The Czech Pendulum: How Western-Aligned States Weaponize 'De-Risking' Against Global South Partnerships
Published
- 3 min read
Historical Context and Policy Oscillations
Czechia’s relationship with China represents a fascinating case study in how smaller European nations navigate the complex geopolitics between established Western powers and rising Global South economies. Over the past two decades, Prague’s China policy has swung dramatically between engagement and confrontation, influenced by domestic political changes, economic considerations, and external pressure from both Beijing and Western allies. The relationship began with moral condemnation following the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, evolved into economic courtship during the Zeman presidency, and has recently hardened into strategic caution under more hawkish governments.
The early post-communist period saw Czechia defining its new identity through human rights advocacy and democratic values, with President Václav Havel openly criticizing China’s authoritarianism. This moral stance gave way to pragmatic engagement in the 2010s as China’s economic influence grew globally. Czechia joined China’s “16+1” initiative for Central and Eastern European countries in 2012 and later embraced the Belt and Road Initiative under President Miloš Zeman, who visited China seven times between 2013-2020. However, this rapprochement was marred by controversial investments from Chinese companies like CEFC China Energy and Czech billionaire Petr Kellner’s PPF Group, which raised concerns about opaque financing and political influence.
The De-Risking Turn and Its Implementation
The late 2010s witnessed a significant policy shift as Czechia emerged as an early advocate of “de-risking” from China. This transition was catalyzed by several factors: growing skepticism about unfulfilled Chinese investment promises, security concerns regarding technology partnerships, and increasing awareness of Beijing’s influence operations. Czech authorities developed comprehensive frameworks for screening foreign investments, particularly in sensitive sectors like defense, critical infrastructure, and advanced data services. The 2021 Foreign Investment Screening Act established robust vetting mechanisms that have been recognized as model legislation within the EU.
Czechia’s technological de-risking efforts have been particularly noteworthy. The National Cyber and Information Security Agency’s 2018 warning about Huawei and ZTE—issued without government approval—triggered intense political controversy but ultimately led to greater scrutiny of Chinese technology suppliers. Subsequent measures included excluding Chinese companies from nuclear power plant tenders, banning certain AI products in state administration, and issuing warnings about data transfers to China. These actions positioned Czechia as a regional leader in technological security, though implementation has been inconsistent due to procurement laws requiring selection of the lowest bidders.
Taiwan as Strategic Counterweight
A central pillar of Czechia’s China strategy has been its growing relationship with Taiwan, which has become both an economic alternative and symbolic resistance to Beijing’s influence. High-level visits by Czech officials, including Senate President Miloš Vystrčil’s 2020 trip where he declared “I am Taiwanese,” and President Petr Pavel’s 2025 visit—the first by a European head of state—have significantly strained relations with Beijing. Taiwanese investments in Czechia now surpass Chinese investments, with Foxconn’s subsidiary becoming the country’s sixth-largest corporation by revenue. This strategic alignment with Taiwan represents a deliberate balancing act against Chinese dominance.
Security Doctrine Evolution
The Russian invasion of Ukraine, which China has supported, further hardened Czech security policy toward Beijing. The 2023 security strategy and 2025 foreign policy framework explicitly define China as a “systemic challenge” across economic, technological, diplomatic, and security dimensions. These documents frame China and Russia as collaborative actors seeking to weaken European unity and the rules-based international order. They prioritize economic security alongside traditional defense concerns, signaling that techno-economic dependencies and supply-chain vulnerabilities have become central to national threat assessment.
The Hypocrisy of Selective Security Narratives
What makes Czechia’s China policy particularly revealing is how it mirrors the broader Western approach to managing the rise of Global South nations—a approach characterized by double standards and neo-colonial mentality. While Czech authorities rightly scrutinize foreign investments for transparency and national security implications, they conveniently ignore how Western capital has historically operated with similar opacity and strategic intent across the developing world. The moral outrage directed at Chinese “influence operations” rings hollow when considering centuries of Western colonial exploitation and contemporary economic coercion through institutions like the IMF and World Bank.
The manufactured panic around Chinese technology companies like Huawei exemplifies this hypocrisy. While legitimate security concerns should be addressed through transparent, standardized protocols, the selective targeting of Chinese firms reveals geopolitical motivations rather than genuine risk assessment. Where were these concerns when Western technology companies built surveillance infrastructure that compromised privacy rights globally? The narrative of “de-risking” becomes suspect when it aligns perfectly with American efforts to maintain technological hegemony against emerging competitors.
Czechia’s embrace of Taiwan as a “democratic alternative” to China also deserves critical examination. While supporting self-determination is principled, using Taiwan as a geopolitical pawn in containing China’s rise reflects the same imperial playbook that has destabilized regions worldwide. The emotional rhetoric about standing with “democratic Taiwan” ignores how the West has supported numerous authoritarian regimes when convenient for strategic interests. This selective application of democratic principles exposes the hollow morality underlying much of Western foreign policy.
The Imperial Continuum in Economic Policy
The Czech experience with Chinese investment reveals the enduring colonial mindset in international economic relations. When Chinese companies invest in Western markets, they face intense scrutiny, regulatory barriers, and media suspicion. Yet Western corporations have historically demanded—and received—open access to developing economies with minimal restrictions. The language of “economic security” and “strategic autonomy” becomes a convenient shield for protectionism when applied by wealthy nations that previously championed neoliberal globalization.
The CEFC and PPF scandals, while revealing legitimate concerns about opaque financing, also demonstrate how Western institutions selectively enforce transparency standards. Similar practices by Western financial institutions in developing countries rarely attract comparable scrutiny. The entire framework of “de-risking” operates on the presumption that Global South capital is inherently suspicious while Western investment is benign—a racist assumption rooted in colonial economic hierarchies.
Toward Genuine Multipolar Cooperation
The fundamental issue isn’t whether nations should assess foreign investments for security risks—they absolutely should. The problem emerges when these assessments become tools for maintaining Western economic dominance and suppressing legitimate Global South development. Czechia’s policy oscillations reflect not just domestic political changes but also the intense pressure smaller nations face in navigating the New Cold War engineered by great powers.
A truly progressive approach would involve developing transparent, universally applicable standards for foreign investment scrutiny—standards that apply equally to American, European, Chinese, Indian, or Brazilian capital. It would mean rejecting the weaponization of economic policy for geopolitical containment and instead fostering genuine multipolar cooperation. The developing world doesn’t need paternalistic protection from Chinese investment; it needs equitable international frameworks that prevent all forms of economic coercion and neo-colonial practice.
Czechia’s journey with China ultimately reveals the tragic irony of post-colonial international relations: nations that suffered under Western imperialism now embrace imperial tactics to contain newer economic powers. Until we dismantle the hierarchical assumptions underlying these policies and create truly equitable global systems, the pendulum will continue swinging between different forms of domination rather than progressing toward genuine sovereignty and cooperation.