Press
Read the latest news and commentary from the German Marshall Fund.
For press inquiries, please contact us by email at [email protected].
Or contact the press officers directly:
Chris Schaefer, Press Officer, at +1 202 642 7727 or [email protected]
Angelina Sutalo, Senior Press Officer, at +32 486 514 479 or [email protected].
For press inquiries, please contact us by email at [email protected].
Or contact the press officers directly:
Chris Schaefer, Press Officer, at +1 202 642 7727 or [email protected]
Angelina Sutalo, Senior Press Officer, at +32 486 514 479 or [email protected].
The Latest
Search
“ “The conflict in Ukraine shifted things,” said Andrew Small, a senior trans-Atlantic fellow with the German Marshall Fund’s Asia Program. “There is more appreciation now [in the EU] of how Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic are more intertwined.” [...] Large-scale Chinese investments in critical European infrastructure are also believed to carry security risks. Chinese investments in European ports have been particularly controversial because ports are counted as strategic assets. Some of these European ports are, naturally, logistical hubs for NATO equipment. “How could China use its control of critical European infrastructure in a wartime scenario? That’s a relevant question and a military scenario that needs to be taken into account while planning a China strategy,” added Small, of the German Marshall Fund.”
“ But the strategy paper confirmed a shift. It did not talk of hope of “Wandel durch Handel“ (change through trade), once a motto of the Merkel era. “De-risking is urgently needed,” the document said, using the now standard language of EU and American officials when referring to the dangers of over-reliance on economic ties with China. It echoed the EU’s labelling of China as a “systemic rival” and said China’s friendly relations with Russia had “direct security implications for Germany”. It warned that military escalation by China in the Taiwan Strait would “affect German and European interests”. The paper promised that Germany would co-ordinate “more closely” with its partners in the EU on China matters. It did mention a relationship of trust: with America. Andrew Small of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, a research centre, calls the language “markedly different from where we were with Merkel and the way she was willing to frame things”. Business decisions Mr Small says that, though large German firms have expressed support for the strategy, “they haven’t jumped in to embrace it”. They have much at stake. According to the Rhodium Group, a research firm, Germany’s three big carmakers—BMW, Daimler and Volkswagen—plus BASF, a chemicals giant, accounted for more than one-third of all European direct investment in China between 2018 and 2021. But the paper is softer than a version that was leaked in November: no more talk of “stress tests” of German companies that are heavily involved in China, or making them “specify and summarise relevant China-related developments”. De-risking, it appears, will be up to businesses themselves. Some of them may not share the government’s sense of urgency.”
“ “The fact that he’s a high-level diplomat means it will attract attention from countries around the world,” said Bonnie Glaser, director of the Asia programme at the German Marshall Fund. “People will make judgements and draw their own conclusions.” [...] Speculation has flourished about the cause, everything from alleged extramarital affairs to political infighting to genuine illness. Construction near the Foreign Ministry reportedly suggested that Qin might need accessible entries. Abruptly cancelled Chinese delegations to the US hint at political turmoil. “It shows how people are just groping for anything,” said Glaser.”
“ Pese al optimismo de la política, Jacob Kirkegaard, del centro de estudios German Marshall Fund, considera que Global Gateway no es una alternativa sólida a la Nueva Ruta de la Seda china y no puede competir con esa iniciativa de Pekín. Afirma que la estrategia de la Unión Europea no está teniendo los resultados concretos necesarios para ser “una competidora seria” ante la Nueva Ruta de la Seda. Para Kirkegaard, el “problema” es que el club comunitario “no suele querer prestar” para que se puedan realizar los proyectos que los países de bajos ingresos desean construir. Alberto Ángel Fernández, Ralph Gonsalves, Charles Michel y Ursula von der Leyen, en la cumbre de la CELACEFE/EPA/Olivier Matthys No obstante, el analista manifiesta que Global Gateway continuará existiendo en el medio y largo plazo, pero “principalmente como postureo ético” del club comunitario. “Realmente no abaratará las infraestructuras para los mercados emergentes ni reducirá la influencia de la Nueva Ruta de la Seda china”, comenta sobre Global Gateway. En opinión de Kirkegaard, la repercusión de la Nueva Ruta de la Seda china disminuirá “debido a la menor voluntad china de financiarla, no a las acciones de la UE”. “La infraestructura de la Unión Europea seguirá siendo financiada principalmente a través del Banco Europeo de Inversiones en todo el mundo”, expone.”
Translated from
Spanish
