Dutch PM Rutte's major speech in Zürich on feb 13, 2019. China.

About China, this speech (https://www.government.nl/documents/speeches/2019/02/13/churchill-lecture-by-prime-minister-mark-rutte-europa-institut-at-the-university-of-zurich) finally seems to push Europe in the right direction, even if it is almost too carefully worded. This speech will probably be the basis of direction the EU will take in the coming years and it is likely to give Rutte an increased authority in Europe. 
I quote here those parts of the speech that are about China and about the European Army:


“In 1995, in the creation of the WTO, the world recognised the paramount importance of global free trade, a predictable trade climate with a level playing field, and an effective mechanism for settling disputes. This rule-based system is the best way to increase international prosperity. A lot has changed since then. New, major players have entered the field. I’m thinking mainly of China of course. As a state-led non-market economy, it is tilting the playing field with non-transparent state subsidies and unequal market access. It’s also clear that China doesn’t shy away from exercising its market power to protect its own economic and political interests. This gives rise to the danger of cherry picking. And we cannot solve that issue with outdated rules and agreements. We share that concern with President Trump. It’s high time that the US and Europe came together to set about reforming the WTO in earnest. I admit that this will not be easy. As you probably know, the Americans are taking a hard line and blocking the appointment of new members to the Appellate Body, because they feel that the WTO has been overstepping its authority. The impending paralysis of dispute settlement at the WTO is one of the problems we must solve if we want avoid a scenario where ‘might is right’. But I also see America’s aggressive stance as a means to force the issue, and finally deliver on the much-discussed and sorely needed modernisation of the WTO. The EU can and must show leadership precisely because an effective multilateral trade system and a level playing field are so important to us. In essence, we need to tighten existing WTO rules and bring them up to date. There are now simply too few options to combat issues like competition-distorting state aid and enforced technology transfer. State-led economies need to become far more transparent. The rules must be better monitored, and compliance must be stepped up. This is another reason it’s vital the Appellate Body can operate with authority. Let us break the deadlock, once and for all. And let us also be less naive and better protect our critical technology and industrial know-how. But not, of course, at the expense of the power and effectiveness of the single market.“
 
In what follows, Rutte seems still to be unrealistic.

“This brings me to the next point I’d like to touch on: the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Certainly in its own geopolitical back garden, the EU should be a political force to be reckoned with. In reality we are not, or at least not enough. One of the main problems is that, in many cases, member states and the European institutions are not on the same page, so in geopolitical terms we don’t pull our weight as we should and could. Take the conflicts in Syria and Libya, for example. Even though they are on our doorstep, the EU is not a sufficiently relevant player Because you cannot have a strong and effective foreign policy (“a political force to be reckoned with “) without accepting a central European authority to formulate and exercise it. And he says that, notwithstanding his own words “The Americans can do this because there is a single political focus, a single enforcement authority and a single message.”

Rutte does not accept that and in this respect he is not realistic. It is though possible he says here what he says, so as not to alienate those European member countries that are teetering and hesitating between European and national loyalty. If that were so, he would be doing very well. He wants to
“present a united front to the outside world.”.,
but still denies us the single tool, even though he says
“Via the European Commission, member states speak with one voice to all the EU’s trade partners. We need that same unity and coordination in sanctions policy and supervision.”,
 which means he DOES understand the need for central EU government. And again
“Of course, the call for energy security cannot be viewed in isolation from the necessary transition to clean energy. This is a prime example of something we can only tackle at European level. And it’s something we must tackle. To limit global warming, as we agreed in Paris.”.
He ends with this
“Now it’s up to us to secure Europe’s position on the world stage, confidently and with a new sense of reality. Because in an insecure, multipolar world, ‘power’ is not a dirty word. And I believe we must face up to that reality, to make sure that future generations of Europeans can work their own miracles.”
… and that is really very good. A major speech.