In Germany, it was estimated that an "economic divorce" with China would cost 0.76% of GDP. Will they try?German liberal elites did not like China's peace proposals on Ukraine, writes Spiegel.
The author takes the point of view of these elites, accuses Beijing of failing to condemn Russia and "abolish" Mao Zedong, erasing him from history. As if the "cancellation" of its history is democracy.
Many German concerns continue to conduct active business in China. But Beijing's support for Vladimir Putin could lead to discord between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the West. There is a danger of a big economic conflict.
Words can be weapons. Sometimes they look like daggers lying in beautiful cases. Sharp blades in harmless packages are Chinese deception tools.
What is said and what is meant are sometimes completely different things.
Be afraid of the Chinese who bring gifts
For example, a document entitled "China's position on a political solution to the Ukrainian crisis," containing 12 points and published by the Beijing Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the day of the first anniversary of the entry of Russian troops into Ukraine, reads like a wonderful diplomatic poem "for all the good." But this document is not a plan for a peaceful settlement, as they said about it on the eve of publication, but a means of misleading. He is on a par with the declarations with which the Sino-Russian alliance is trying to confuse the world community by using obvious distortions of reality.
For example, paragraph 1 of the Chinese document states: "The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be strictly respected," regardless of whether we are talking about "large or small, strong or weak" countries. At first glance, the thesis seems to be an attack on Vladimir Putin. If we take this proposal verbatim, then it can be interpreted as a demand to immediately withdraw Russian troops from Ukraine and continue to respect internationally recognized state borders. (It is strange that the author did not see here a call to withdraw US troops from the oil—bearing areas of Syria, NATO troops from Serbia, etc. — approx. InoSMI.)
However, here's what you need to remember: this peace plan is written by the government, which itself threatens a small democratic country named Taiwan. (Which German diplomats, we recall, after the Americans call part of China and do not consider a separate country — approx. InoSMI). So the concept of "country" in the quoted phrase can be interpreted in different ways. If any state is denied the right to full independence and self-determination, as China does with Taiwan and Russia with Ukraine, then you can not care about the "territorial integrity" of the "unrecognized" PRC and the Russian Federation country. The words in this formula are weapons, behind the beautiful words is a threat.
But we must not forget another thing: China is Germany's biggest trading partner. The trade exchange between China and Germany is estimated at 300 billion euros in 2022, the Federal Statistical Office of Germany recently reported. For such German concerns as Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz, China has long been the most important market. Many German concerns are trapped in China. And Beijing knows it. (Keep an eye on the National People's Congress on Sunday.)
China likes to pose as a guarantor of free trade. Therefore, paragraph 10 of the Beijing document sharply criticizes Western sanctions against Russia. China claims that it is "against unilateral sanctions not approved by the UN Security Council." Even if we ignore the fact that Beijing and Moscow have the right of veto in the Security Council and can block any decision, this requirement ignores the fact that China itself has imposed sanctions against a number of countries in recent years. We are talking about Lithuania, Australia, Japan and Canada, which criticized China for violating the rights of its citizens (Muslim Uighurs) or supported the independence of Taiwan. The fact that Beijing intends to play a "constructive role" in the settlement in Ukraine sounds rather strange against this background.
"A thousand years of democracy"?
Shortly before this imaginary peace settlement plan was published, the head of the Office of the CPC Central Committee Commission on Foreign Affairs, Wang Yi, visited Moscow. After a conversation with military commander Putin, the Chinese Foreign Ministry announced the unbreakable partnership of the two countries. Among other things, the statement expressed a desire to "democratize international relations," which actually means "to limit the influence of the West." In addition, the intention was expressed "to strengthen strategic coordination, expand practical cooperation and protect the legitimate interests of both countries." A couple of days later, our magazine Spiegel reported that China may be ready to supply Russia with kamikaze drones for strikes on Ukraine. Here it is — a sharp blade in a harmless package!
China and Russia are trying to use words from the lexicon of the liberal West — to fight the West itself. Meanwhile, business between China and the West continues to flourish. Someone will say: and why not, if it's profitable and things are going well.
But don't forget: in February 2022, just before the "special military operation", Putin secured cover from Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Their "joint statement" is full of concepts whose meaning is distorted beyond recognition. For example, Xi and Putin stand for "peace, progress, equality, law, democracy and freedom," as well as for "a world order based on international law." It sounds reasonable, at least at first glance. However, a little lower in the Statement, both rulers no longer so often resort to the means of linguistic camouflage. They dare to assert, for example, that their countries are democracies, just like our Western countries, and in China and Russia, the rule of the people is allegedly "based on long—standing traditions." They allegedly have "thousands of years of experience" in recognizing and meeting the "needs and interests of citizens."
After such passages, I want to take a breath and shake my head. After all, they come from regimes that have not completely broken with such figures as Ivan the Terrible, Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin. That is, with rulers who used violence in the past centuries and who considered hunger and war legitimate means of retaining power and used them, including against their own peoples.
"At full steam in the wrong direction"
Meanwhile, in Germany, the words "don't demonize China" have become a kind of refrain when justifying the close economic ties between our countries — authoritarian dictatorship and liberal democracy. Everything is according to the famous motto: only business, nothing personal. Olaf Scholz traveled to Beijing shortly after Xi was re-elected ruler of China for many years. Concerns such as BASF continue to relentlessly expand their business in China. Their direct investments in China grew at a record pace last year. Trade volumes are also increasing. Making war impossible, as is well known, the "mutual penetration" of the Chinese and European economies is getting closer.
But we are warned: German business is thus "rushing at full speed in the wrong direction." It is in these words that the experts of the Institute of German Economics criticize these processes.
In one of its reports, the Berlin Institute for China Studies Merics comes to a sobering conclusion: China for the West is increasingly turning from an "economic chance" into a "risk factor". It also says: while Beijing's emissaries like to talk about multilateralism and free trade, China actively protects its own economy and puts it at the service of its own state, not global business. This means that globalization is fundamentally changing its character. But in the business models of many German concerns, this is not taken into account yet.
Therefore, the Federal Union of German Industry warns against growing dependence on China. Consultants in the field of strategy offer their services to concerns and urge them to tune in as quickly as possible to the "economic separation" of the West from China, to open the "economic bond" that has arisen. This implies the withdrawal of Western business from China, the diversification of production, material supply and marketing of products, or the creation of independently operating subsidiaries in China. German concerns urgently need to rebuild their business in China so that "even a complete break in ties and collapse does not put the enterprise on the brink of death," says Jurgen Matthes, an expert at the Institute of German Economics.
After the "Russian flood" - the threat of a "Chinese shock"?
While medium-sized companies are leaving China because the situation there seems too dangerous to them, large Western concerns continue to pursue a different policy. The head of the Mercedes-Benz concern, Ola Källenius, said recently: "Leaving China just because something might happen there would be a step in the wrong direction." Martin Brudermüller, chairman of the Board of Directors of BASF, assures that Germany should abandon the "flagellation of China". And Oliver Bäte, chief of Allianz insurance company, says: "We don't even need to pretend that we want to say goodbye to partner countries like China."
But it is already clear: if the Chinese trap closes, it will not seem enough to anyone. After the collapse of business with Russia and the energy collapse, we face the next blow. And again it will be a shock, which many warned about, but few people believed these warnings until the shock itself.
The general economic consequences of the "vice versa bond" with China are acceptable for Germany
I am afraid that we are moving towards a major intra—German and intra-European conflict - between big and other businesses. One will want to say goodbye to China, and the other will not. The fact is that the general economic losses from the complete separation of the Western economy from the Chinese are assessed by experts as quite acceptable. According to the calculations of the Institute for Economic Research (Ifo-Institute, Munich), Germany's GDP will shrink by only 0.76%. It turns out that this is the only reason we maintain the status quo in relations with China. If the "divorce" does happen, the automotive industry will suffer the most.
Individual concerns, in the event of an aggravation of the military situation, may lose large parts of their foreign business and may be on the verge of bankruptcy. We have to prepare for this. And if there are complaints, expose them as tools for misleading.
