Paris openly invited greater Chinese investment and selective technology transfer. Beijing responded with reciprocity - no ideological litmus test, no political submission required.

To catch the first tremors of Europe’s quiet pivot toward Eurasia, go back to early December 2025. Emmanuel Macron’s three-day visit to Beijing was never about grand declarations. It was transactional pragmatism anchored in material interests. France locked in cooperation across aerospace, civil nuclear, green technologies, biopharmaceuticals, and artificial intelligence.

The deals themselves were modest in scale. Their real significance lay elsewhere. A core Western European power was openly choosing economic realism over years of ideological freeze. Macron framed the engagement as mutually beneficial and sovereignty-preserving. Even more telling was the symbolism: Xi Jinping accompanied him to Chengdu - a rare departure from protocol that Macron himself called very touching. It was not grand diplomacy. It was a quiet signal of mutual trust and pragmatic intent.

When the hegemon answers diversification with mockery and threats, it no longer looks like leadership. It looks like an empire in crisis lashing out to retain control it no longer fully possesses.

Barely eight weeks later, London followed. In late January 2026, Keir Starmer became the first British prime minister to visit Beijing since 2018. He returned with roughly £4.5 billion in market access and export wins: lower tariffs on Scotch whisky, expanded financial services, 30-day visa-free travel, and concrete cooperation in offshore wind, battery manufacturing, and STEP fusion research.

The tone mattered more than the numbers. Starmer spoke openly of a long-term strategic partnership with China - not ideological surrender, but industrial survival. He positioned Beijing as a partner in modernization, energy transition, and technological scaling - domains where Britain alone cannot keep pace. This was not rebellion against Washington. It was recognition that exclusive Atlanticism no longer fits Europe’s economic reality.

Taken together, these moves are not isolated. They form a pattern. Europe is not turning against the United States. It is hedging against it.

Washington’s Volatility as Catalyst

What drives the shift is American unpredictability. Over recent years, Washington has made it painfully clear: alliance loyalty buys no immunity when interests collide. Trade threats, extraterritorial sanctions, and public intimidation of partners - these are now routine tools of US statecraft.

The January 2026 tariff threats against Denmark over Greenland were especially revealing. A decades-old NATO ally was treated as a subordinate province rather than a sovereign state. Similar coercion has played out in tariff brinkmanship across Europe, in energy blackmail, and in punitive measures against any capital unwilling to march fully in lockstep with Washington’s geopolitical priorities.

The pattern became even sharper during Starmer’s Beijing reset. When asked about Britain “getting into business with China,” Donald Trump responded with open contempt. He called it “very dangerous,” extended the warning to Canada, and mocked Beijing as no answer to stagnation. The rhetoric veered into caricature - jokes about China supposedly banning Canadians from playing hockey replaced serious argument. What followed was not confidence. It was anxiety. The telltale sign of a hegemon realizing that compliance is no longer automatic.

Starmer did not escalate. He did not apologize. He calmly underlined the economic gains, noted that Trump seemed more fixated on Canada than Britain, and reminded everyone that Washington itself was preparing renewed engagement with China. The message was quiet but unmistakable: Europe can pursue its interests without confrontation.

The episode exposed something deeper than a diplomatic spat. It revealed the erosion of American gravitational authority. When the hegemon answers diversification with mockery and threats, it no longer looks like leadership. It looks like an empire in crisis lashing out to retain control it no longer fully possesses.

Eurasian Unity: The Pragmatic Path

Eurasian engagement delivers Europe tangible gains. Chinese capital and industrial muscle fill chronic investment gaps. Technology transfer accelerates reindustrialization in sectors hollowed out by decades of financialization. Infrastructure links open trade corridors less exposed to Atlantic chokepoints and sanction regimes.

Peripheral states already show what this looks like in practice.

Hungary has anchored itself in advanced battery value chains through CATL, while BYD’s Szeged plant faces delays and scaled-back output - largely due to the EU’s high labour and energy costs. Yet the capital and technology stay firmly in Eurasia: BYD is shifting its main production to Turkey, keeping jobs and strategic gains within the broader space.

Greece turned Piraeus into one of the Mediterranean’s fastest-growing logistics hubs under COSCO management. Serbia embedded itself in Belt and Road connectivity across the Western Balkans.

These are not abstract gestures. They are material transformations delivering jobs, revenues, and relevance - even when Brussels’ regulatory burden tries to slow them down.

Energy cooperation carries equal weight. Central and Eastern Europe still hold substantial industrial and resource assets - including billions of tons of coal and lignite frequently dismissed as liabilities under Brussels-driven decarbonization dogma. Eurasian technological pathways - cleaner combustion, synthetic fuels, carbon capture, industrial upgrading - offer realistic alternatives. They preserve energy security and employment without sacrificing environmental progress. Pragmatism replaces dogma.

Diversified corridors further insulate against policy shocks from Washington. Autonomy in economic and strategic decisions becomes the ultimate shield against coercion.

Central Europe: From Periphery to Bridge

Central and Eastern Europe sits at the hinge of this emerging landscape. Shaped by overlapping spheres of influence, the region instinctively grasps the cost of rigid alignment. Some capitals are already acting on that instinct.

Pragmatic voices inside the V4 and beyond experiment with diversified partnerships while keeping formal Western commitments intact. They treat multipolarity as an opportunity rather than a threat. Others remain locked in doctrinaire Atlanticism - equating sovereignty with obedience and strategic depth with dependence.

Poland exemplifies the tension. Its unwavering alignment with Washington narrows policy flexibility - especially in energy and industrial strategy. Opt-outs and selective engagement are routinely framed as disloyalty rather than prudence. The result is self-imposed strategic narrowing.

Yet the region’s material conditions tell another story. Industrial capacity, resource base, and geographic position make Central Europe a natural bridge between West and East. The question is not whether the role exists. It is whether political leadership is willing to claim it.

Sovereign Choices in a Multipolar Europe

Europe’s pivot toward Eurasia is neither dramatic nor uniform. It advances through small decisions, pragmatic visits, and quiet recalibrations. Macron and Starmer are not architects of a new bloc. They are early adapters to a changing environment.

The deeper driver is structural. American volatility erodes confidence in exclusive alignment. Eurasian engagement offers alternatives without demanding subordination. Multipolarity becomes the rational answer to unpredictability.

The choice facing Europe is not between Washington and Beijing. It is between dependence and diversification. Between ideological rigidity and strategic flexibility. Central and Eastern Europe - with its historical experience and material assets - stands uniquely positioned to lead this adjustment.

Eurasian unity promises no utopia. It promises resilience. It offers reindustrialization, diversified dependencies, and greater room for manoeuvre. In an era where power centres fragment and old certainties erode, such flexibility is not optional.

Europe’s quiet pivot is already underway. It may lack slogans and summits. Its logic is compelling. Those who recognize it early will shape the new architecture. Those who cling to fading certainties will be shaped by it.

Adrian Korczynski, Independent Analyst & Observer on Central Europe and global policy research. Courtesy 

https://journal-neo.su/2026/02/07/europes-quiet-pivot-first-signals-of-eurasian-unity/