Deutsche Welle Chinese website: Before the German election, you said in an interview with us that no matter who is in charge of the new government, Germany-China relations will go through a period of running-in. If Scholz is elected prime minister, the break-in period may be the shortest. Now he has indeed become the Chancellor of Germany, but Belbok, a female Green Party politician who has a tougher attitude towards China, has become the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Under such circumstances, what kind of fusion do you expect the bilateral relationship to experience?
Gu Xuewu:In fact, through the study of the documents of the three-party joint governance program and the analysis of Prime Minister Scholz’s statements in recent times, I think this running-in period may be shorter. The expression of China in the ruling program is generally very mild. Although China’s issues involving Xinjiang, Hong Kong, and Taiwan have been mentioned, they have adopted a relatively compromised approach.
To give an example, this document mentions supporting Taiwan’s participation in international organizations in more ways. This is what Taiwan is very pleased to see. However, two prerequisites are also set. One is to adhere to the “one China” principle, and the second is to support Taiwan’s participation in “transactional organizations,” that is, non-sovereign organizations. This is actually consistent with the attitude of mainland China, because Beijing has never opposed Taiwan’s participation in international organizations, but only participates in the name of “Chinese Taipei.”
Therefore, it can be seen that the document did not directly confront China, but was only expressed in German discourse, leaving a lot of room for interpretation. I think the three parties in this part of the statement are very rigorous every word. From the German point of view, he did not write it casually. Including the Xinjiang issue, the document did not use the concept of “genocide” proposed by the United States, nor did it use the term “concentration camp”. It only used the expression “human rights violations” (Menschenrechtsverletzungen), and it did not say anything. To protest with China, only to “communication” (kommunizieren).
Scholz and Belbok: Who has the final say on China policy?
So I think that after the new German government takes office, there will definitely be a running-in period with China. After all, Germany has a female foreign minister for the first time-Belbok, she is only 40 years old, she is a vigorous and full-blooded woman. At that time, the attitude towards China will also be expressed in language, and there will be some sharper remarks towards China. China must accept this reality, that is, there are a new generation of people in the ruling party in Germany. They do not agree with what China is doing, they do not understand the path China is taking, and they will definitely criticize it. But after all, the prime minister is Scholz, who is another style. Therefore, the relationship between the two countries will definitely need to be adjusted, but it will not take too long.
“The leading power of major power diplomacy is in the hands of the prime minister”
Deutsche Welle: The “Daily” (taz) published in Berlin previously quoted the former Chancellor Schroeder and compared the relationship between the German Chancellor and the Foreign Minister to a “chef and a running hall”, which means that the Chancellor is the foreign policy maker The foreign minister is only responsible for implementation. Do you agree with this metaphor?
Gu Xuewu:Although this analogy is a bit exaggerated, it is true from the perspective of Germany’s constitutional system. This system respects the “Prime Minister’s Principle” on the one hand, which means that the Prime Minister has the ultimate political decision-making power; on the other hand, it is the “Professional Department Principle”, which means that ministries are responsible in their own professional fields. Although a foreign minister or defense minister comes from different parties, once he enters the government cabinet, he is subject to the restrictions of the constitutional system. From a practical point of view, the dominance of major-country diplomacy is in the Prime Minister’s Office, and this is true for Russia, the United States, France, and China. Perhaps the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has more room for diplomatic relations with other small countries, but the prime minister will control relations with big countries very tightly.
Deutsche Welle: At present, the United States is taking the lead in implementing a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics. The media is also very concerned about the attitude of the new German government. Scholz said at a recent press conference that he would not follow up for the time being. The chairman of the Green Party and the Liberal Democratic Party, who attended the press conference with him at the time, also expressed ambiguity. This should be regarded as the first problem faced by the “Traffic Light” coalition government after taking office. How do you think Scholz and his foreign minister Belbok will answer this question?
Gu Xuewu:Judging from the current position, they are still very cautious. It can be seen from this attitude that, first, they are unwilling to follow the United States, but they also expressed respect for this decision of the United States. Why there is such an evasive statement comes from a change in the ruling style of the new government, that is, any major decision needs to be voiced from a unified EU stand. They are now gaining time through ambiguity and negotiating with other EU countries, especially France and Poland. The EU will definitely negotiate a unified position on the Beijing Winter Olympics. I think they may not completely follow the path of the United States, but they will not do nothing. They should try their best to choose a plan that is acceptable to both China and the United States. As for the specific actions, we can only wait and see.
Deutsche Welle: Scholz said that in terms of foreign policy, the main line is to continue the Merkel era. Now he is leading the first three-party government in German history. What are the opinions of the Social Democratic Party, the Green Party, and the Liberal Democratic Party on China, and how do they finally integrate into a German government’s China policy? What kind of route will dominate?
Gu Xuewu:In fact, it can be said that they have successfully integrated. If you read the declaration of the three-party joint governance, you should be able to see that they have decided to inherit Merkel’s China policy legacy. To ask what is Merkel’s China policy heritage, the most important point is that she and China’s three generations of leaders, especially the Hu-Wen system, and now Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang have jointly created a Sino-German intergovernmental consultation mechanism. This is a structure of institutionalization of Sino-German bilateral relations. From a political perspective, whether Sino-German relations and Merkel’s China policy can continue depends on whether the new government accepts or abandons this intergovernmental consultation mechanism. There is a brief sentence in the three-party joint governance platform: We are willing to continue the Sino-German intergovernmental consultation mechanism. This shows that they will continue to follow a more pragmatic diplomatic route.
“U.S. attempts to persuade Europe to boycott the Winter Olympics have failed.”
Deutsche Welle: The French Sports Minister stated on December 9 that France will not boycott the Winter Olympics. Assuming that Germany finally makes a decision within the framework of the European Union not to impose a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics, how will Scholz face the pressure from the United States?
Gu Xuewu:In fact, the United States‘ efforts to persuade Europe to boycott the Winter Olympics can be said to have failed. We will not see the United States react more strongly to this in Europe. Because after the “US-Europe-China Issues Dialogue” communiqué came out last week, we can discover that the Winter Olympics were not listed as a topic at all. In other words, the United States may have done a lot of work to persuade the EU to act together before the announcement (diplomatic boycott), but it did not succeed. The French side first stated that they would not resist, which may make Scholz feel relieved. Because he just took office, he certainly didn’t want to take the lead. So I estimate that Germany may not resist in the end, but in order not to embarrass the United States, it will not send high-level officials to participate. After all, for the EU, the United States is an ally and China is not. But as far as China is concerned, as long as Germany does not explicitly boycott with the United States, you can send anyone.
If in the end the United States cannot persuade more than ten countries to participate in the boycott of the Winter Olympics, it may not be called a real “boycott.” Because the concept of boycott requires a certain number of people to participate in order to be counted as a real boycott. For example, in the 1980 Moscow Olympics, when Western society launched a boycott because of the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan, more than 50 countries responded. This is a real full boycott.
Deutsche Welle: Have you had any contact with Scholz? What do you think is different from Merkel’s style and ruling style?
Gu Xuewu:I have not had any contact with him, but through some information and conversations with people familiar with him, I think he and Merkel have some similarities and differences. The same thing is that they were both born in North Germany, Merkel was born in Hamburg, and then followed his parents to East Germany; Scholz grew up in Hamburg. The people of North Germany are honest and introverted. Although they are not good at speeches, they do things steadily. On this point, Scholz and Merkel are relatively similar, although they grew up under different political systems.
But in the pursuit of political ideals, they are still very different. Merkel grew up in East Germany, and her church family background made her have a deep resentment towards the East German system. Although Scholz is also an “angry youth,” according to some existing data, he was a staunch Marxist when he was young and was once a leader of the Social Democratic Party’s youth organization. Later, many of their generation transformed into Social Democrats, but maintaining social fairness and improving social welfare are still a very important part of their political philosophy.
Let’s look at the political sect of the Social Democratic Party from which Scholz came from. It was inherited from the two former Prime Ministers of the Social Democratic Party, Schmidt and Schroeder. Schmidt once said that he did not think he knew better how to govern China than the then Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji, so he was not qualified to teach the other party. So I think as the inheritor of this genre, Scholz should still maintain this pragmatic philosophy. Although he will certainly not agree with those things in China in terms of values, he should be relatively stable when dealing with China and seek peaceful coexistence.
Gu Xuewu is a professor of political science, a tenured chair professor of political science and international relations at the University of Bonn, Germany, and concurrently serves as the director of the Global Research Center.
Deutsche Welle is committed to providing you with objective and neutral news reports, as well as comments and analysis from multiple perspectives. The comments and analysis in the article only represent the personal position of the author or expert.
©️ 2021Deutsche Welle’s copyright notice: All content in this article is protected by copyright law. Without special authorization from Deutsche Welle, you may not use it without authorization. Any misconduct will lead to recovery.
.