• 

After German foreign minister Annalena Baerbock concluded her recent China visit, a hawkish Western press, and Berlin’s G7 allies are at it again: demonstrating poverty of knowledge on the fundamentals of China-Germany ties. Loud calls about standing up to so-called Chinese “coercion” and interfering in internal matters ignore Berlin’s nuance in compartmentalizing differences.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz's government is in the process of putting together a new China strategy to reduce what Germany complains is its dependence on Beijing. But the cooperative dimensions of China-Germany ties are captured amply by Baerbock’s China trip, where she co-chaired the 6th round of China-Germany Strategic Dialogue on Diplomacy and Security and shared in-depth bilateral exchanges with Wang Yi, director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee. 

Peaceful reunification

Berlin has been clear on the Taiwan question’s sensitivity to China, and reaffirmed its continued adherence to the iron-clad one-China principle through the visit. This is in stark contrast to what the G7 has long taken as its imperative to blatantly interfere in China’s internal affairs. Thus, both of Germany’s positions on Taiwan, as well as the one-China principle, point to a more practical and acceptable approach to key foundational issues, especially when such alignment is consistent with trust-building of the past. 

Look no further than Beijing’s historic backing for Germany’s own unification cause, a message of goodwill that reflects positively on hopes that Berlin will also “support China's great cause of peaceful reunification.” Thus, reciprocity on core national issues remains largely intact between the two sides, and yet the same cannot be said about a G7 grouping that banks on demonizing China.

In the same spirit, Germany’s consistent support for the one-China principle is noteworthy for another reason: there isn’t an overblown desire to exercise interference and hollow-out compliance on issues of territorial significance to its largest trading partner. Baerbock’s stated focus on enriching “mutual understanding” through closer communication with China forms a vital parallel with Beijing’s own readiness for subsequent China-Germany intergovernmental consultations. These engagements have played a central role in bolstering common ground and coordinating differences. A motivated Western press won’t change that. 

From a diplomatic standpoint, Berlin’s positive signaling on core national interests matters to China because of Germany’s standing within the European Union. It enjoys the status of a key diplomatic voice in Europe and has made an example out of its judicious balancing of strategic interests with China. Given seismic regional shifts, Baerbock’s visit carries a broad appetite for Sino-German convergence around conflict hotspots, illustrated by the view that conflicts can “only be solved peacefully.”

Trade as the linchpin of historic ties

Optimism for dialing up trade and multisector business engagement remains plenty. The sixth China-Germany Strategic Dialogue is a case in point: Baerbock hailed an almost 50-fold increase in bilateral trade since the end of the Cold War, while affirming opposition to decoupling. 

To date, expanded market access and trade complementarity has accomplished substantial feats for both sides. That includes positioning China as Berlin’s leading trade partner for seven years, while Germany continues to serve as Beijing’s top trading partner within Europe. Baerbock’s visit enabled both sides to leverage globalization for stronger industrial chain integration and put the focus on equitable treatment of high-growth enterprises in each other’s markets. “Economic and trade cooperation is the basis of the relationship between the two countries, mutual benefit, and a win-win situation is the base of Sino-German pragmatic cooperation, Sino-German dependence in the industrial chain is the inevitable result of economic globalization and the optimal choice under market rules," affirmed China’s foreign minister recently. 

Some $320 billion in traded goods last year is indicative of an upward surge, strengthening the case for deeper economic cooperation to draw nations closer.

Imperatives on global peace

One of the other hallmarks of high-level Sino-German engagement is the ability to focus attention on major regional security affairs. Baerbock’s visit made no exception to the Ukraine conflict, an issue complete with the understanding that enduring peace runs through dialogue. The G7 has its own polarizing thoughts on the issue but has no tangible leverage to bring the conflict to a close. On the contrary, predominantly Western groupings and military alliances can play a major role in driving up the conflict, as evidenced by their staunch advocacy for counterproductive sanctions.

China’s stance on facilitating talks has already offered lessons in stemming protracted conflict, including spillovers for Europe. High global stakes in eliminating irritants to peace underscore the timeliness of China and Germany’s regional security focus and the extent of their “commitment” to a mutually beneficial solution.

In sum, a needlessly controversial spin on Baerbock’s China visit ignores the broad-based promise to strengthen the trade and economic foundations of Sino-German ties. At the same time, Berlin demonstrated pragmatism on issues of core significance. 

Without doubt, Germany’s success in partnering with China and coordinating differences in the past has formed a strong point in relations, furthering the case for meaningful reciprocity in the future.