It’s difficult to be sure, but it seems that Europe and China are in the process of wooing each other. If this is so, it so far seems a joyless courtship, as both have been jilted by the feckless Lothario in the room and forced to think about second-best choices. But, as with so many arranged marriages around the world, it may be that pragmatism and low expectations can forge a practical, enduring relationship that might over time amount to something. As European Union foreign policy head Josep Borrell noted this month, despite their many differences, China remains an “ indispensable partner ” to Europe. The EU is China’s most important export market while China is EU’s second-largest export market, second only to the US, and the source of most export growth. Joerg Wuttke, president of the European Chamber in China, says he expects the country to account for over 30 per cent of global growth over the next decade. He noted: “China is a huge opportunity, and we have to be here … We have more in common with the US, but we don’t choose a side.” As we move into six months of German presidency of the EU Council, and with the world focused on managing the impacts of the pandemic recession, the EU and China seem set on a series of meetings aimed at improving ties. They will probably need to be virtual, which will no doubt underscore the pragmatic lovelessness of the courtship, but necessity may drive them forward. A primary driver is the flagrant philandering of US President Donald Trump’s team, whose serial infidelities over trade and defence and unpredictability on issues like managing the global health crisis, or tackling climate change, have created such uncertainty among long-standing allies. EU-US rows over tariffs on European steel, aluminium and cars, over a future digital services tax , disagreements on climate change, and US defence spending cuts in Nato, have prompted many in Europe to conclude that hedging bets on future friendships might be overdue. Add to that Trump’s “leadership” during the Covid-19 pandemic, including his withholding of funding to the World Health Organisation and uncertain commitment to global cooperation on sharing access to vaccines once they become available, and the imperative to hedge bets becomes even more urgent. However, Europe’s hopes of some form of courtship from China have been a source of disappointment for many years. There have been grumblings that Chinese officials have been beguiled by the US and preoccupied with Trump’s trade war. Not unreasonably, Europeans have been anxious that Chinese commitments to add US$200 billion in US imports under January’s phase one trade deal will come at the expense of hundreds of European exporters. A recent letter from Vice-Premier Liu He to the European Commission promised that the US deal would be achieved in a “non-discriminatory manner”, but European scepticism remains rife. Another frustration for the EU has been the slow progress towards a Comprehensive Agreement on Investment with China. After eight years and 29 rounds of negotiations, an agreement still remains elusive. Meetings over the coming months aim at achieving an agreement by the end of this year, but many are doubtful this will materialise. China puts focus on consensus, EU highlights differences after summit The European view is that China has been all talk and no action, and that promise fatigue has now set in. Obstacles remain high to European companies keen to sell to, or operate in China. There are frustrations over pressure to transfer European technology. Regular use of subsidies to protect and promote mainland companies, in particular state-owned enterprises, remains a problem, with European companies complaining they see few signs of any liberalising progress. But, for all these differences, EU attitudes to China are distinct from those in the US, and much more pragmatic, despite criticism of Hong Kong’s new national security law or China’s treatment of Uygurs . There is an acceptance that – whatever its differences – China has become a massive and influential economy which the world’s rich economies need to cooperate with, not block. As Carl Bildt, former Swedish prime Minister, wrote in Project Syndicate this month: “Because Europe can no longer count on the US as a reliable, like-minded partner, [the EU] will have to develop its own approach” and “Though Europe will stand together with the US on many issues, it will not abandon its engagement with China on issues of mutual concern.” EU not in mood to follow Trump into China conflict over Hong Kong law Those issues of mutual concern with China have substance. They include a preference for using multilateral processes and organisations to solve international problems, in contrast with the Trump administration’s “America first” policies. That includes support for the WHO and the World Trade Organisation. Also of shared concern is climate change and a recognition that, given China’s size, no effective global solutions are possible without close cooperation with Beijing. Some Europeans have been encouraged by recent hints from Beijing that some real practical liberalisations are back on the agenda after eight years of retrenchment. As Kevin Rudd and Daniel Rosen noted in the Post this week, policies are being discussed to improve the “market-based allocation of factors of production” and emphasise “employment first”. They say this new reform agenda acknowledges the importance of competition, giving better protection to private firms and intellectual property, strengthening market pricing, formalising property rights and limiting administrative interference in market activities. Only time will tell. Clearly, Beijing has a chance through such reforms and its courtship of the EU to build international trust in its intentions. But, in the face of deep promise fatigue, there is a need for practical action. As Wuttke noted: “We need China to do something that sets a positive note. Where is the charm offensive?” Expect a slow and clumsy courtship. David Dodwell researches and writes about global, regional and Hong Kong challenges from a Hong Kong point of view