When it comes to Taiwan, Beijing is absolutely uncompromising. Any doubts about Chinese claims to the neighboring country are hyped up as a national affair. Oddly enough, however, this does not happen when it comes to territories that Russia occupied in the middle of the 19th century. At the time, these belonged to the Qing dynasty and even led to military disputes between Moscow and Beijing in the 1960s.
Fabian Peltsch takes us on a journey through Chinese history, which explains why China applies double standards. The realization: The fact that China is no longer arguing about the return of Russian territories but is beating the war drum ever louder when it comes to Taiwan points above all to the People’s Republic’s distorted self-image.
Meanwhile, Christian Domke-Seidel took a closer look at Chinese manufacturers’ presentations at the commercial vehicle version of the IAA in Hanover for us. His conclusion: Chinese manufacturers have also set their sights on this market.
As far as Xi Jinping is concerned, Taiwan should be fully integrated into mainland China by the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic in 2049 at the latest. This would finally heal the wound that the century of humiliation from 1839 to 1949 left in the collective consciousness of the Chinese people.
But why doesn’t China also demand the return of vast parts of Manchuria on the grounds of territorial integrity? These territories were once annexed by Russia in similarly unequal treaties during this humiliating period. Taiwan’s President William Lai recently raised this question. And added provocatively: “Russia is now at its weakest, right?”
Lai deliberately put his finger in the Chinese wound with his statement. After the Second Opium War (1856-1860), the Tsarist Empire – like the Western powers – had exploited the weak position of the ruling Qing dynasty and annexed territories in north-east China three times the size of Germany. It became clear in 1969 that China wanted these territories back, which led to military confrontations because the divided brother states could not agree on how the over 4,000-kilometer-long common border should be drawn.
It was not until July 2001 that the two countries signed a friendship treaty in which they renounced any territorial claims. Even then, China’s “old friend” Putin was sitting at the table, his counterpart was the head of state and party leader Jiang Zemin. However, official Chinese maps still use the old Chinese names for the cities that fell to Russia. “Rule the East,” as Vladivostok is called in English, is probably not so easy for the Chinese to say, even if the Chinese alternative does not necessarily radiate splendor and grandeur. In China, the city is called Haishenwai – Sea Cucumber Bay.
“In China, there is a particular historical sensitivity when it comes to territorial integrity, even though China is one of the few countries that managed to regain the most important territories it once lost in the 20th century.” These are the words of sinologist and historian Klaus Muehlhahn from Zeppelin University in Friedrichshafen. He has recently dealt extensively with the Qing period and its impact on the Chinese perception of history for his book “History of Modern China.”
“We are in a situation where North Korea, Russia and China are moving closer together. Beijing will not drive a wedge between them by suddenly asserting any territorial claims.” However, the historian does not rule out the possibility that this could still happen one day or that China could de facto reclaim the territories through its economic influence.
The fact that China is no longer discussing the return of Russian territories, but is beating the war drum ever louder when it comes to Taiwan, points above all to the People’s Republic’s distorted self-image.
The idea of a Chinese nation-state developed relatively late and under outside pressure. For a long time, the people of China saw themselves primarily as members of the respective ruling dynasty and not as citizens of a homogeneous cultural nation with thousands of years of history.
The Qing dynasty, to whose greatness today’s China relates, was not only a time of weakness, but also one in which the empire acted as an aggressor to the outside world and annexed large territories. “In the early phase of the dynasty, well before the often cited period of weakness, the Qing had one of the most powerful militaries in the world,” says Muehlhahn. More recent historiography accordingly treats the annexation of territories such as Xinjiang and Tibet as conquest campaigns that were accompanied by the subjugation and oppression of the respective peoples. “In this respect, the Qing were not much better than the foreign imperialists. Their campaigns definitely had a colonialist and expansive character of subjugation.”
For example, the Qing not only oppressed the Dzungar people on the periphery, but almost completely wiped them out. One could also argue that a colonial empire that was never decolonized lives on in today’s nation-state.
“So today’s China identifies with an imperial past that was actually actively shaped by a non-Chinese people, but by the Manchus, who founded the Qing dynasty. That makes things even more complicated,” says Mühlhahn. The Manchus were not so impressed by the radiance of Chinese-Confucian culture that they voluntarily and completely Sinicized themselves, says Muehlhahn.
Incidentally, the same also applies to the other conquered peoples. “This narrative is long outdated,” says Mühlhahn. “Even among Chinese historians, by the way, if you talk to them outside the propaganda.” According to Muehlhahn, the Manchu elite insisted on their peculiarities until the very end, and the Han were clearly subordinate to them. For example, marriages between Han and Manchu were only permitted in 1902, when the empire was already in sharp decline.
Mühlhahn’s verdict is clear: “For Beijing, history is a decisive form of legitimizing the system. And that is why this disastrous 19th century plays just as overriding a role as the imperial splendor of this regime. As the historical narrative says: The Communist Party has led China out of this disaster, only it can revive the glory of the imperial past and ensure China’s great rebirth in the present – and because the Party is the only force that can achieve this, it must continue to rule.”
However, China’s propaganda continues to propagate the country as the liberator of the world from imperialism. All in all, an unrivaled historical walk on eggshells. Anyone who disagrees with this is deemed guilty of “historical nihilism,” which can result in severe punishment in China.
This is another reason why it is an essential part of China expertise not to simply accept such narratives without reflection, says Muehlhahn. “Historical facts easily fall by the wayside when history is instrumentalized. That is why I believe it is important to counter the Chinese narrative with a more differentiated view of history.”
Chinese manufacturers are well represented at the IAA Transportation in Hanover. They impressively prove that electromobility also works with heavy loads, on construction sites and in public transport. And it has to, because the transport revolution also includes this sector.
Strict emissions standards force companies to adapt their logistics accordingly. Brands from the People’s Republic such as BYD, Windrose, Anhui Jianghuai Automobile (JAC) and Xiamen King Long also want to benefit from this. According to a study by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), Chinese manufacturers could gain up to eleven percent of the European market with their trucks and buses.
Manufacturers have different strategies for securing such a large slice of the pie. JAC, for example, focuses on regional partnerships. The company is well-established in China and can draw on a strong domestic market. With around 600,000 units produced in 2023, the company is among the top five in the Chinese commercial vehicle sector. In Europe, the manufacturer operates a design center in Turin.
If a company is interested in renewing or electrifying its fleet, JAC spends between three and twelve months with the customer to understand the applications down to the last detail and offer individual solutions. In the heavy-duty sector, the superstructures and detailed solutions are often crucial. The design center in Turin then implements the solutions.
“It’s not a Chinese truck. It’s a partnership between the European customer and us,” explains Oscar Yu, Deputy General Manager of JAC International, at the IAA Transportation. JAC has already won over renowned companies such as Carrefour, Heineken, Danone and Dachser in Spain and France.
Chinese truck manufacturer Windrose, on the other hand, is focusing on a global solution that can be launched on the market at a low price thanks to this scaling. The truck comes with a battery from China Aviation Lithium Battery (CALB) and provides a large capacity of 729 kilowatt-hours, allowing a range of 670 kilometers. The model costs around 250,000 dollars in the United States. “Our investments pay off after selling 10,000 trucks,” Windrose founder Han Wen said in an interview with the NZZ.
According to Han, Daimler already reaches this threshold at 500 units. However, Daimler does not comment on this. As with many Chinese car manufacturers, the aim is first to generate market share before considering returns. In June 2024, the company already had 5,000 pre-orders in the USA alone.
BYD is also represented at the IAA Transportation. The brand is currently booming. In the first half of 2024, the NEV specialist was the third-largest car manufacturer in the world. In the commercial sector, BYD wants to stand out by offering an electric solution for every use. This is also evident from the presentation at the trade fair – the EYT2.0, a special vehicle that transports containers or other trailers in ports, airports or large logistics centers.
King Long attracted much attention at the IAA Transportation with its Merry Combo. The luxurious coach won the Red Dot Design Award. However, the Xiamen-based company is also taking a step forward in terms of sales in Europe. After all, it is bringing its partner Digital Sustainable Transport (DST) along. It provides operational services for customers who opt for King Long’s electric commercial vehicles. This means, among other things, ensuring servicing, clarifying the charging options, providing leasing offers, and taking care of recycling or collection at the end of the life cycle. In short: DST takes care of everything that gives many fleet managers a headache when dealing with electric commercial vehicles.
The fact that Chinese manufacturers are now going on the offensive with their electric commercial vehicles in Europe is no coincidence, as Pinglu Kang, Executive Vice President of DST, emphasized at the IAA Transportation. “Europe’s electrification plans fit perfectly with our product portfolio.” He referred to the European Union’s (EU) roadmap for reducing CO2 emissions from heavy-duty vehicles, which has been set out since the beginning of 2024. They must fall by 45 percent between 2030 and 2034 compared to 2019, and by 65 percent (2035 to 2039) and 90 percent (from 2040) in the following years. Even stricter requirements apply to public transport. New city buses will have to have 90 percent lower emissions from 2030 and be completely (locally) emission-free from 2035.
The development of a corresponding charging infrastructure has long been underway. After all, an EU regulation already sets specific minimum targets. By 2030, Germany alone must have 314 truck charging stations. Every 60 to 100 kilometers along the country’s main motorways. The IAA Transportation shows that many Chinese models will also charge their batteries here.
Chinese scientist He Jiankui, who caused global outrage in 2018 when he created the first genetically modified babies, is openly considering moving to the United States to work on a gene treatment for Alzheimer’s disease.
He made global headlines six years ago when he manipulated the genetic material of two embryos to make them resistant to HIV. The intervention sparked ethical debates about the limits of genetic research. Although He claimed that the procedure was successful, there are considerable doubts about the effectiveness and safety of his experiments. Many scientists have criticized that the long-term effects of the interventions are unknown.
An investor from Silicon Valley has offered him money to found a company that develops gene therapies against Alzheimer’s disease, He said in an online roundtable organized by the science magazine MIT Technology Review.
He spent three years in prison for illegal medical practices following the 2018 scandal. Since his release in 2022, he has struggled to regain a foothold in science. Plans to work in Hong Kong fell through when his visa was revoked for allegedly providing false information. He currently runs a laboratory in Wuhan and has also opened a new facility in Sanya on Hainan, reportedly funded by American donors and Chinese companies.
The US-educated scientist studied at Rice University and conducted research at Stanford University. He has since decided to focus on Alzheimer’s research, as his mother is suffering from the disease.
He plans to use a new gene editing technique called base editing to introduce a genetic mutation into human embryos to protect against dementia. He emphasizes that he wants to continue his research, but appears to be reformed: He said his work would initially be limited to mice, monkeys and non-viable embryos. “The basic research can be completed in two years.”
He said that society decides when the technology will be used in human trials, adding that in 50 years, embryo editing will be as standard as IVF is today and all babies will be born without known diseases. “I believe society will realize that genetic editing improves human health.”
He used the CRISPR-Cas9 technique on the two babies he manipulated. This method allows targeted cuts to be made in the DNA in order to change genes. He removed the CCR5 gene from the babies to protect them against HIV. The procedure is known for its precision, but carries the risk of off-target effects, in other words unintended changes to the genetic material.
By contrast, base editing is an advanced technique that works without double-strand breaks in the DNA. Double-strand breaks are cracks in both DNA strands that can occur with CRISPR-Cas9, which can cause unintended changes.
Base editing involves the targeted modification of individual DNA building blocks, making it safer and more precise. While CRISPR-Cas9 works like a pair of scissors that cut the DNA, base editing works like a pencil that changes a single letter in the genetic code. This technique promises more precise interventions with fewer risks.
In the US, federal laws prohibit government funding of experiments on genetically modified embryos, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved genetic modifications in embryos for use on humans. After the He scandal, legislation in China was tightened to prevent unauthorized genetic experiments, leading to stricter controls and harsher penalties.
In the EU, national laws, as well as joint directives, regulate the manipulation of embryos. Most EU countries prohibit germline manipulation to prevent risks. Public and scientific debate on the ethical implications of gene editing remains intense in all three regions. Joern Petring
The world of sports has long been unable to get past China. Its market is too tempting for sports associations to avoid the People’s Republic as a venue for world championships or World Cup series. Consequently, China now hosts ski jumping and luge competitions, Formula 1 and motocross races. Over the weekend, the off-road machines of the world’s best cross-country riders whizzed past the grandstands in Shanghai at the Oriental Beauty Valley MXGP of China. The event marked the return of the series after a four-year break. Due to the Covid pandemic, the event in China was removed from the calendar in 2020. Chinese riders were also at the start. Although they finished in the last three places, they at least left their eliminated competitors behind them.
When it comes to Taiwan, Beijing is absolutely uncompromising. Any doubts about Chinese claims to the neighboring country are hyped up as a national affair. Oddly enough, however, this does not happen when it comes to territories that Russia occupied in the middle of the 19th century. At the time, these belonged to the Qing dynasty and even led to military disputes between Moscow and Beijing in the 1960s.
Fabian Peltsch takes us on a journey through Chinese history, which explains why China applies double standards. The realization: The fact that China is no longer arguing about the return of Russian territories but is beating the war drum ever louder when it comes to Taiwan points above all to the People’s Republic’s distorted self-image.
Meanwhile, Christian Domke-Seidel took a closer look at Chinese manufacturers’ presentations at the commercial vehicle version of the IAA in Hanover for us. His conclusion: Chinese manufacturers have also set their sights on this market.
As far as Xi Jinping is concerned, Taiwan should be fully integrated into mainland China by the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic in 2049 at the latest. This would finally heal the wound that the century of humiliation from 1839 to 1949 left in the collective consciousness of the Chinese people.
But why doesn’t China also demand the return of vast parts of Manchuria on the grounds of territorial integrity? These territories were once annexed by Russia in similarly unequal treaties during this humiliating period. Taiwan’s President William Lai recently raised this question. And added provocatively: “Russia is now at its weakest, right?”
Lai deliberately put his finger in the Chinese wound with his statement. After the Second Opium War (1856-1860), the Tsarist Empire – like the Western powers – had exploited the weak position of the ruling Qing dynasty and annexed territories in north-east China three times the size of Germany. It became clear in 1969 that China wanted these territories back, which led to military confrontations because the divided brother states could not agree on how the over 4,000-kilometer-long common border should be drawn.
It was not until July 2001 that the two countries signed a friendship treaty in which they renounced any territorial claims. Even then, China’s “old friend” Putin was sitting at the table, his counterpart was the head of state and party leader Jiang Zemin. However, official Chinese maps still use the old Chinese names for the cities that fell to Russia. “Rule the East,” as Vladivostok is called in English, is probably not so easy for the Chinese to say, even if the Chinese alternative does not necessarily radiate splendor and grandeur. In China, the city is called Haishenwai – Sea Cucumber Bay.
“In China, there is a particular historical sensitivity when it comes to territorial integrity, even though China is one of the few countries that managed to regain the most important territories it once lost in the 20th century.” These are the words of sinologist and historian Klaus Muehlhahn from Zeppelin University in Friedrichshafen. He has recently dealt extensively with the Qing period and its impact on the Chinese perception of history for his book “History of Modern China.”
“We are in a situation where North Korea, Russia and China are moving closer together. Beijing will not drive a wedge between them by suddenly asserting any territorial claims.” However, the historian does not rule out the possibility that this could still happen one day or that China could de facto reclaim the territories through its economic influence.
The fact that China is no longer discussing the return of Russian territories, but is beating the war drum ever louder when it comes to Taiwan, points above all to the People’s Republic’s distorted self-image.
The idea of a Chinese nation-state developed relatively late and under outside pressure. For a long time, the people of China saw themselves primarily as members of the respective ruling dynasty and not as citizens of a homogeneous cultural nation with thousands of years of history.
The Qing dynasty, to whose greatness today’s China relates, was not only a time of weakness, but also one in which the empire acted as an aggressor to the outside world and annexed large territories. “In the early phase of the dynasty, well before the often cited period of weakness, the Qing had one of the most powerful militaries in the world,” says Muehlhahn. More recent historiography accordingly treats the annexation of territories such as Xinjiang and Tibet as conquest campaigns that were accompanied by the subjugation and oppression of the respective peoples. “In this respect, the Qing were not much better than the foreign imperialists. Their campaigns definitely had a colonialist and expansive character of subjugation.”
For example, the Qing not only oppressed the Dzungar people on the periphery, but almost completely wiped them out. One could also argue that a colonial empire that was never decolonized lives on in today’s nation-state.
“So today’s China identifies with an imperial past that was actually actively shaped by a non-Chinese people, but by the Manchus, who founded the Qing dynasty. That makes things even more complicated,” says Mühlhahn. The Manchus were not so impressed by the radiance of Chinese-Confucian culture that they voluntarily and completely Sinicized themselves, says Muehlhahn.
Incidentally, the same also applies to the other conquered peoples. “This narrative is long outdated,” says Mühlhahn. “Even among Chinese historians, by the way, if you talk to them outside the propaganda.” According to Muehlhahn, the Manchu elite insisted on their peculiarities until the very end, and the Han were clearly subordinate to them. For example, marriages between Han and Manchu were only permitted in 1902, when the empire was already in sharp decline.
Mühlhahn’s verdict is clear: “For Beijing, history is a decisive form of legitimizing the system. And that is why this disastrous 19th century plays just as overriding a role as the imperial splendor of this regime. As the historical narrative says: The Communist Party has led China out of this disaster, only it can revive the glory of the imperial past and ensure China’s great rebirth in the present – and because the Party is the only force that can achieve this, it must continue to rule.”
However, China’s propaganda continues to propagate the country as the liberator of the world from imperialism. All in all, an unrivaled historical walk on eggshells. Anyone who disagrees with this is deemed guilty of “historical nihilism,” which can result in severe punishment in China.
This is another reason why it is an essential part of China expertise not to simply accept such narratives without reflection, says Muehlhahn. “Historical facts easily fall by the wayside when history is instrumentalized. That is why I believe it is important to counter the Chinese narrative with a more differentiated view of history.”
Chinese manufacturers are well represented at the IAA Transportation in Hanover. They impressively prove that electromobility also works with heavy loads, on construction sites and in public transport. And it has to, because the transport revolution also includes this sector.
Strict emissions standards force companies to adapt their logistics accordingly. Brands from the People’s Republic such as BYD, Windrose, Anhui Jianghuai Automobile (JAC) and Xiamen King Long also want to benefit from this. According to a study by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), Chinese manufacturers could gain up to eleven percent of the European market with their trucks and buses.
Manufacturers have different strategies for securing such a large slice of the pie. JAC, for example, focuses on regional partnerships. The company is well-established in China and can draw on a strong domestic market. With around 600,000 units produced in 2023, the company is among the top five in the Chinese commercial vehicle sector. In Europe, the manufacturer operates a design center in Turin.
If a company is interested in renewing or electrifying its fleet, JAC spends between three and twelve months with the customer to understand the applications down to the last detail and offer individual solutions. In the heavy-duty sector, the superstructures and detailed solutions are often crucial. The design center in Turin then implements the solutions.
“It’s not a Chinese truck. It’s a partnership between the European customer and us,” explains Oscar Yu, Deputy General Manager of JAC International, at the IAA Transportation. JAC has already won over renowned companies such as Carrefour, Heineken, Danone and Dachser in Spain and France.
Chinese truck manufacturer Windrose, on the other hand, is focusing on a global solution that can be launched on the market at a low price thanks to this scaling. The truck comes with a battery from China Aviation Lithium Battery (CALB) and provides a large capacity of 729 kilowatt-hours, allowing a range of 670 kilometers. The model costs around 250,000 dollars in the United States. “Our investments pay off after selling 10,000 trucks,” Windrose founder Han Wen said in an interview with the NZZ.
According to Han, Daimler already reaches this threshold at 500 units. However, Daimler does not comment on this. As with many Chinese car manufacturers, the aim is first to generate market share before considering returns. In June 2024, the company already had 5,000 pre-orders in the USA alone.
BYD is also represented at the IAA Transportation. The brand is currently booming. In the first half of 2024, the NEV specialist was the third-largest car manufacturer in the world. In the commercial sector, BYD wants to stand out by offering an electric solution for every use. This is also evident from the presentation at the trade fair – the EYT2.0, a special vehicle that transports containers or other trailers in ports, airports or large logistics centers.
King Long attracted much attention at the IAA Transportation with its Merry Combo. The luxurious coach won the Red Dot Design Award. However, the Xiamen-based company is also taking a step forward in terms of sales in Europe. After all, it is bringing its partner Digital Sustainable Transport (DST) along. It provides operational services for customers who opt for King Long’s electric commercial vehicles. This means, among other things, ensuring servicing, clarifying the charging options, providing leasing offers, and taking care of recycling or collection at the end of the life cycle. In short: DST takes care of everything that gives many fleet managers a headache when dealing with electric commercial vehicles.
The fact that Chinese manufacturers are now going on the offensive with their electric commercial vehicles in Europe is no coincidence, as Pinglu Kang, Executive Vice President of DST, emphasized at the IAA Transportation. “Europe’s electrification plans fit perfectly with our product portfolio.” He referred to the European Union’s (EU) roadmap for reducing CO2 emissions from heavy-duty vehicles, which has been set out since the beginning of 2024. They must fall by 45 percent between 2030 and 2034 compared to 2019, and by 65 percent (2035 to 2039) and 90 percent (from 2040) in the following years. Even stricter requirements apply to public transport. New city buses will have to have 90 percent lower emissions from 2030 and be completely (locally) emission-free from 2035.
The development of a corresponding charging infrastructure has long been underway. After all, an EU regulation already sets specific minimum targets. By 2030, Germany alone must have 314 truck charging stations. Every 60 to 100 kilometers along the country’s main motorways. The IAA Transportation shows that many Chinese models will also charge their batteries here.
Chinese scientist He Jiankui, who caused global outrage in 2018 when he created the first genetically modified babies, is openly considering moving to the United States to work on a gene treatment for Alzheimer’s disease.
He made global headlines six years ago when he manipulated the genetic material of two embryos to make them resistant to HIV. The intervention sparked ethical debates about the limits of genetic research. Although He claimed that the procedure was successful, there are considerable doubts about the effectiveness and safety of his experiments. Many scientists have criticized that the long-term effects of the interventions are unknown.
An investor from Silicon Valley has offered him money to found a company that develops gene therapies against Alzheimer’s disease, He said in an online roundtable organized by the science magazine MIT Technology Review.
He spent three years in prison for illegal medical practices following the 2018 scandal. Since his release in 2022, he has struggled to regain a foothold in science. Plans to work in Hong Kong fell through when his visa was revoked for allegedly providing false information. He currently runs a laboratory in Wuhan and has also opened a new facility in Sanya on Hainan, reportedly funded by American donors and Chinese companies.
The US-educated scientist studied at Rice University and conducted research at Stanford University. He has since decided to focus on Alzheimer’s research, as his mother is suffering from the disease.
He plans to use a new gene editing technique called base editing to introduce a genetic mutation into human embryos to protect against dementia. He emphasizes that he wants to continue his research, but appears to be reformed: He said his work would initially be limited to mice, monkeys and non-viable embryos. “The basic research can be completed in two years.”
He said that society decides when the technology will be used in human trials, adding that in 50 years, embryo editing will be as standard as IVF is today and all babies will be born without known diseases. “I believe society will realize that genetic editing improves human health.”
He used the CRISPR-Cas9 technique on the two babies he manipulated. This method allows targeted cuts to be made in the DNA in order to change genes. He removed the CCR5 gene from the babies to protect them against HIV. The procedure is known for its precision, but carries the risk of off-target effects, in other words unintended changes to the genetic material.
By contrast, base editing is an advanced technique that works without double-strand breaks in the DNA. Double-strand breaks are cracks in both DNA strands that can occur with CRISPR-Cas9, which can cause unintended changes.
Base editing involves the targeted modification of individual DNA building blocks, making it safer and more precise. While CRISPR-Cas9 works like a pair of scissors that cut the DNA, base editing works like a pencil that changes a single letter in the genetic code. This technique promises more precise interventions with fewer risks.
In the US, federal laws prohibit government funding of experiments on genetically modified embryos, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved genetic modifications in embryos for use on humans. After the He scandal, legislation in China was tightened to prevent unauthorized genetic experiments, leading to stricter controls and harsher penalties.
In the EU, national laws, as well as joint directives, regulate the manipulation of embryos. Most EU countries prohibit germline manipulation to prevent risks. Public and scientific debate on the ethical implications of gene editing remains intense in all three regions. Joern Petring
The world of sports has long been unable to get past China. Its market is too tempting for sports associations to avoid the People’s Republic as a venue for world championships or World Cup series. Consequently, China now hosts ski jumping and luge competitions, Formula 1 and motocross races. Over the weekend, the off-road machines of the world’s best cross-country riders whizzed past the grandstands in Shanghai at the Oriental Beauty Valley MXGP of China. The event marked the return of the series after a four-year break. Due to the Covid pandemic, the event in China was removed from the calendar in 2020. Chinese riders were also at the start. Although they finished in the last three places, they at least left their eliminated competitors behind them.
