Follow us on social

google cta
|||

China and the US wrestle for dominant pandemic narrative in Europe

In the absence of a coherent response from the United States, the pandemic has paved the way for China to bolster its ambitions and validate its political values.

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

An official press release by the Chinese Embassy in France recently claimed that Chinese efforts to contain the COVID-19 pandemic are regarded by French officials as an “inspiration” and a source of “admiration and envy” of the Chinese Communist Party’s model of governance. “It was the ‘dictatorship’ to which the world first sought help from, and not the American flagship of democracy,” the release asserted. 

These words are just a snippet, but they demonstrate how attempts to shape the narrative around the pandemic have made Europe an information battleground. Already dragged into the United States’ trade war with China, European Union policymakers have been faced with difficult decisions in recent years over a range of topics like the Belt and Road Initiative and the adoption of 5G technology. Having been the epicenter of the COVID-19 spread this past month, Europe is now host to adversarial messaging emanating from the two powers, highlighting both its importance and the complicated road ahead of it.  

Given the economic and reputational stakes for both Washington and Beijing, the CCP seeks to discredit the United States’ healthcare system, while the current U.S. administration opts to skirt past missteps at home by pointing the finger abroad. As a result, information operations have turned to the weaponization of the virus for the benefit of promoting one state’s greatness over the other.

For China, projections estimate minimal, if not negative GDP growth for the year, compounded by a partial exodus in manufacturing. Given that CCP legitimacy is predicated on guarantees of economic advances, a surge in nationalism is now part of its agenda.

For the United States, the outbreak could increase unemployment to staggering levels. Between U.S. leadership repeatedly referring to COVID-19 as the “Chinese” or “Wuhan” virus, and the CCP’s continued gaslighting on the origins of the pandemic — the fracturing of multilateralism leaves Europe’s liberal future in a perilous position. 

Since the crisis, Chinese government officials’ activity on social media has increased exponentially, despite the fact that many of the same platforms they are using are banned in the mainland. Indeed, the number of Twitter accounts connected to Chinese embassies, consulates, and ambassadors has increased by more than 250 percent. In Western Europe, Chinese embassies routinely boast about the mainland’s handling of the crisis and Beijing’s generosity in helping foreign countries cope, vindicating its political model as a harbinger of stability, in contrast to the United States. 

In examining the Chinese government’s official tweet-sphere, narratives vary from praising the CCP in its efforts to contain the outbreak to critiquing Donald Trump’s handling of the pandemic and casting doubt on Washington’s ability to manage the crisis. A public statement from the Chinese Embassy in Paris goes so far as to compare European political systems with those of China. Such posts are then retweeted by Chinese embassies in Francophone Africa, amplifying the narrative. 

Through the Chinese Global Television Network’s French channel, the claim that the United States might be at the origin of the virus was propagated to its audience. The news agency further stated that, “Even if American politicians are loud, they are still unable to put the blame on others” and that “gray areas in the prevention and control of the epidemic in the United States are beginning to be highlighted.” 

Screen-shot-2020-04-15-at-11.53.46-am

In addition, CGTN’s podcast series has maintained that Xi Jinping is leading the fight against COVID-19, asserting that he “personally guided and deployed the Chinese people to lead the containment battle, which is also the people's joint battle against the COVID-19 epidemic.” 

Episodes of the podcast have then been shared by official Chinese government accounts on Twitter, including by consulates and embassies across France and Francophone Africa. All these messages aim to extol China’s efforts in combating the outbreak while discrediting those of the United States. 

Screen-shot-2020-04-15-at-11.53.02-am Screen-shot-2020-04-15-at-11.52.03-am

Indeed, the pandemic’s global repercussions have forced the CCP into taking a more confrontational approach to information manipulation that appears to be drawn from Russian tactics. Its influence efforts are now bent on shaping the narrative behind the blame, statistics, and containment of the virus.  

China’s propaganda efforts have multiple goals. Internally, they seek to legitimize the regime after initial errors in crisis management. Externally, they seek to discredit democracies by highlighting their failures in coping with the outbreak. In addition, as noted by Foreign Policy’s James Palmer, they validate the claim that the Chinese diaspora can only feel safe in the mainland. 

But China’s propaganda has also been matched with responses on the American front. Right-wing figures such as Senator Tom Cotton have led the charge, openly spreading a corrosive theory claiming that the virus originated in a laboratory in Wuhan — claims that have found resonance with their political counterparts in France. Compounded with Representative Paul Gosar’s coinage of the “Wuhan Virus” moniker and Mitt Romney’s call for a National Security Council task force, the current U.S. administration is on course to further degrade the multilateralism the United States worked so hard to create after World War II.   

In a world where China is sufficiently confident in its global narrative to launch an international debate on global health governance, and where the U.S. pronounces its supposed exceptionalism over ally and foe alike, many other Western democracies find themselves caught between a rock and a hard place. From one end, they are offered help by a regime that asks little but to consent to its narrative, and from the other, they are denied aid by a historic ally that has descended into isolationism and embraced brutal competition for scarce, life-saving resources. 

In the absence of a coherent response from the United States, the pandemic has paved the way for China to bolster its ambitions and validate its political values. These ambitions may lead to the legitimization of authoritarian narratives around governance and the materialization of a new form of multilateralism.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Photo credit: Frederic Legrand - COMEO / Shutterstock.com|||
google cta
Analysis | Europe
Trump
Top image credit: President Donald Trump addresses the nation, Wednesday, December 17, 2025, from the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump national security logic: rare earths and fossil fuels

Washington Politics

The new National Security Strategy of the United States seeks “strategic stability” with Russia. It declares that China is merely a competitor, that the Middle East is not central to American security, that Latin America is “our hemisphere,” and that Europe faces “civilizational erasure.”

India, the world's largest country by population, barely rates a mention — one might say, as Neville Chamberlain did of Czechoslovakia in 1938, it’s “a faraway country... of which we know nothing.” Well, so much the better for India, which can take care of itself.

keep readingShow less
Experts at oil & weapons-funded think tank: 'Go big' in Venezuela
Top image credit: LightField Studios via shutterstock.com

Experts at oil & weapons-funded think tank: 'Go big' in Venezuela

Military Industrial Complex

As the U.S. threatens to take “oil, land and other assets” from Venezuela, staffers at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank funded in part by defense contractors and oil companies, are eager to help make the public case for regime change and investment. “The U.S. should go big” in Venezuela, write CSIS experts Ryan Berg and Kimberly Breier.

Both America’s Quarterly, which published the essay, and the authors’ employer happen to be funded by the likes of Lockheed Martin and ExxonMobil, a fact that is not disclosed in the article.

keep readingShow less
ukraine military
UKRAINE MARCH 22, 2023: Ukrainian military practice assault tactics at the training ground before counteroffensive operation during Russo-Ukrainian War (Shutterstock/Dymtro Larin)

Ukraine's own pragmatism demands 'armed un-alignment'

Europe

Eleven months after returning to the White House, the Trump administration believes it has finally found a way to resolve the four-year old war in Ukraine. Its formula is seemingly simple: land for security guarantees.

Under the current plan—or what is publicly known about it—Ukraine would cede the 20 percent of Donetsk that it currently controls to Russia in return for a package of security guarantees including an “Article 5-style” commitment from the United States, a European “reassurance force” inside post-war Ukraine, and peacetime Ukrainian military of 800,000 personnel.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.