It's a message that [European] Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will deliver when she visits China next week, together with French President Emmanuel Macron.
[...]
Namechecking [sic] this week's political agreement to create a so-called anti-coercion instrument in a speech in Brussels on Thursday, von der Leyen said: "We now need the unity at EU level for a bolder and faster use of those instruments when they are required and a more assertive approach to enforcement [of WHAT?]."

archive extortion

The new rules will empower the Commission to investigate whether coercion has happened and to propose countermeasures—handing the executive greater [exclusive]competence in the making of foreign policy, an area where EU countries have traditionally called the shots.

Interestingly, Hobbes seems to share Aquinas' view that acting from fear does not undercut the voluntariness [volition] of one's acts, as he famously asserts that "covenants extorted by fear are valid" (Hobbes 1651, Ch. 14).

Countermeasures [read: anit-coercion instrument mechanism tool rules sanction] that the Commission [EC] could deploy include increased customs duties [read: tariffs], intellectual property restrictions or export controls [read: "EU embargo"], under a time-bound procedure lasting no more than a year. Details are still to be worked out but a final deal is expected before the summer break, with the anti-coercion free will instrument likely to enter force in the second half of the year.
[...]
Power grab
The anti-coercion tool [sic] was originally inspired by former U.S. President Donald TRUMP's imposition in 2018 of steel tariffs against the EU [exports] on national security grounds, which pushed Brussels to raise its game and seek to strengthen its own trade defenses.
[...]

"This instrument is a kind of monster resulting from trying to reconcile two very opposite decision-making processes: one for foreign policy and security, and the other one for trade," said Philippe De Baere, managing partner at law firm Van Bael & Bellis.
[...]

Credible deterrence

The Netherlands [alias Lithuania] has already emerged as a potential test case [of WHICH LAW? of WHICH JURISDICTION?].

The Dutch government bowed recently under U.S. pressure to impose export controls on high-end equipment used to manufacture microchips. ASML, a Dutch company, is the global market leader and its most advanced lithography tools are a missing piece [FALSE] of the puzzle in China's chip ecosystem [sic].

Huawei has replaced thousands of U.S.-banned parts in its products, founder says

Following the announcement, China's ambassador to the Netherlands warned this would not stay "without consequences." This in turn, sparked questions from [EU] lawmakers to the government on whether it will seek support from other EU member states in case China [?!] turns to sanctions
[...]