Why Germany's Merz could take 'more rational' approach to China
Centre-right election winner Merz, leader of the Christian Democratic Union, is trying to put together a coalition government with the centre-left Social Democrats. The chance of the China-critical Green Party securing a position in the new leadership, however, appears slim.
According to Wu Ken, who was China's ambassador to Germany from 2019 to 2024, a Merz-led government could be expected to focus on the two countries' economic ties.
Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.
"This stems primarily from Merz's long-standing emphasis on the economy, particularly in trade," Wu said. "More measures to secure economic and trade relations between the two nations could be implemented ... I remain confident about the prospects."
During his diplomatic posting, Wu had extensive exchanges with Merz and Social Democratic Party co-leader Lars Klingbeil, who is in talks to form a coalition government.
"These two figures certainly do not see China in exactly the same way, especially in terms of how to perceive China and its development," Wu said. "However, one thing they agree on is that China is an indispensable partner to Germany."
Wu Ken, who was China's ambassador to Germany from 2019 to 2024, is expecting "positive energy" in relations under the new German leadership. Photo: Handout alt=Wu Ken, who was China's ambassador to Germany from 2019 to 2024, is expecting "positive energy" in relations under the new German leadership. Photo: Handout>
Wu anticipated a fresh outlook for China-Germany relations under the new government after outgoing Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, of the Green Party, leaves office.
"Whichever of the two parties sends someone to be foreign minister, I think it will bring a new look - that is, positive energy - in terms of cooperation and advancing the relationship with China," Wu said.
On China relations, he expected a new Merz administration to try to strike a balance between the approach of the outgoing Olaf Scholz government and that of Angela Merkel, when trade and economic ties served as an anchor for ties between the two nations.
"Her approach ensured that the Sino-German relationship remained steady and continued to develop smoothly over the long term," Wu said.
Relations between China and the European Union have been strained in recent years, including over Beijing's ties with Moscow since Russia invaded Ukraine, and alleged Chinese industrial overcapacity, unfair subsidies and the large trade deficit.
Wu said ideological factors were increasingly part of the bilateral relationship and that Germany's stance on China since 2023 - as a partner, competitor and systemic rival - was "perplexing".
"In my view, this strategy has not only failed to advance Sino-German relations but has, in some areas, hindered the progress of bilateral ties, especially on trade and the economy," he said.
"These classifications seem to lack a clear basis and rationale, fragmenting China into three segments without clear distinctions. Even I, as the ambassador to Germany, found myself uncertain of when I was considered a partner, a competitor, or an adversary."
Relations have been strained between China and the European Union. Photo: Reuters alt=Relations have been strained between China and the European Union. Photo: Reuters>
The Greens, one of three parties in Scholz's last coalition government and holder of the foreign ministry portfolio, were the driving force behind Berlin's first-ever and rigorously worded China strategy in July 2023.
The strategy emphasised the need to de-risk, diversify and reduce Germany's reliance on China. It also called for tariffs to be applied - including EU levies on Chinese electric vehicles - to counteract the influx of inexpensive Chinese imports into the region.
The Greens also regard Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine and the broader global conflict with authoritarian regimes like China as catalysts for a strategic realignment of the country's economic security, trade and supply chains.
From 2016 to 2023, China was Germany's largest trading partner. But last year the United States overtook China in this position as German exports to China fell by 7.6 per cent. Despite this shift, China has remained an important trading partner as Germany's economy contracted in the past two years, adding to urgency for the new government to address economic challenges.
This article originally appeared in the South China Morning Post (SCMP), the most authoritative voice reporting on China and Asia for more than a century. For more SCMP stories, please explore the SCMP app or visit the SCMP's Facebook and Twitter pages. Copyright © 2025 South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 2025. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
24 minutes ago
- CNBC
Thyssenkrupp steel, workers agree on site closures, less working hours in revamp
Thyssenkrupp and trade union IG Metall on Saturday said they had agreed on reduced working hours, lower bonus payments and site closures as part of a push to revamp Germany's largest steelmaker. The accord with steel workers marks a major step in Thyssenkrupp's restructuring, under which the former German industrial icon is planning to turn into a holding company, and comes after renewed tension between management and labour representatives. Implementation of the new collective bargaining agreement, which runs until September 30, 2030, must be approved by IG Metall members at Thyssenkrupp's steel unit TKSE and is pending an agreement on the division's future financing, they said. The agreement follows Thyssenkrupp's announcement that up to 11,000 jobs at the steel unit, TKSE, had to be cut or outsourced and that annual production capacity would be lowered to 8.7-9.0 million tons from 11.5 million tons. "We went to the pain threshold and only made concessions where it was really necessary in order to secure jobs and locations," said Tekin Nasikkol, head of Thyssenkrupp's works council and member of the group's supervisory board. "We have now created the conditions for the company to emerge from the difficult situation out of its own strength," Nasikkol said in a statement. Thyssenkrupp had wanted to reach a deal regarding the restructuring by summer and both sides aim to finalise the current agreement by the end of September. Reaching a wage deal has been seen as a key hurdle to be cleared before Thyssenkrupp can sell an additional 30% stake in TKSE to Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky, as planned. The investor already owns a 20% stake via a holding company.
Forbes
32 minutes ago
- Forbes
Even A.I. Might Not Be Able To Save These New Style Trademarks
North American and European brands have been successfully selling made-in-China goods for decades. It was probably inevitable that many of its small factories would become direct online sellers, perhaps in competition with their former customers. But the trademarks that many of them have been using may not be helping them crack the market. American companies – and startups are certainly no different – give a lot of thought to the best mark, which will personify their product, using a name which helps it to sell, yet also distinguishes it from its competition. All companies should also search their marks to be sure they do not come too close to a potential competitor which may demand a name change, or worse, threaten to sue. Many Chinese startups have taken a different path. They are adopting made-up names which bear little resemblance to the traditional English or Romance language sounding words we usually see. Consider this random assortment I came up with: 'Lvrigfpro' for pharmaceuticals 'Matdg' for jewelry 'Mahcscha' for beach towels 'Bfxlmki' for paintings and paper 'Haisiwlkj' for furniture covers 'RabvPerce' for toys A number of these brands are setting new paradigms by using a combination of consonants and vowels which don't follow familiar patterns, making them arguably a little difficult to recognize and to pronounce. These contrast sharply with now-household names of many Chinese brands with a gigantic U.S. presence – brands such as: 'Tik Tok' 'Alibaba' 'Huawei' 'Shein' 'Haier' Pronunciation can always be a challenge for brands coming into the U.S. from overseas. All of the well-known brands listed above are capable of a pronunciation in English, largely because they still follow certain rules which combine consonants and vowels in a way that makes them understandable, even if initially pronunciation is unclear. Words have a certain flow, creating a kind of familiarity so that made-up words can sound like and be pronounced like a word in the English language. These marks follow the rules in a way that the other marks above which I randomly selected do not. Words are formed of syllables, and syllables are composed of a combination of consonants. The reader needs to build up a 'beat,' and words which are readily recognized will march to that beat. Interestingly, companies could save time and money in the trademark creation process by coming up with something that feels unfamiliar, like 'Haisiwlkj.' One interesting aspect of these marks is that while I always counsel startup companies to adopt a mark that they will be able to protect and to register in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, it is also desirable that the words look, appear and sound different from anything already in use in traditional terms; this equates to a stronger, more distinctive trademark. The chances of running into another mark already used with a similar appearance, sound and meaning seem small. So, two of the three goals of brand name creation are fulfilled: (1) first, do no harm (avoid conflicting with others); (2) get something you can protect (make it distinctive as possible); (3) as for the third, which is 'pick a name that will sell the product' – maybe not so much. (Marketers accuse lawyers of preferring 1 and 2 over 3, and in many cases, they're not wrong. What's the use of having a mark if it doesn't help actually sell the product?) The great inherent value to using the right word for a brand is the benefit of projecting the right image, taking into account an enormous range of cultural preferences which range from the literal messages words or portions of words suggest, to a sound of familiarity which elicits good or positive feelings, or reflects certain values. All of that is lost in brand names which are not only fanciful creations, but which fail to send a message to a consumer who is busy trying to figure out exactly what the word is and how you would pronounce it. Given the roles trademarks play in conveying meaning or evoking emotion, these new marks may be losing out on the main branding opportunity. The U.S. market has since the very beginning featured 'foreign' products, and often many of those products have had the greatest of prestige. Not all of them have been inherently easy for American consumers to pronounce, whether from Europe, Asia, or elsewhere. But they have had a certain common element to them much more familiar to the American and English language speaker's ear than this newest generation of trademarks. Over time, people become accustomed to and comfortable with new things. Will these neologisms start to sound familiar once there are enough of them in everyday use, or will they fade in favor of more traditional sounding words? There's always a back story. The explosion in trademark applications from China in recent years has actually been well documented. Lawyers who practice regularly in front of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office also recognize certain patterns among some segment of these applications. A word is created, and a web page is thrown together to show the product being offered for sale. Many of these applications are accused of being filed simply to try to reserve rights, and names are even more blatantly just to get applications on file in the Trademark Office for the benefit of certain subsidies that were being offered by the Chinese government to obtain U.S. trademark registration protection. The flood of these offbeat names in the Trademark Office has its own story. Official investigations by the United States Patent and Trademark Office have indicated the Chinese government, at every level from national to local, has incentivized companies to seek to develop and protect their brands abroad, including in the U.S.A. In many cases some government agency paid the bill not only for the cost of applications in the Trademark Office, but even allowed the trademark owner to end up with a surplus for each trademark application they file in the United States. Over the past few years, the Trademark Office has even taken some enforcement actions where it has found that some of these practices violate the good faith rule that any application exhibits a 'bona fide intent' to use the mark in the United States. Will American consumers accept and become familiar with these names and come to appreciate them as trusted brands? Or is this only a phase during which time these non-U.S. marketers and non-English language natives are making an all-out assault to project and protect brand names into the United States for their own purposes? Putting aside the tariffs in the room, it would otherwise seem that direct-to-consumer marketing from these small China-based enterprises which formerly relied on U.S. entities to sell their wares is not likely to die down. They presumably will change their branding habits – through time, experience, and maybe even the assistance of A.I. – to develop words and names that look more like the types of familiar terms that will motivate American shoppers to trust those brands and remember the names. You might say that this process will be more consonant with consumer expectations.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
While institutions own 37% of MEDICLIN Aktiengesellschaft (ETR:MED), private companies are its largest shareholders with 53% ownership
The considerable ownership by private companies in MEDICLIN indicates that they collectively have a greater say in management and business strategy 53% of the company is held by a single shareholder (Broermann Holding GmbH) Institutions own 37% of MEDICLIN This technology could replace computers: discover the 20 stocks are working to make quantum computing a reality. To get a sense of who is truly in control of MEDICLIN Aktiengesellschaft (ETR:MED), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are private companies with 53% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company. Institutions, on the other hand, account for 37% of the company's stockholders. Institutions often own shares in more established companies, while it's not unusual to see insiders own a fair bit of smaller companies. Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about MEDICLIN. Check out our latest analysis for MEDICLIN Institutions typically measure themselves against a benchmark when reporting to their own investors, so they often become more enthusiastic about a stock once it's included in a major index. We would expect most companies to have some institutions on the register, especially if they are growing. As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in MEDICLIN. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see MEDICLIN's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story. MEDICLIN is not owned by hedge funds. The company's largest shareholder is Broermann Holding GmbH, with ownership of 53%. This implies that they have majority interest control of the future of the company. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 23% and 12% of the stock. While studying institutional ownership for a company can add value to your research, it is also a good practice to research analyst recommendations to get a deeper understand of a stock's expected performance. While there is some analyst coverage, the company is probably not widely covered. So it could gain more attention, down the track. The definition of an insider can differ slightly between different countries, but members of the board of directors always count. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO. Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group. We note our data does not show any board members holding shares, personally. It is unusual not to have at least some personal holdings by board members, so our data might be flawed. A good next step would be to check how much the CEO is paid. With a 10% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over MEDICLIN. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run. It seems that Private Companies own 53%, of the MEDICLIN stock. It might be worth looking deeper into this. If related parties, such as insiders, have an interest in one of these private companies, that should be disclosed in the annual report. Private companies may also have a strategic interest in the company. It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand MEDICLIN better, we need to consider many other factors. Be aware that MEDICLIN is showing 1 warning sign in our investment analysis , you should know about... But ultimately it is the future, not the past, that will determine how well the owners of this business will do. Therefore we think it advisable to take a look at this free report showing whether analysts are predicting a brighter future. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen. Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten
