In the current climate of rising global trade protectionism, intensified geopolitical competition, and increased self-reliance among developing countries, Europe's traditional trade model with Africa—centered on Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) and emphasizing reciprocity and rule alignment—faces challenges of inefficiency and lack of attractiveness. China's zero-tariff treatment of countries like Mozambique offers an alternative path of "unilateral openness + mutual benefit," worthy of serious consideration by Europe in its strategic adjustments. It concerns not only trade figures but also the reshaping of development philosophies, geopolitical influence, and the Global South cooperation model.
This article will analyze the policy background, the effectiveness of the Mozambique case, the limitations of Europe's existing trade mechanisms with Africa, a comparison of the China-EU models, and specific pathways that Europe can learn from, exploring the profound implications of this preferential treatment.
I. Background of China's Zero-Tariff Policy and Its Specific Impact on Mozambique
China's zero-tariff policy on least developed countries is not a sudden measure. As early as 2005, China began granting preferential tariff treatment to some least developed countries, and gradually expanded the scope through the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC). By 2022, it covered 98% of tariff lines, and by December 2024, it had achieved 100% coverage. Mozambique, as a major resource-rich and agricultural country in Africa, is a direct beneficiary.
Major export commodities benefit significantly: Mozambique's exports to China mainly consist of titanium ore, graphite, coal, liquefied petroleum gas, cashew nuts, cotton, sugar, frozen fish, shrimp, and timber. Zero tariffs have drastically reduced export costs and enhanced price competitiveness. For example, agricultural and fishery products, which previously faced certain tariff barriers, can now enter China, the world's second-largest import market, at zero cost. Mozambican exporters say this will directly increase farmers' income, create jobs, and boost local processing capacity.
Quantitative Results: According to Chinese customs data, Mozambique's exports to China have maintained growth momentum since the policy's implementation, demonstrating strong complementarity in bilateral trade. China exports machinery, equipment, building materials, and consumer goods to support Mozambique's infrastructure development; Mozambique exports primary products to meet China's resource and consumption needs. Zero tariffs are seen as a key driver of trade growth by 2025. The Chinese Ambassador to Mozambique emphasized that this is a long-term economic policy aimed at sustainable development and shared prosperity.
Beyond trade, the comprehensive effects are multifaceted: zero tariffs are not an isolated measure, but rather integrated with Belt and Road investment, production capacity cooperation, green channel construction, and technical assistance. Chinese enterprises are investing in mining, processing, and agriculture in Mozambique, promoting a shift from raw material exports to local value-added services. This aligns with the principles of sincerity, real results, amity, and good faith in relations with Africa and the correct approach to justice and shared interests, avoiding accusations of mere resource exploitation.
II. The Current Status and Challenges of Europe's Trade Policy Towards Africa
The EU has long been an important trading partner of Africa, with EU-Africa trade in goods estimated at around €355 billion by 2024. African exports to the EU enjoy relatively high tariff-free treatment. The "Everything Except Arms" (EBA) scheme provides almost complete zero-tariff access for least developed countries, while Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) negotiate reciprocal arrangements with regional organizations, covering over 90% of African exports.
First, it is highly conditional. EPAs require African countries to open their markets and comply with EU rules (rules of origin, sanitary and phytosanitary standards, intellectual property, labor and environmental standards, etc.), leading to lengthy and contentious negotiations. Some countries, such as Nigeria, have long resisted or delayed signing, arguing that the terms are unequal and increase compliance costs.
Second, non-tariff barriers are prominent. Agricultural protectionism is strong within the EU, and new regulations such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) create hidden barriers to African exports. While strict standards have their merits, they present significant challenges to market access for African countries with weak infrastructure, leading to a rigid trade structure: Africa primarily exports raw materials and primary agricultural products, while the EU exports high-value-added industrial goods, hindering Africa's industrialization process.
Third, geopolitical competition is intensifying. China has been Africa's largest trading partner for many consecutive years, with Sino-African trade reaching $348 billion in 2025, a year-on-year increase of 17.7%. China's zero-tariff policy, without attached political conditions, is implemented rapidly and forms a powerful combination with infrastructure investment and production capacity cooperation, making it more attractive than the EU's "condition-oriented" model. African countries are increasingly emphasizing independent development and are more sensitive to the EU's "government-linked" and "human rights-conditional" practices.
The EU has an urgent need for cooperation with Africa in areas such as key minerals and green transformation, but its implementation efficiency and flexibility are insufficient, resulting in a relative decline in its influence.
III. Comparative Analysis of China-EU Trade Models with Africa
Differences in Opening-up Methods: China adopts a unilateral opening-up model, directly granting zero tariffs without the need for lengthy reciprocal negotiations. This provides certainty and rapid benefits to African countries. The EU model emphasizes reciprocity and rule alignment, which, while in line with the spirit of the WTO, can easily be seen as a burden given the asymmetry in development levels.
Differences in Supporting Measures:China's zero tariffs are accompanied by facilitation measures such as "green channels," smart customs cooperation, the China International Import Expo (CIIE) platform, and cross-border e-commerce, while simultaneously promoting local processing and supply chain integration. The EU focuses on standards alignment and technical assistance, but actual market access is more constrained by non-tariff factors.
Differences in Development Philosophy:China emphasizes "mutual benefit and win-win" and "common development," focusing on infrastructure and industrial cooperation and avoiding ideological entanglements. The EU places greater emphasis on "sustainability" and "inclusivity," incorporating green agreements and human rights issues. This may reduce flexibility in the short term but helps to regulate governance in the long term.
Comparison of Actual Effects: After the implementation of China's policies, African exports to China have increased significantly, especially agricultural products and resources. While the EU offers broad market access, its trade growth has been relatively stable. Africa's trade surplus with the EU primarily comes from energy and minerals, indicating insufficient diversification. The Chinese model demonstrates greater potential in driving value chain upgrading, boosting processing capacity through investment rather than solely relying on preferential policies.
Geopolitical Implications: Against the backdrop of rising protectionism globally, China's zero-tariff policy demonstrates its responsibility as a major power, injecting positive energy into multilateral trade and strengthening cohesion in the Global South. Facing competition from the US and China, the EU needs to rethink how to find a balance between rules and flexibility.
IV. Specific Pathways for Europe to Learn From
Simplifying Market Access and Expanding Unilateral Preferences: The EU could consider further expanding the coverage of the EBA or launching more ambitious zero-tariff/low-tariff measures for key African partners, reducing reciprocal barriers for countries outside the least developed countries. Focus should be placed on African advantageous products such as tropical agricultural products and processed foods, lowering non-tariff barriers, such as simplifying SPS certification and providing technical support to help them meet standards.
Strengthening Supporting Infrastructure and Capacity Building: Drawing on China's "green channel" experience, the EU could jointly build logistics corridors, cold chain facilities, and digital customs systems with Africa. The Global Gateway program already has a foundation; increased investment support for the processing industry could help Africa shift from exporting raw materials to exporting semi-finished and finished products, increasing added value.
Promoting Flexible Integration of Regional and Bilateral Partnerships: Within the framework of the AfCFTA (African Continental Free Trade Area), the EU could explore more pragmatic cooperation with African regional organizations, avoiding a "one-size-fits-all" approach to EPAs. More targeted economic partnerships could be signed with specific countries such as Mozambique, focusing on areas of common concern such as mineral processing, agricultural modernization, and green energy.
Balancing Rules and Pragmatic Cooperation: Europe can retain its high standards while adding flexible provisions, such as transitional arrangements and capacity building funds, to reduce resistance from African countries. In key mineral supply chains, trilateral cooperation with China should be pursued to achieve complementarity rather than zero-sum competition.
Focusing on Long-Term Predictability: China's policy stability is stronger than the preferential policies of Europe and the US, which are affected by political cycles (such as the fluctuating US AGOA). Europe can lock in long-term preferential policies through laws or multilateral mechanisms, enhancing investor confidence in Africa and avoiding the phenomenon of "migratory enterprises."
Promoting Industrial Transfer and Localization: European companies should be encouraged to transfer labor-intensive or low-end processing to Africa, combining zero-tariff/low-tariff preferences to form a "EU standards + African production + global market" model. This aligns with Europe's green transition needs and creates jobs in Africa.
Conclusion: Open Competition Drives Development of the Global South
China's zero-tariff treatment of countries like Mozambique is essentially an innovative practice of cooperation between a major developing country and the Global South. It demonstrates that in an asymmetric development landscape, unilateral openness combined with pragmatic cooperation can effectively unleash trade potential and promote industrial upgrading. For Europe, this policy offers a valuable lesson: how to enhance flexibility and inclusiveness while protecting rules, and how to translate market access into tangible development outcomes. In the future, if China and Europe can engage in healthy competition and appropriate cooperation in Africa, they will jointly contribute to African modernization and also contribute more positive energy to global trade governance. Europe needs to accelerate its strategic adjustments, responding to African needs with a more open and pragmatic approach to maintain competitiveness in the new global landscape.