it once seemed.

European countries, in particular, have been struggling to supply Ukraine with sufficient military aid. France, for instance, has complained that after China halted exports of nitrocellulose—a key component in ammunition production—it could no longer adequately arm its own forces.

Earlier, China also imposed strict restrictions on drone exports to prevent their use on the battlefield by either side in the conflict.

China’s direct message to the EU was not intended as a threat, but rather as a call for the EU to face reality and stop perpetuating the narrative of China’s alleged support for Russia’s military-industrial complex.

The EU’s irresponsible approach not only undermines China-EU relations but also hampers the political resolution of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Traditionally, China has been diplomatically tactful, often speaking in measured tones and hoping others would take the hint. But when such subtlety fails, China is not above delivering a blunt message to make an impact.

In fact, the “shock” China delivered to the Europeans didn’t end there.

According to insiders, during the talks, the Chinese side also provided Borrell with an analysis of the broader geopolitical landscape involving China, the U.S., and Russia, including China’s relations with both countries and its national interests.

Some EU diplomats felt as though their foreign policy chief was being given “several history lessons” and a “crash course in realpolitik.”

For the EU’s top diplomat to be publicly “schooled” might be a topic of amusement for some, but from a more serious perspective, it’s no laughing matter for the EU.

The importance of diplomacy cannot be overstated. While it need not be rigid, it must be professional. Even when positions differ, all parties should have a basic understanding of the facts and context.

Only when this minimum requirement is met can dialogue proceed smoothly and yield the desired outcomes. To put it bluntly, if even the basics are lacking, the talks are a waste of time.

If the reports are accurate, it appears that Borrell, as the EU’s foreign policy chief, may have failed to meet even this basic standard.

This would explain why China’s foreign minister felt the need to “educate” him. Without clarifying the fundamentals, meaningful dialogue would be impossible.

The media outlet that reported this story also seemed to hint at Borrell’s relative inexperience in diplomacy, noting that he only assumed his current role at the end of last year.

This suggests that Borrell may lack the necessary background in foreign affairs.

Indeed, there are signs to support this. Born in 1977 in Estonia, Borrell grew up in an environment marked by strong anti-Soviet and anti-Russian sentiment, which likely shaped his own pronounced anti-Russia stance.

Viewing issues through such a biased lens inevitably leads to arrogance and prejudice—traits that are detrimental to diplomacy.

Beyond personal biases, Borrell also appears to lack a strong track record in foreign affairs. His resume is filled with terms like “law” and “business administration.” During his time as an EU lawmaker, his work focused on digital markets, energy, and consumer policy.

As Estonia’s Prime Minister, he publicly clashed with former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and opposed Vladimir Putin’s participation in European summits.

Whether such a figure is suited to lead the EU’s foreign policy and engage directly with major powers is open to debate.

At the very least, judging from his conversation with China’s foreign minister, Borrell still has much to learn.

While this episode is unlikely to have a major negative impact on China-EU relations, it should serve as a wake-up call for the EU. Professional matters must be handled by professionals—otherwise, the EU risks putting itself at a disadvantage.