By merging liberal-intergovernmentalism and neo-functionalism, the Failing-Forward-Framework（ FFF） has created a grand theoretic boundary, based on which this article makes a comprehensive study of the 75 external sanction cases within EPC and CFSP and concludes that the EU’s relatively efficient regimes and satisfactory sanction effects have,in fact, experienced constant difficulties and setbacks. The practical challenge with which the EU is currently encountered is the inherent contradiction between the aim of the sanction regimes as an integral part of CFSP and the overall objective of CFSP designed to build a “common security system” while external sanctions has created, in reality, a “common insecurity environment” for both the member states and the other countries concerned.
Power asymmetry among states is prevalent in international negotiations. Weak states usually make use of structural power to pursue their interests in their negotiations with strong states.Structural power refers not only to the indirect influence exerted by one actor on the other actors through “ structures”, but also to the interaction between different actors. The strength of one actor’s structural power is determined by its structural position and the timing and fulcrum of its interaction with the others. Within the negotiation network, the influence generated by the interaction between actors can take the form of mutual reinforcement,restraint or counterbalance, and the change of identity and interests in the negotiation process determines the displacement attribute of structural power, which makes it possible for small and medium-sized states to gain benefits when competing with great powers. Germany’s power position, history, culture, diplomatic network and decision-making mechanism suggest that it needs to resort to structural power when negotiating with great powers.In the negotiations on German reunification, the China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment（CAI） and “Nord Stream 2”, with the help of the internal interaction between the parties of negotiations as a structural leverage, the German government tried to influence the process and results of the negotiations by optimizing its own structural position.Changes in the context of negotiations, the advantages and disadvantages of the structural position of different actors, and the increase or decrease of soft and hard power or authority may all affect the effectiveness of structural power. The logic of power followed by Germany in its negotiations with great powers provides a reference for judging the diplomatic behaviors of states in complex international negotiations and their impacts on international relations.
The Report to the 20th CPC National Congress has elaborated comprehensively the essential requirements and objectives of the Chinese Path to Modernization. An overall understanding of the relationship between the Chinese Path to Moderation and the outside world has become the topic of heated discussions within Chinese academic circle. In this Issue, we invite four distinguished Chinese scholars to make in-depth discussions on the Chinese Path to Modernization and the European modern, Europe’ s strategic autonomy and the future of Europe, and China-Europe relations. Zhou Hong’s article on The Chinese Path to Modernization, European Model and China-Europe Relations explains that there are at least three aspects in which the concept of the Chinese Path to Modernization is related to the outside world. She then turns to analyze the Europe-style modernization as a reference and makes a summary of what constitutes the European model and of the transformation of Europe in the fields of economy, digitalization, green development, politics and diplomacy. But the Russia-Ukraine conflict has disturbed the process of European transformation while at the same time promoting its reverse transformation. She concludes that it’ s necessary for us to be more outward-looking when dealing with China-Europe relations and elaborates the three principles that we should stick to in China’s Europe policy. Feng Zhongping’s article discusses the critical role of Strategic Autonomy in the future of Europe. After a brief review of the origin, evolution and connotation of the concept of Strategic Autonomy, which involves not only defense and security, but other fields such as economy, energy, technology and industry chain, he then explores the impacts of the Russia-Ukraine conflict on Europe’s strategic autonomy, which is not only a touchstone but one of the most important reasons leading to disputes around the idea. It has at the same time highlighted the urgency of realizing strategic autonomy for Europe. He makes it clear that the future of Europe is determined by its ability to realize or safeguard “sovereign Europe” and that one of the most difficult issues that Europe is faced with is to build defense autonomy and to effectively safeguard its interests among the big power game-playing. He concludes that the strengthening of bilateral relations between China and Europe is not only beneficial to the two parties’ fundamental interests but to the stability and prosperity of the world. Cui Hongjian’s article on Transformation of Europe in the Context of the Changes Unseen in a Century and the China-Europe Relations first reviews the transformation that Europe is experiencing from post-Lisbon Treaty era to post-Ukraine crisis period. He believes great changes have taken place in Europe’s idea on the world pattern, the world order and development. In the post-Ukraine crisis period, the European transformation has entered a new phase where Europe is faced with the rebuilding of security structure, regrouping of energy economy and adjustment of internal power relations. The China-Europe relations will act as an important factor in the transformation of Europe at the present stage. In the last part, he elaborates the way forward for China-Europe relations and points out some of the principles and policies to be employed in dealing with bilateral relations. Zhang Jian’ s article on New Opportunities for China-Europe Relations in the New Era first explains some of the new characteristics of the new era including the increasing risks of confrontation between different blocs, the spreading of the idea of de-globalization and the failure of multilateral governance mechanism.He then points out the new opportunities that China and Europe possess in their cooperation, including the unprecedented urgency in safeguarding world peace, promoting opening up and development and enhancing global governance. Against such a background, new thought is needed on the EU side in its dealing with China-Europe relations.
The Report to the 20th CPC National Congress has elaborated comprehensively the essential requirements and objectives of the Chinese Path to Modernization. An overall understanding of the relationship between the Chinese Path to Moderation and the outside world has become the topic of heated discussions within Chinese academic circle. In this Issue, we invite four distinguished Chinese scholars to make in-depth discussions on the Chinese Path to Modernization and the European modern, Europe’ s strategic autonomy and the future of Europe, and China-Europe relations. Zhou Hong’s article on The Chinese Path to Modernization, European Model and China-Europe Relations explains that there are at least three aspects in which the concept of the Chinese Path to Modernization is related to the outside world. She then turns to analyze the Europe-style modernization as a reference and makes a summary of what constitutes the European model and of the transformation of Europe in the fields of economy, digitalization, green development, politics and diplomacy. But the Russia-Ukraine conflict has disturbed the process of European transformation while at the same time promoting its reverse transformation. She concludes that it’ s necessary for us to be more outward-looking when dealing with China-Europe relations and elaborates the three principles that we should stick to in China’s Europe policy. Feng Zhongping’s article discusses the critical role of Strategic Autonomy in the future of Europe. After a brief review of the origin, evolution and connotation of the concept of Strategic Autonomy, which involves not only defense and security, but other fields such as economy, energy, technology and industry chain, he then explores the impacts of the Russia-Ukraine conflict on Europe’s strategic autonomy, which is not only a touchstone but one of the most important reasons leading to disputes around the idea. It has at the same time highlighted the urgency of realizing strategic autonomy for Europe. He makes it clear that the future of Europe is determined by its ability to realize or safeguard “sovereign Europe” and that one of the most difficult issues that Europe is faced with is to build defense autonomy and to effectively safeguard its interests among the big power game-playing. He concludes that the strengthening of bilateral relations between China and Europe is not only beneficial to the two parties’ fundamental interests but to the stability and prosperity of the world. Cui Hongjian’s article on Transformation of Europe in the Context of the Changes Unseen in a Century and the China-Europe Relations first reviews the transformation that Europe is experiencing from post-Lisbon Treaty era to post-Ukraine crisis period. He believes great changes have taken place in Europe’s idea on the world pattern, the world order and development. In the post-Ukraine crisis period, the European transformation has entered a new phase where Europe is faced with the rebuilding of security structure, regrouping of energy economy and adjustment of internal power relations. The China-Europe relations will act as an important factor in the transformation of Europe at the present stage. In the last part, he elaborates the way forward for China-Europe relations and points out some of the principles and policies to be employed in dealing with bilateral relations. Zhang Jian’ s article on New Opportunities for China-Europe Relations in the New Era first explains some of the new characteristics of the new era including the increasing risks of confrontation between different blocs, the spreading of the idea of de-globalization and the failure of multilateral governance mechanism.He then points out the new opportunities that China and Europe possess in their cooperation, including the unprecedented urgency in safeguarding world peace, promoting opening up and development and enhancing global governance. Against such a background, new thought is needed on the EU side in its dealing with China-Europe relations.
Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, its potential impact on the international economy and trade has attracted much attention from both academics and policymakers. At a time when a series of sanctions have significantly limited Russia’s access and ability to conduct cross-border economic activities, the disruption of Russian imports and exports will exert significant effects on global production and trade, particularly the industries,countries and regions that are highly dependent on such imports and exports. Based on the UIBE GVC Index’s origin of value added in gross exports data and applying two important concepts from economic interdependence theory, i.e., sensitivity and vulnerability dependence, this article analyzes the sensitivity and vulnerability dependence of the different countries and regions on 35 industries of Russia from 2015 to 2021 from the perspective of global value chains. Based on the results, the potential impact of Russia-Ukraine conflict on the global economy and trade in the short and long term is analyzed. The author finds out that Europe will be the region most negatively affected by the Russia-Ukraine conflict,among which the CEEs and Baltic countries will bear the biggest pressure for adjusting supply chain and export market, as well as the biggest opportunity cost and loss. In the short term, the other European countries will face pressures for rebuilding their supply chains and expanding into new export markets. But in the long run, the cost of returning to value chain stability is relatively small, even smaller than that of some countries in Central Asia and East Asia. Besides, the potential impact of the Russia-Ukraine conflict on the world economy will be evidenced in the pressure for reconstructing the supply chain of key industries and the cost of finding alternative suppliers in key industries.
The Report to the 20th CPC National Congress has elaborated comprehensively the essential requirements and objectives of the Chinese Path to Modernization. An overall understanding of the relationship between the Chinese Path to Moderation and the outside world has become the topic of heated discussions within Chinese academic circle. In this Issue, we invite four distinguished Chinese scholars to make in-depth discussions on the Chinese Path to Modernization and the European modern, Europe’ s strategic autonomy and the future of Europe, and China-Europe relations. Zhou Hong’s article on The Chinese Path to Modernization, European Model and China-Europe Relations explains that there are at least three aspects in which the concept of the Chinese Path to Modernization is related to the outside world. She then turns to analyze the Europe-style modernization as a reference and makes a summary of what constitutes the European model and of the transformation of Europe in the fields of economy, digitalization, green development, politics and diplomacy. But the Russia-Ukraine conflict has disturbed the process of European transformation while at the same time promoting its reverse transformation. She concludes that it’ s necessary for us to be more outward-looking when dealing with China-Europe relations and elaborates the three principles that we should stick to in China’s Europe policy. Feng Zhongping’s article discusses the critical role of Strategic Autonomy in the future of Europe. After a brief review of the origin, evolution and connotation of the concept of Strategic Autonomy, which involves not only defense and security, but other fields such as economy, energy, technology and industry chain, he then explores the impacts of the Russia-Ukraine conflict on Europe’s strategic autonomy, which is not only a touchstone but one of the most important reasons leading to disputes around the idea. It has at the same time highlighted the urgency of realizing strategic autonomy for Europe. He makes it clear that the future of Europe is determined by its ability to realize or safeguard “sovereign Europe” and that one of the most difficult issues that Europe is faced with is to build defense autonomy and to effectively safeguard its interests among the big power game-playing. He concludes that the strengthening of bilateral relations between China and Europe is not only beneficial to the two parties’ fundamental interests but to the stability and prosperity of the world. Cui Hongjian’s article on Transformation of Europe in the Context of the Changes Unseen in a Century and the China-Europe Relations first reviews the transformation that Europe is experiencing from post-Lisbon Treaty era to post-Ukraine crisis period. He believes great changes have taken place in Europe’s idea on the world pattern, the world order and development. In the post-Ukraine crisis period, the European transformation has entered a new phase where Europe is faced with the rebuilding of security structure, regrouping of energy economy and adjustment of internal power relations. The China-Europe relations will act as an important factor in the transformation of Europe at the present stage. In the last part, he elaborates the way forward for China-Europe relations and points out some of the principles and policies to be employed in dealing with bilateral relations. Zhang Jian’ s article on New Opportunities for China-Europe Relations in the New Era first explains some of the new characteristics of the new era including the increasing risks of confrontation between different blocs, the spreading of the idea of de-globalization and the failure of multilateral governance mechanism.He then points out the new opportunities that China and Europe possess in their cooperation, including the unprecedented urgency in safeguarding world peace, promoting opening up and development and enhancing global governance. Against such a background, new thought is needed on the EU side in its dealing with China-Europe relations.
The Report to the 20th CPC National Congress has elaborated comprehensively the essential requirements and objectives of the Chinese Path to Modernization. An overall understanding of the relationship between the Chinese Path to Moderation and the outside world has become the topic of heated discussions within Chinese academic circle. In this Issue, we invite four distinguished Chinese scholars to make in-depth discussions on the Chinese Path to Modernization and the European modern, Europe’ s strategic autonomy and the future of Europe, and China-Europe relations. Zhou Hong’s article on The Chinese Path to Modernization, European Model and China-Europe Relations explains that there are at least three aspects in which the concept of the Chinese Path to Modernization is related to the outside world. She then turns to analyze the Europe-style modernization as a reference and makes a summary of what constitutes the European model and of the transformation of Europe in the fields of economy, digitalization, green development, politics and diplomacy. But the Russia-Ukraine conflict has disturbed the process of European transformation while at the same time promoting its reverse transformation. She concludes that it’ s necessary for us to be more outward-looking when dealing with China-Europe relations and elaborates the three principles that we should stick to in China’s Europe policy. Feng Zhongping’s article discusses the critical role of Strategic Autonomy in the future of Europe. After a brief review of the origin, evolution and connotation of the concept of Strategic Autonomy, which involves not only defense and security, but other fields such as economy, energy, technology and industry chain, he then explores the impacts of the Russia-Ukraine conflict on Europe’s strategic autonomy, which is not only a touchstone but one of the most important reasons leading to disputes around the idea. It has at the same time highlighted the urgency of realizing strategic autonomy for Europe. He makes it clear that the future of Europe is determined by its ability to realize or safeguard “sovereign Europe” and that one of the most difficult issues that Europe is faced with is to build defense autonomy and to effectively safeguard its interests among the big power game-playing. He concludes that the strengthening of bilateral relations between China and Europe is not only beneficial to the two parties’ fundamental interests but to the stability and prosperity of the world. Cui Hongjian’s article on Transformation of Europe in the Context of the Changes Unseen in a Century and the China-Europe Relations first reviews the transformation that Europe is experiencing from post-Lisbon Treaty era to post-Ukraine crisis period. He believes great changes have taken place in Europe’s idea on the world pattern, the world order and development. In the post-Ukraine crisis period, the European transformation has entered a new phase where Europe is faced with the rebuilding of security structure, regrouping of energy economy and adjustment of internal power relations. The China-Europe relations will act as an important factor in the transformation of Europe at the present stage. In the last part, he elaborates the way forward for China-Europe relations and points out some of the principles and policies to be employed in dealing with bilateral relations. Zhang Jian’ s article on New Opportunities for China-Europe Relations in the New Era first explains some of the new characteristics of the new era including the increasing risks of confrontation between different blocs, the spreading of the idea of de-globalization and the failure of multilateral governance mechanism.He then points out the new opportunities that China and Europe possess in their cooperation, including the unprecedented urgency in safeguarding world peace, promoting opening up and development and enhancing global governance. Against such a background, new thought is needed on the EU side in its dealing with China-Europe relations.
When the return of geopolitics encounters economic globalization, the boundary between geoeconomics and geopolitics has become blurred. While Europe’ s geoeconomic strength has declined, the pressure of economic competition and security risks has increased. In view of this situation, the EU has been conducting geopolitical transformation along with adjusted foreign economic policy, in order to rejuvenate geo-economic vitality. From the perspective of geoeconomics and based on the geo-structure and the effect of geopolitics on geoeconomics, this article puts forward the concept of “geo-economic Europe” as an analytical framework for the adjustment of EU’ s foreign economic policy. Specifically speaking, while the integrated Europe acts as the main body of “geo-economic Europe”, the intense international geopolitical and economic competition plays the role of external environment, and the neighbourhood, the regional and global levels constitute the overall framework of “geo-economic Europe”. As a way of constructing “geo-economic Europe”, the EU puts an emphasis on mutual transformation between wealth and power and on the pursuit of power goals by controlling economic resources and markets. The concept of “geo-economic Europe” is meant to guide the adjustment of EU’s foreign economic policy, with which the EU safeguards multilateralism and diversifies its global partnership network in order to adapt to the new form of geoeconomics in the world by developing trade protection tools and exerting economic coercion.
乌克兰危机使能源,尤其是天然气成为西方与俄罗斯实施制裁与反制裁的主要博弈领域,并衍生出一系列危机和问题.要想全面评估和预测欧俄能源之争的结果和影响,需要回顾和探究欧俄能源合作的历史经纬和动因.本文首先从欧俄能源关系发端的冷战时期开始,对欧俄能源关系的历史脉络进行回顾;其次,从地缘关系、欧盟能源供应保障与欧盟绿色能源政策三个视角入手,探究欧俄能源关系的衍变动因;最后,展望能源关系对欧俄关系的影响和前景.显然乌克兰危机重塑了欧俄之间的地缘关系并影响了美欧俄三边关系.随着北约重要性的再次提升,美国在欧洲事务的话语权得到加强,欧洲借能源关系缓和对俄关系的设想基本破灭.欧盟将降低对俄能源依赖并加速能源转型,但欧盟战略自主的能力已然遭到削弱.
全球化和新自由主义刺激了新民族主义在欧洲国家的兴起和传播.面对全球化的经济影响以及穆斯林移民人口结构的剧烈变化,法国身份政治的焦点由少数群体的身份政治转为主流社会的身份政治.难民危机和新冠疫情加剧了法国主流群体与少数群体、边缘群体的对抗,白人的身份政治得以强化.法国主流群体对可能失去文化和身份优势感到焦虑和担忧,是形成新民族主义身份政治的关键因素.社会运动成为主流群体表达其身份政治的方式.本文试图描绘在难民危机后、法国大选的背景下,法国主流社会的身份政治现状.研究发现,"本土主义—民族主义""右翼民粹主义"和"种族主义"是法国新民族主义身份政治的主要类型."反觉醒"运动、"黄背心"运动和"认同"运动分别是政治精英、工人阶级和底层民众,以及极端组织身份政治的表达.
2022年的法国总统选举和议会选举表明,民粹主义政治势力已经对传统政治格局构成全面挑战,同时出现了左右翼民粹主义之争、民粹主义内部的极端派与温和派之争.传统的左右翼意识形态都无法有效应对当代的问题,技术官僚主义作为一种替代品主导着法国的政治舞台,但它不仅没有成为对抗民粹主义的利器,反而成为民粹主义进一步发酵的诱因.法国政治格局已经从左右之争演变为民粹主义和技术官僚主义之争,其中既有全球化冲击、新的社会经济格局冲击和特殊事件的影响,又有本国政治传统和政治体制的原因,与法国右翼民粹主义的主流化也密切相关.法国主流政治的未来不能寄托于不再牢固的"共和阵线",必须凝聚新的共识才能改变社会撕裂的趋势.
英国哲学家帕菲特认为世界上存在重要之事,并列出了客观理由和主观理由两种划分标准.利己的利他主义和损己的利他主义都不是必然归属于基于道德价值的客观理由,"无人性有德性"和"有德性无人性"假设都面临着普遍性不足的哲学难题.建构重要之事的客观理由需要引入新概念,在乎的伦理维度否定了基于个人分立的假设,为人的相关性理论提供了哲学基础.趋同论证在康德主义、后果论和契约论之间寻找共性,同时论证中西哲学之间存在文明合作的模式.作为一种方法论而非哲学类型,趋同哲学与中国"将无同"文化精神相契合,提示了不同文明之间的共性,推动形成从文明冲突模式向文明合作模式转化的认识论基础.
新版战略概念文件的发布,标志着北约未来十年大战略方向的确定.一是应对大国地缘政治竞争成为北约最为优先的战略目标,以"泛安全化"方式整合安全政策成为北约未来应对安全风险的新方式;二是重申北约在欧洲安全体系中的主导地位,暂时理清了北约—欧盟在欧洲防务供给体系中的关系;三是战略扩张突破跨大西洋地理界限,将亚太地区作为战略扩张重点方向.新一轮北约战略转型的启动,将重塑欧洲和亚洲地区安全秩序,推动大国战略竞争向着"泛安全化"和混合性方向发展.北约战略转型受到四方面限制因素的影响,包括联盟对俄强硬政策共识的持久性、美国东西两个方向的战略平衡、美欧矛盾与分歧再次爆发的隐患和美欧亚太利益的差异.在对华政策方面,应对中国崛起带来的"系统性挑战",已被纳入北约未来战略规划,北约亦保留了对华建设性政策接触空间.北约战略转型启动,给中国周边安全和国家利益维护带来了不容忽视的风险.未来中国与北约关系将会呈现出"有限竞争、非敌非友"的非结构性状态,多种因素将限制双方关系向着对抗方向发展.中国应精准把握和利用对自身有利的战略空间,妥善管控北约新一轮战略转型带来的负面影响.
新一轮技术革命对国际竞争产生日益显著的影响,作为一种新型权力,技术在全球范围内进行快速和跨边界的渗透.技术的新特征也给欧洲带来现实的压力,引发欧洲对于技术主权的追求,进而促使新的欧洲一体化向增强欧洲技术能力、技术凝聚力和提升对外安全能力的方向转变.现阶段,欧洲技术主权主要侧重技术产业强化并勾勒技术安全防卫边界,以降低对外依赖度和外来技术权力渗透带来的地缘风险,但欧洲技术主权战略实施空间也受到多种因素的制约.在现实主义回归的背景下,伴随着全球关键技术合作的逐步收紧,技术的主权性和安全性将成为包括欧洲在内的诸多国家的持久性议题,技术政治化也将逐渐走向国际竞争与博弈的中心舞台.
欧洲议会内的激进左右翼党团分别采取了合作与对抗的行为策略.基于第六届欧洲议会至今的议员非投票参与行为、投票行为、议会内政策网络关系以及党团变更四类数据,可以发现激进左右翼党团成员在欧洲议会中表现出明显的行为反差.在党团内合作与跨党团合作上,激进左翼党团议员表现出更强的团结合作特征,激进右翼党团议员则表现出更强的消极对抗特征.个体层面的观念与利益两类动机,以及结构层面的各类制度约束能够解释这一差异.激进左翼议员偏好一体化和国际主义的观念动机、欧盟层面的利益动机与稳定的国内选举基础、较少的议会制度约束构成良性循环,塑造了其合作行为;激进右翼议员偏好反一体化与民族主义的观念动机、国内层面的利益动机与不稳定的选举基础、较强的议会制度约束形成"对抗性平衡",使得激进右翼表现出"表面合作、本质分裂"的特征.
欧洲货币联盟作为"非完全货币联盟",其调节模式与积累体系并不完全匹配,因此时刻处于不对称冲击和经济失衡的风险之中.共同货币的引入虽然促进贸易、通胀和失业等一些指标趋同,但未能推动欧元区自动走向"最优货币区".以劳动生产率和国际收支失衡为主要表现的失衡问题仍然存在,甚至有所加剧,并在国际金融危机的冲击下暴露无遗.基于欧洲推进经济一体化的共识和经济高度一体化的现状,欧盟更多地在技术层面着眼于引发危机的具体问题与制度漏洞,完善与经济积累体系相匹配的调节模式,以维持欧元区宏观经济的稳定运行;却在不经意间引进了共同债券与财政转移支付工具这两个财政联盟的基本要素,从而创造性地撬开了欧盟财政一体化的大门,使欧元区向"最优货币区"迈出了突破性的一步.欧元区的实践也在经验上为解释"内生性"最优货币区假说提供了不同的视角.
科技变革推动社会、经济与政治生活的重大变迁.自动化、机器人生产、人工智能等技术的运用给各个职业带来不同程度的职业替代风险,由此产生一批"自动化的失败者".在欧洲拥有高自动化水平的发达国家,科技变革不仅冲击着工人阶级,而且分化了欧洲中产阶级,并对欧洲各国的政党选举投票格局产生影响.本文分析"欧洲社会调查"最近四轮的数据(2012-2018年)发现,自动化技术带来的职业替代风险升高会普遍加大选民对福利政策的需求,这将增加工人阶级对激进右翼政党与主流左翼政党的拥护,并削弱中产阶级对主流右翼政党的支持,使之转向主流左翼政党,中产阶级也由此出现阶级下行、日渐工薪化的趋势.技术进步带来的冲击成为理解当前欧洲国家政党选举投票结构变迁不可或缺的因素.
在《双支柱解决方案2021年》通过之前,国际社会尚未形成与数字经济发展相匹配的国际税收规则体系.欧盟为应对成员国之间的恶性税收竞争,曾提出征收欧洲统一的数字服务税,但遭到部分成员国的反对.法国、意大利、西班牙等欧盟成员国为应对经济数字化税收挑战,选择单边开征数字服务税.美国主张在既有国际税收规则中推动数字服务税改革,并借助"301调查"向单边征收数字服务税的部分国家施压.围绕数字服务税规则,美欧展开博弈.尽管美欧在《双支柱解决方案2021年》中就数字服务税规则达成一致,但双方的分歧仍未完全消除.新国际税收改革方案中与数字服务税相关的规则还存在诸多缺陷,面临潜在的风险.在此背景下,欧盟将继续寻求在新国际税改规则中体现数字经济特质;美国和欧盟将努力促成各国国内税法与新国际税改规则的衔接;双方将为构建符合自身数字服务税规则偏好的税收监督机制展开博弈.
2022年6月30日,中国欧洲学会欧洲经济研究分会2022年年会暨"俄乌冲突背景下的欧洲经济形势与前景"研讨会在线上举行.此次会议由中国欧洲学会欧洲经济研究分会与中国社会科学院欧洲研究所联合举办.来自中国社会科学院、中国现代国际关系研究院、商务部国际贸易经济合作研究院、上海社会科学院、复旦大学、南开大学、武汉大学、四川大学、对外经济贸易大学等全国20多家科研院所与高校的百余位专家学者及媒体界人士参加了会议.
21世纪以来,欧盟对非经贸政策调整经历了从《洛美协定》到《科托努协定》再到"后科托努协定"的转变.欧盟通过签署《科托努协定》以调整到期的《洛美协定》,试图改变欧盟对非洲的单边优惠经贸关系,推动双方从"援助者—受援者"关系转向完全"平等"的伙伴关系,其核心方案是推动双方"经济伙伴关系协定"的谈判与签署,"后科托努协定"大体继承了这一经贸政策.然而,近20多年来欧盟对非经贸政策调整可能给非洲带来潜在的负面冲击,包括对非洲初步工业化进程、财政资源和社会治理能力、大陆经济一体化及对外关系多元化等造成不同程度的(可能的)损害,并最终加深非洲对欧盟在经济和政治方面的依赖.因此,欧盟对非经贸政策调整与其说是基于自由主义方案的双边经贸关系平等化,不如说是欧盟以"平等"之名,使欧非关系朝着可能实质上更加不平等的方向演进.非洲需要加强自身对欧盟的谈判和交往能力,深入发展和新兴经济体的全面关系,尽可能摆脱对欧盟的依赖,实现欧非间真正平等关系的发展.
