I hope our readers in China had a wonderful 端午节 (Dragon Boat Festival), while we in Europe enjoyed an extended Pentecost weekend. With a shorter week ahead of us, let’s get right to it:
China’s steel is a problem for Europe. First, it is produced with state subsidies and in a way that is bad for the climate, only to end up on the European market at knockdown prices. This has nothing to do with fair competition, and certainly not with protecting the environment. But the EU wants to do something about it.
Tomorrow, Wednesday, the EU Parliament will vote on a carbon border adjustment mechanism. What experts call CBAM is intended, among other things, to prevent price dumping of climate-damaging Chinese steel. This sounds like a punitive mechanism and will probably be perceived as such in Beijing. Speaking with Amelie Richter, Green European politician Michael Bloss explains why this targeted price increase for Chinese imports makes sense for climate policy.
Our second analysis focuses on Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s trip through the Pacific. In the past few days, Beijing’s chief diplomat visited eight island nations in ten days – even a hardened Chinese travel group would probably have reached its limits here. And things didn’t go smoothly for Wang Yi, either.
The small island nations such as Samoa, Fiji and Micronesia reacted surprisingly cold to Beijing’s wooing – and thus answered a question that German and European politicians are also asking themselves: What is the best way to approach China? Perhaps not only Beijing, but even Brussels and Berlin will learn from Wang Yi’s trip.
Mr. Bloss, why does the EU need carbon border adjustment?
In the EU, we have a carbon pricing regime: the Emissions Trading System ETS. The industry will also be increasingly affected by its effects. We now fear that suppliers from outside the EU will enter our market with dumping prices, offering cheap but not climate-friendly steel. The price advantage of this less climate-conscious competition needs to be offset.
China has its own emissions trading system. Do you think the systems can become compatible at some point? After all, that would also simplify foreign trade.
China would have to have at least as effective a carbon pricing model or climate policy as we have in Europe. However, I believe that the Chinese People’s Republic is still a long way from achieving this. The standards still differ considerably. The requirements and the industries covered by the ETS are far behind those of the EU.
The carbon border adjustment, or CBAM, is to be gradually introduced starting in 2026. Do you have hopes that the EU will set an example with the border adjustment and that foreign countries will quickly adapt?
I think the CBAM is definitely exemplary. It’s the first time that we’ve looked in trade policy not only at the product as it reaches the border, but also at the manufacturing processes. We look at: What does the carbon footprint look like? That is something progressive and, in my opinion, a positive development for the global trading system.
Meanwhile, there are concerns in the industry about competitiveness in other markets. CBAM does not apply outside the EU. So here, products from the Far East would definitely have an advantage over the more eco-friendly EU goods.
Overall, we are facing a huge change in the industry, which has to become carbon-neutral. This is what was agreed in Paris. If German and European industry quickly becomes carbon-neutral, this will be more likely a competitive advantage for the future, also compared to China. Of course, the transition is always a bit more expensive when you switch from one production method to another. But there is also a lot of support, including financial ones. Obviously, there is a lot of uproar, especially from industry, because they are afraid that they will lose their free allocations in the ETS, because these are extremely lucrative. But this is a state that cannot continue. It has to be a system that incentivizes decarbonization. And the transformation process is strongly supported. That is a good deal for the industry.
Again, one point that causes debates is how to deal with exports after the introduction of CBAM to ensure that European products will not be at a disadvantage on the global market.
We need to find a system that is WTO compliant. Export support is not permitted by the World Trade Organization. We also need to find a system that does not lead to distortions. We in the European Parliament have now drafted a position that I think is good: Together with the EU Commission, we closely monitor whether the introduction of a CBAM will lead to such shifts and disadvantages on the global market. And if that is the case, we will take action.
What other disputes exist for the negotiations on CBAM in the EU institutions?
The following points are still open: How quickly will the border adjustment be introduced and how exactly? The EU Commission has proposed ten-percent steps from 2025 to 2035. We have now proposed 10 percent increments from 2025 to 2030 and then 20 percent increments. Others are proposing to not implement CBAM until 2028. The industry likes to talk about making the transition period even longer. So even longer than ten years. I think if we introduce the carbon border adjustment and still don’t know after ten years whether it will work or not, then we haven’t done it right.
There is the idea of so-called climate clubs. No carbon border adjustment would be needed for trade between club members, as all participating economies would commit to similarly strong emission reduction measures. Could China become a member?
Climate clubs are generally not a bad thing. However, the question is to what extent these clubs result in being exempt from CBAM. CBAM is a relatively precise system for looking at how much carbon emissions are present in a product. And these climate clubs tend to be loose associations where there is no equivalence of each country’s climate regime. A climate club could be considered a kind of precursor to a global climate protection system. But it has to be more than just a nice get-together.
Are there concerns that China or other countries will use loopholes to circumvent CBAM?
It will certainly be tried. But we can then also react to it. If there are loopholes, then we have to plug them. A new instrument will not run perfectly from the beginning. But if you only accept an instrument that runs perfectly from the start, then you’re actually saying that you don’t want it anyway. It all takes time. As for the vote, I simply wish that European politicians will have the confidence to start with something and then improve it if necessary, instead of being afraid of their own initiatives and then doing nothing at all.
Michael Bloss was elected to the European Parliament in 2019. He is a full member of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and a substitute member of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety.
Samoa, Tonga, Vanuatu, and lastly, picturesque Dili in Timor-Leste – who wouldn’t love to go on such a tour, even as a business trip? But when China’s foreign minister returned to Beijing on Monday, he did not exactly look back on a dream trip. On the contrary.
Wang Yi recently visited eight Pacific island nations: the Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, and Timor-Leste. He carried a clear mission in his luggage: To bind the islands in the Southwest Pacific closely to China. It would have been a geopolitical coup to extend China’s sphere of influence to the strategically important states.
For Malcolm Davis of the renowned Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Wang’s trip represents a major policy initiative by Beijing to create a Chinese sphere of influence in the Southwest Pacific. “All at the expense of the security interests of the United States, Australia, and New Zealand,” Davis told China.Table.
Everything went according to plan on the first three stops – the Solomon Islands, Kiribati and Samoa. But the diplomatic fiasco was waiting in Fiji, Wang’s fourth stop in the South Seas: In its capital Suva, he wanted to sign a regional trade and security agreement at the “Second Foreign Ministers’ Meeting with Pacific Island Countries”. According to a leaked draft of the “Memorandum of Understanding on a Common Development Vision,” China offered millions in financial aid to the island states, as well as the prospect of a free trade agreement and extensive access to domestic markets. So far, so good.
But in exchange for the boons offered, Beijing wanted to be involved in such things as police training and the expansion of the national Internet and cybersecurity in the Pacific states. The list of demands went even further. China wanted to gain influence over the education sector – as well as greater access to the region’s mineral resources. Analyst Davis has clear words for this: “This is China’s plan to build an imperial sphere of influence throughout the Southwest Pacific and ultimately control the societies and economies of these small states.”
Even Wang’s demeanor during his tour showed China’s desire for control. Several journalists reported that they were not allowed to ask questions at the press conferences. Some were even pushed aside by Chinese officials. This brusque behavior apparently went so far that a representative of the Pacific states had to remind the Chinese delegation that they were only guests – and not hosts of the joint meeting.
And a look at the leaked draft agreement reminded some of China’s widely noted “security agreement” with the Solomon Islands, which was signed just a few weeks earlier (China.Table reported). When necessary and with the Solomon Islands’ consent, it allows China to “make ship visits to, carry out logistical replacement in, and have stopover and transition in the Solomon Islands”. This would also apply to Chinese forces – and is thus the legal basis for Chinese security and naval operations. Consequently, experts believe that China will use the agreement to establish a base in the Solomon Islands.
The draft agreement with the eight Pacific islands once again contains deliberately vague security aspects, notes analyst Davis, explaining that Beijing could, for example, send the People’s Armed Police without further delay as part of police assistance. However, this would more likely be the army, as the People’s Armed Police is a branch of the People’s Liberation Army. And just like that, China would be on the scene with its military. In addition, part of Beijing’s plan is said to include specific investments in ports and airports to gain better access. And with this, the white hulls of the Chinese Coast Guard and the gray hulls of the People’s Liberation Army would quickly follow, warns Davis.
Military strategists have long viewed the Pacific island nations as an important hub between the US foreign territory of Guam and its ally Australia. But the location also suits China’s geostrategic ambitions: In keeping with its 1951 island chain strategy, Beijing would manage to extend its influence beyond the so-called first island chain of Taiwan, the Koreas, and Japan. In addition, China would occupy the key SLOC (Sea Line of Communication) between Australia and the United States. Sea lines are essential for trade and logistics, but also the deployment of naval forces.
Unsurprisingly, China’s advance into the South Seas draws sharp criticism, especially from the United States and its allies. In a debate in the European Parliament on Monday evening, MEPs warned of China’s growing influence in the region. In light of the Ukraine crisis, the EU’s strategy in the Indo-Pacific has become even more relevant to guarantee security and peace in the region, Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement Olivér Várhelyi said at the plenary session in Strasbourg, speaking on behalf of Josep Borrell, the EU’s High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs. In this context, cooperation with countries in the region, for example within the framework of “Global Gateway” (China.Table reported), would have to be prioritized, emphasized Green Party European politician Reinhard Buetikofer.
A report by the EU Parliament on the security situation in the Pacific, which will be voted on Tuesday, reads similarly. In it, the European Parliament warns not only of an increasing military presence of the People’s Republic in the Pacific. The State Department in Washington also accuses Beijing of “shadowy deals”. Australia, as usual, warns of China’s growing influence in the region. And New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says the region does not need China’s security assistance.
China, in turn, accuses the US of pursuing a hegemonic mentality and addresses the island nations with its own message. Wang tried to ease concerns. Beijing would have no interest in a geopolitical battle for influence in the Pacific. “China supports Pacific Island Countries in strengthening security cooperation and working together to address regional security challenges.” Their nations are sovereign and independent countries “and not anyone’s backyard,” Wang said.
But the island nations apparently do not want to be instrumentalized as pawns in the global power struggle between China and the USA. And so the president of the Federated States of Micronesia appealed to 22 Pacific heads of state in a letter. In it, David Panuelo warned that Beijing’s draft agreement would pull the island nations “very close into Beijing’s orbit”. Signing such an agreement would not only affect the sovereignty of the Pacific island states, but could also spark a new Cold War amid tensions between China and the West.
Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, the Prime Minister of Samoa, said there had not been enough time to consider the agreement. Henry Puna, Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum, told the Chinese Foreign Minister on camera where the region’s priorities lie, namely in the fight against rising sea levels. For the inhabitants of the island states, it is already a threat, and the very existence of the islands is at stake. Puna did not need to mention that China is the world’s biggest carbon emitter.
Fiji’s Prime Minister Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama summed it up by saying, “The Pacific needs genuine partners, not superpowers that are super-focussed on power.”
For the time being, at least, the Pacific islands are the big winners: Together, the eight states have about as many inhabitants as the German state of Bavaria, but thanks to their unity, they have successfully made themselves heard by a seemingly overpowering China. And not only there: Australia’s new Foreign Minister Penny Wong also set off for Fiji at the end of the week. She announced, “we will listen because we care what the Pacific has to say”. She also promised lasting help in the fight against climate change and better job opportunities in Australia for Pacific workers. But sustained success requires a long-term commitment.
Because something else should be clear: China will not be swayed by the setback. At any rate, Beijing appeared resolute: Not every meeting has to end in an agreement, the foreign ministry spokesman explained. The big deal may have failed for now, but at least Wang was able to sign several bilateral agreements during his trip.
And this is where China will continue: In bilateral negotiations, China has much greater leverage. And Beijing knows only too well how to use its power and influence in direct exchanges with smaller countries.
The Commissioner of the Chinese Foreign Ministry in Hong Kong has criticized the behavior of Western diplomats in Hong Kong. In a letter released on Sunday, the commissioner’s office expressed its “strong disapproval and firm opposition”. “In disregard of China’s solemn position and advance warning, your office repeated the wrong deeds of last year and insisted on posting misleading words about the June 4 incident on the social media accounts of your office on June 4.” On Saturday, the consulates of the United States, Finland and the European Union had placed lit candles in the windows of their Hong Kong offices to commemorate the June 4 Tiananmen massacre in Beijing 33 years ago. Images of it were then uploaded to their social media pages.
Hong Kong police also cracked down on any public vigil commemorating the Tiananmen massacre on Saturday. Numerous people were stopped and searched, and several were arrested. Commemoration of the Beijing massacre 33 years ago is illegal in Hong Kong. Democratic activist Yu Wai Pan of the League of Social Democrats is said to be among the arrested, according to AFP.
To this day, the memory of the events of 1989 is forbidden in China, and a historical reappraisal has never taken place. The leadership of the Communist Party is making great efforts to erase the massacre from the collective memory. No information is found in history books, and references to it are erased from the Chinese Internet and online platforms. Outside China, symbols like the “Tank Man” changed the world (China.Table reported).
For decades, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region was the only place in China where commemoration of the victims of the Tiananmen massacre was still tolerated. Until two years ago, tens of thousands of people held an annual vigil in Victoria Park to commemorate the dead. Last Friday, Hong Kong authorities had warned that people taking part in an “unauthorized gathering” could face up to five years in prison. Large parts of Victoria Park were closed.
A massive police presence was seen around the park on Saturday, and many people were stopped and searched by officers. Near Victoria Park, dozens of people spread out and turned on the flashlights of their smartphones – whereupon police used megaphones to order them to turn them back off. The legal basis for the authorities’ harsh approach is the National Security Act. It allows the authorities to take action against all activities that, by their own definition, threaten China’s national security.
The US criticized China for banning commemorative events in Hong Kong. “33 years have passed since the world watched brave demonstrators and bystanders peacefully demand democracy in Tiananmen Square,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken posted on Twitter. “Despite the removal of memorials and attempts to erase history, we honor their memory by promoting respect for human rights wherever threatened.”
Meanwhile, some 1,000 people gathered in Taiwan’s capital Taipei on Saturday to commemorate the events of 1989. Many of the participants were immigrants and refugees from Hong Kong. The familiar protest chant “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times” (光復香港，時代革命) echoed over and over in Cantonese across the square. Taiwanese organizers tried their best to focus the event on universal values such as democracy and freedom rather than, for instance, a shared Chinese heritage or historical responsibility for Mainland China. The evening was organized by a coalition of Taiwanese NGOs led by the New School for Democracy (華人民主書院).
The culmination of the event was the erection of an approximately three-meter-tall 3D-printed copy of the “Pillar of Shame” statue by Danish artist Jens Galschiøt. The original had been removed from the Hong Kong University campus in a cloak-and-dagger operation last December. In a video message, Galschiøt explained that while he would gladly have brought the original to Taiwan, it was still being held by Hong Kong authorities to this day.
The Chinese army brutally crushed protests in Beijing on June 4, 1989. For weeks, students especially had peacefully protested for political change and measures against government corruption. Between 300 and 1,000 people were believed to have been killed, possibly more. David Demes/rad
Several Covid restrictions are to be lifted in Beijing in the coming week. Starting Monday, people will be allowed to go back to work and restaurants will be allowed to receive guests provided they have tested negative three days earlier. Schools are also to reopen the following Monday. This was announced by local authorities on Sunday. Today, Tuesday and Wednesday, the nationwide exam for university applicants is to be held. The exam is also known as Gaokao.
Since the end of April, nearly 2,000 Covid infections have been confirmed in Beijing. Consequently, restaurants, schools and tourist attractions were closed, public transport drastically restricted, and people were ordered to work from home (China.Table reported).
In its fight against the pandemic, China pursues a strict zero-covid strategy. For instance, a months-long lockdown was imposed on Shanghai. But even in the economic metropolis, the strict curfews were recently largely lifted again (China.Table reported). However, hundreds of thousands of people who are considered to be in contact with infected individuals remain quarantined. rad
Tanja Goenner will be the first woman to head the Federation of German Industries. The CDU politician and former State Minister for Baden-Wuerttemberg is to take over the vacant position at Germany’s most influential industry association starting this summer. Her predecessor Joachim Lang left the post on May 31.
Goenner plans to put greater emphasis on sustainability for the association. “The transformation to carbon neutrality, the challenges in the international context and acceptance in society” are what the 52-year-old sees as the main tasks in her new role. In her current job as spokeswoman for the board of the German Corporation for International Cooperation GmbH (GIZ), Goenner has already advocated for a green reconstruction of the global economy after the Covid pandemic. She frequently stresses that economic policy must always be climate policy as well.
Gönner has headed the GIZ since 2012. In a press release, she stated that she had found her time at GIZ very enriching, but that she now wanted to pursue new career paths after ten years. GIZ was also her first major experience with China: GIZ operates a large office in Beijing and is active throughout the country.
Her new job will see her dealing with China more than ever before. The BDI is an important pacesetter in Germany’s China policy. This is demonstrated by association decisions in 2019 that still have an impact today. At that time, the BDI published demands on China that struck a critical tone toward Beijing for the first time. Since then, the country has also been regarded as a “systemic competitor,” no longer just a partner. This change of course has ushered in a shift in German policy: Since “even the BDI,” as it is now often put, complains about its members’ dependence on a single market, even the traditionally pro-business German government could distance itself more.
Born in 1969 in Sigmaringen, Tanja Goenner began her career after school with an apprenticeship as a legal officer. She then studied law at the Eberhard Karls University in Tuebingen and, after passing her state exam and completing her legal clerkship, worked for a law firm.
Alongside her legal career, she early on also pursued a political one. In 1986, she joined the Junge Union (Young Union of Germany), and has been a member of the CDU since 1987, including serving on the national board from 2000 to 2012. Between 2002 and 2004, she was a member of the German Bundestag.
In 2004, she was appointed Minister of Social Affairs in Baden-Wuerttemberg. From February 2010 to May 2011, Tanja Goenner served as Minister for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Transport in the state of Baden-Wurttemberg. The appointment of Goenner to the BDI leadership is expected to take place at the meeting of the Presidium and Executive Board of the BDI on June 20.
Have you been struggling to learn the Chinese language for a while now? In the beginning, you may have enthusiastically downloaded a learning app. But when you wanted to show off your language skills on your next visit to a Chinese restaurant, it turned out that this strategy wasn’t the best one. Because instead of eloquently ordering the check in Chinese (买单！Mǎidān! “Check, please!” – literally “buying the bill”), you pronounced it wrong and turned yourself into an “egg vendor” (卖蛋！Màidàn! “Eggs for sale!”).
It is hardly easy, though! Not only the pronunciation, but also many of the characters in Chinese seem to be identical. Keep calm, take a deep breath and simply let off some linguistic steam. And do it with eggs! Eggs are a great way to curse in Chinese. Here’s a quick guide!
In China, the egg-beginner variant for kid-glove swearing is 笨蛋 bèndàn (“stupid egg”), which means “idiot,” “dimwit,” or “dumbass,” and is also sometimes used playfully. It is followed by 傻蛋 shǎdàn (“stupid egg” – “fool, numbskull”), which is already a touch higher on the insult scale. If the Chinese really get into a grouchy mood, they reach into their linguistic bag of tricks for the “bad” or “rotten egg” (坏蛋 huàidàn “bastard, scoundrel”). And if the blood gets really boiling, they start throwing “mixed eggs” (混蛋 húndàn “bastard”) at each other.
The pinnacle of egg-related swear words is the “wangba egg” (王八蛋 wángbādàn “shithead, asshole”). The latter, by the way, is – who would have guessed it – a swear word with a long tradition that goes back to Confucius, so to speak. It originally alludes to the concept of the eight Confucian virtues (八德 bā dé or 八端 bā duān). In ancient China, it was equivalent to verbal ostracism to accuse someone of having abandoned or “forgotten” all eight morals (忘八端 wàng bā duān). Over time, in the heat of word-fighting, the term has mellowed to its current form – 端 duān became 蛋 dàn and the initial 忘八蛋 wàngbādàn later became the similar-sounding 王八蛋 wángbādàn.
But back to the egg fight: In Chinese, slackers are also referred to as eggs, namely as “lazy” or “work-shy eggs” (懒蛋 lǎndàn). Cowards, on the other hand, are often called “soft-shell egg” (软蛋 ruǎndàn). And those who are unlucky are known as 倒霉蛋 dǎoméidàn (“bad luck egg” or “unlucky egg”). Those who are then verbally outmatched or are otherwise beaten are proverbially “finish egg” (完蛋 wándàn). As a true egg, however, one does not simply crawl away, of course, but “rolls” away in style (滚蛋 gǔndàn – literally “rolling egg; rolling eggs” – a synonym for “getting lost” or for shouting “Fuck off! Get the hell out of here!”).
Finally, let us wrap it up with two egg-cellent Chinese expressions: “If many chickens come together, they do not lay eggs” (鸡多不下蛋 jī duō bú xià dān – meaning: “many cooks spoil the broth”). And as a motivator to start the week with: Don’t always “look for a bone in the egg” (鸡蛋里挑骨头 jīdàn lǐ tiāo gǔtou – meaning: “always find a fly in the ointment” or “always have something to complain about”). This brings us to the end of our linguistic therapy exercise and leaves us with a clear head for new learning impulses.
Verena Menzel runs the online language school New Chinese in Beijing.
I hope our readers in China had a wonderful 端午节 (Dragon Boat Festival), while we in Europe enjoyed an extended Pentecost weekend. With a shorter week ahead of us, let’s get right to it:
China’s steel is a problem for Europe. First, it is produced with state subsidies and in a way that is bad for the climate, only to end up on the European market at knockdown prices. This has nothing to do with fair competition, and certainly not with protecting the environment. But the EU wants to do something about it.
Tomorrow, Wednesday, the EU Parliament will vote on a carbon border adjustment mechanism. What experts call CBAM is intended, among other things, to prevent price dumping of climate-damaging Chinese steel. This sounds like a punitive mechanism and will probably be perceived as such in Beijing. Speaking with Amelie Richter, Green European politician Michael Bloss explains why this targeted price increase for Chinese imports makes sense for climate policy.
Our second analysis focuses on Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s trip through the Pacific. In the past few days, Beijing’s chief diplomat visited eight island nations in ten days – even a hardened Chinese travel group would probably have reached its limits here. And things didn’t go smoothly for Wang Yi, either.
The small island nations such as Samoa, Fiji and Micronesia reacted surprisingly cold to Beijing’s wooing – and thus answered a question that German and European politicians are also asking themselves: What is the best way to approach China? Perhaps not only Beijing, but even Brussels and Berlin will learn from Wang Yi’s trip.
Mr. Bloss, why does the EU need carbon border adjustment?
In the EU, we have a carbon pricing regime: the Emissions Trading System ETS. The industry will also be increasingly affected by its effects. We now fear that suppliers from outside the EU will enter our market with dumping prices, offering cheap but not climate-friendly steel. The price advantage of this less climate-conscious competition needs to be offset.
China has its own emissions trading system. Do you think the systems can become compatible at some point? After all, that would also simplify foreign trade.
China would have to have at least as effective a carbon pricing model or climate policy as we have in Europe. However, I believe that the Chinese People’s Republic is still a long way from achieving this. The standards still differ considerably. The requirements and the industries covered by the ETS are far behind those of the EU.
The carbon border adjustment, or CBAM, is to be gradually introduced starting in 2026. Do you have hopes that the EU will set an example with the border adjustment and that foreign countries will quickly adapt?
I think the CBAM is definitely exemplary. It’s the first time that we’ve looked in trade policy not only at the product as it reaches the border, but also at the manufacturing processes. We look at: What does the carbon footprint look like? That is something progressive and, in my opinion, a positive development for the global trading system.
Meanwhile, there are concerns in the industry about competitiveness in other markets. CBAM does not apply outside the EU. So here, products from the Far East would definitely have an advantage over the more eco-friendly EU goods.
Overall, we are facing a huge change in the industry, which has to become carbon-neutral. This is what was agreed in Paris. If German and European industry quickly becomes carbon-neutral, this will be more likely a competitive advantage for the future, also compared to China. Of course, the transition is always a bit more expensive when you switch from one production method to another. But there is also a lot of support, including financial ones. Obviously, there is a lot of uproar, especially from industry, because they are afraid that they will lose their free allocations in the ETS, because these are extremely lucrative. But this is a state that cannot continue. It has to be a system that incentivizes decarbonization. And the transformation process is strongly supported. That is a good deal for the industry.
Again, one point that causes debates is how to deal with exports after the introduction of CBAM to ensure that European products will not be at a disadvantage on the global market.
We need to find a system that is WTO compliant. Export support is not permitted by the World Trade Organization. We also need to find a system that does not lead to distortions. We in the European Parliament have now drafted a position that I think is good: Together with the EU Commission, we closely monitor whether the introduction of a CBAM will lead to such shifts and disadvantages on the global market. And if that is the case, we will take action.
What other disputes exist for the negotiations on CBAM in the EU institutions?
The following points are still open: How quickly will the border adjustment be introduced and how exactly? The EU Commission has proposed ten-percent steps from 2025 to 2035. We have now proposed 10 percent increments from 2025 to 2030 and then 20 percent increments. Others are proposing to not implement CBAM until 2028. The industry likes to talk about making the transition period even longer. So even longer than ten years. I think if we introduce the carbon border adjustment and still don’t know after ten years whether it will work or not, then we haven’t done it right.
There is the idea of so-called climate clubs. No carbon border adjustment would be needed for trade between club members, as all participating economies would commit to similarly strong emission reduction measures. Could China become a member?
Climate clubs are generally not a bad thing. However, the question is to what extent these clubs result in being exempt from CBAM. CBAM is a relatively precise system for looking at how much carbon emissions are present in a product. And these climate clubs tend to be loose associations where there is no equivalence of each country’s climate regime. A climate club could be considered a kind of precursor to a global climate protection system. But it has to be more than just a nice get-together.
Are there concerns that China or other countries will use loopholes to circumvent CBAM?
It will certainly be tried. But we can then also react to it. If there are loopholes, then we have to plug them. A new instrument will not run perfectly from the beginning. But if you only accept an instrument that runs perfectly from the start, then you’re actually saying that you don’t want it anyway. It all takes time. As for the vote, I simply wish that European politicians will have the confidence to start with something and then improve it if necessary, instead of being afraid of their own initiatives and then doing nothing at all.
Michael Bloss was elected to the European Parliament in 2019. He is a full member of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and a substitute member of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety.
Samoa, Tonga, Vanuatu, and lastly, picturesque Dili in Timor-Leste – who wouldn’t love to go on such a tour, even as a business trip? But when China’s foreign minister returned to Beijing on Monday, he did not exactly look back on a dream trip. On the contrary.
Wang Yi recently visited eight Pacific island nations: the Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, and Timor-Leste. He carried a clear mission in his luggage: To bind the islands in the Southwest Pacific closely to China. It would have been a geopolitical coup to extend China’s sphere of influence to the strategically important states.
For Malcolm Davis of the renowned Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Wang’s trip represents a major policy initiative by Beijing to create a Chinese sphere of influence in the Southwest Pacific. “All at the expense of the security interests of the United States, Australia, and New Zealand,” Davis told China.Table.
Everything went according to plan on the first three stops – the Solomon Islands, Kiribati and Samoa. But the diplomatic fiasco was waiting in Fiji, Wang’s fourth stop in the South Seas: In its capital Suva, he wanted to sign a regional trade and security agreement at the “Second Foreign Ministers’ Meeting with Pacific Island Countries”. According to a leaked draft of the “Memorandum of Understanding on a Common Development Vision,” China offered millions in financial aid to the island states, as well as the prospect of a free trade agreement and extensive access to domestic markets. So far, so good.
But in exchange for the boons offered, Beijing wanted to be involved in such things as police training and the expansion of the national Internet and cybersecurity in the Pacific states. The list of demands went even further. China wanted to gain influence over the education sector – as well as greater access to the region’s mineral resources. Analyst Davis has clear words for this: “This is China’s plan to build an imperial sphere of influence throughout the Southwest Pacific and ultimately control the societies and economies of these small states.”
Even Wang’s demeanor during his tour showed China’s desire for control. Several journalists reported that they were not allowed to ask questions at the press conferences. Some were even pushed aside by Chinese officials. This brusque behavior apparently went so far that a representative of the Pacific states had to remind the Chinese delegation that they were only guests – and not hosts of the joint meeting.
And a look at the leaked draft agreement reminded some of China’s widely noted “security agreement” with the Solomon Islands, which was signed just a few weeks earlier (China.Table reported). When necessary and with the Solomon Islands’ consent, it allows China to “make ship visits to, carry out logistical replacement in, and have stopover and transition in the Solomon Islands”. This would also apply to Chinese forces – and is thus the legal basis for Chinese security and naval operations. Consequently, experts believe that China will use the agreement to establish a base in the Solomon Islands.
The draft agreement with the eight Pacific islands once again contains deliberately vague security aspects, notes analyst Davis, explaining that Beijing could, for example, send the People’s Armed Police without further delay as part of police assistance. However, this would more likely be the army, as the People’s Armed Police is a branch of the People’s Liberation Army. And just like that, China would be on the scene with its military. In addition, part of Beijing’s plan is said to include specific investments in ports and airports to gain better access. And with this, the white hulls of the Chinese Coast Guard and the gray hulls of the People’s Liberation Army would quickly follow, warns Davis.
Military strategists have long viewed the Pacific island nations as an important hub between the US foreign territory of Guam and its ally Australia. But the location also suits China’s geostrategic ambitions: In keeping with its 1951 island chain strategy, Beijing would manage to extend its influence beyond the so-called first island chain of Taiwan, the Koreas, and Japan. In addition, China would occupy the key SLOC (Sea Line of Communication) between Australia and the United States. Sea lines are essential for trade and logistics, but also the deployment of naval forces.
Unsurprisingly, China’s advance into the South Seas draws sharp criticism, especially from the United States and its allies. In a debate in the European Parliament on Monday evening, MEPs warned of China’s growing influence in the region. In light of the Ukraine crisis, the EU’s strategy in the Indo-Pacific has become even more relevant to guarantee security and peace in the region, Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement Olivér Várhelyi said at the plenary session in Strasbourg, speaking on behalf of Josep Borrell, the EU’s High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs. In this context, cooperation with countries in the region, for example within the framework of “Global Gateway” (China.Table reported), would have to be prioritized, emphasized Green Party European politician Reinhard Buetikofer.
A report by the EU Parliament on the security situation in the Pacific, which will be voted on Tuesday, reads similarly. In it, the European Parliament warns not only of an increasing military presence of the People’s Republic in the Pacific. The State Department in Washington also accuses Beijing of “shadowy deals”. Australia, as usual, warns of China’s growing influence in the region. And New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says the region does not need China’s security assistance.
China, in turn, accuses the US of pursuing a hegemonic mentality and addresses the island nations with its own message. Wang tried to ease concerns. Beijing would have no interest in a geopolitical battle for influence in the Pacific. “China supports Pacific Island Countries in strengthening security cooperation and working together to address regional security challenges.” Their nations are sovereign and independent countries “and not anyone’s backyard,” Wang said.
But the island nations apparently do not want to be instrumentalized as pawns in the global power struggle between China and the USA. And so the president of the Federated States of Micronesia appealed to 22 Pacific heads of state in a letter. In it, David Panuelo warned that Beijing’s draft agreement would pull the island nations “very close into Beijing’s orbit”. Signing such an agreement would not only affect the sovereignty of the Pacific island states, but could also spark a new Cold War amid tensions between China and the West.
Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, the Prime Minister of Samoa, said there had not been enough time to consider the agreement. Henry Puna, Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum, told the Chinese Foreign Minister on camera where the region’s priorities lie, namely in the fight against rising sea levels. For the inhabitants of the island states, it is already a threat, and the very existence of the islands is at stake. Puna did not need to mention that China is the world’s biggest carbon emitter.
Fiji’s Prime Minister Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama summed it up by saying, “The Pacific needs genuine partners, not superpowers that are super-focussed on power.”
For the time being, at least, the Pacific islands are the big winners: Together, the eight states have about as many inhabitants as the German state of Bavaria, but thanks to their unity, they have successfully made themselves heard by a seemingly overpowering China. And not only there: Australia’s new Foreign Minister Penny Wong also set off for Fiji at the end of the week. She announced, “we will listen because we care what the Pacific has to say”. She also promised lasting help in the fight against climate change and better job opportunities in Australia for Pacific workers. But sustained success requires a long-term commitment.
Because something else should be clear: China will not be swayed by the setback. At any rate, Beijing appeared resolute: Not every meeting has to end in an agreement, the foreign ministry spokesman explained. The big deal may have failed for now, but at least Wang was able to sign several bilateral agreements during his trip.
And this is where China will continue: In bilateral negotiations, China has much greater leverage. And Beijing knows only too well how to use its power and influence in direct exchanges with smaller countries.
The Commissioner of the Chinese Foreign Ministry in Hong Kong has criticized the behavior of Western diplomats in Hong Kong. In a letter released on Sunday, the commissioner’s office expressed its “strong disapproval and firm opposition”. “In disregard of China’s solemn position and advance warning, your office repeated the wrong deeds of last year and insisted on posting misleading words about the June 4 incident on the social media accounts of your office on June 4.” On Saturday, the consulates of the United States, Finland and the European Union had placed lit candles in the windows of their Hong Kong offices to commemorate the June 4 Tiananmen massacre in Beijing 33 years ago. Images of it were then uploaded to their social media pages.
Hong Kong police also cracked down on any public vigil commemorating the Tiananmen massacre on Saturday. Numerous people were stopped and searched, and several were arrested. Commemoration of the Beijing massacre 33 years ago is illegal in Hong Kong. Democratic activist Yu Wai Pan of the League of Social Democrats is said to be among the arrested, according to AFP.
To this day, the memory of the events of 1989 is forbidden in China, and a historical reappraisal has never taken place. The leadership of the Communist Party is making great efforts to erase the massacre from the collective memory. No information is found in history books, and references to it are erased from the Chinese Internet and online platforms. Outside China, symbols like the “Tank Man” changed the world (China.Table reported).
For decades, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region was the only place in China where commemoration of the victims of the Tiananmen massacre was still tolerated. Until two years ago, tens of thousands of people held an annual vigil in Victoria Park to commemorate the dead. Last Friday, Hong Kong authorities had warned that people taking part in an “unauthorized gathering” could face up to five years in prison. Large parts of Victoria Park were closed.
A massive police presence was seen around the park on Saturday, and many people were stopped and searched by officers. Near Victoria Park, dozens of people spread out and turned on the flashlights of their smartphones – whereupon police used megaphones to order them to turn them back off. The legal basis for the authorities’ harsh approach is the National Security Act. It allows the authorities to take action against all activities that, by their own definition, threaten China’s national security.
The US criticized China for banning commemorative events in Hong Kong. “33 years have passed since the world watched brave demonstrators and bystanders peacefully demand democracy in Tiananmen Square,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken posted on Twitter. “Despite the removal of memorials and attempts to erase history, we honor their memory by promoting respect for human rights wherever threatened.”
Meanwhile, some 1,000 people gathered in Taiwan’s capital Taipei on Saturday to commemorate the events of 1989. Many of the participants were immigrants and refugees from Hong Kong. The familiar protest chant “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times” (光復香港，時代革命) echoed over and over in Cantonese across the square. Taiwanese organizers tried their best to focus the event on universal values such as democracy and freedom rather than, for instance, a shared Chinese heritage or historical responsibility for Mainland China. The evening was organized by a coalition of Taiwanese NGOs led by the New School for Democracy (華人民主書院).
The culmination of the event was the erection of an approximately three-meter-tall 3D-printed copy of the “Pillar of Shame” statue by Danish artist Jens Galschiøt. The original had been removed from the Hong Kong University campus in a cloak-and-dagger operation last December. In a video message, Galschiøt explained that while he would gladly have brought the original to Taiwan, it was still being held by Hong Kong authorities to this day.
The Chinese army brutally crushed protests in Beijing on June 4, 1989. For weeks, students especially had peacefully protested for political change and measures against government corruption. Between 300 and 1,000 people were believed to have been killed, possibly more. David Demes/rad
Several Covid restrictions are to be lifted in Beijing in the coming week. Starting Monday, people will be allowed to go back to work and restaurants will be allowed to receive guests provided they have tested negative three days earlier. Schools are also to reopen the following Monday. This was announced by local authorities on Sunday. Today, Tuesday and Wednesday, the nationwide exam for university applicants is to be held. The exam is also known as Gaokao.
Since the end of April, nearly 2,000 Covid infections have been confirmed in Beijing. Consequently, restaurants, schools and tourist attractions were closed, public transport drastically restricted, and people were ordered to work from home (China.Table reported).
In its fight against the pandemic, China pursues a strict zero-covid strategy. For instance, a months-long lockdown was imposed on Shanghai. But even in the economic metropolis, the strict curfews were recently largely lifted again (China.Table reported). However, hundreds of thousands of people who are considered to be in contact with infected individuals remain quarantined. rad
Tanja Goenner will be the first woman to head the Federation of German Industries. The CDU politician and former State Minister for Baden-Wuerttemberg is to take over the vacant position at Germany’s most influential industry association starting this summer. Her predecessor Joachim Lang left the post on May 31.
Goenner plans to put greater emphasis on sustainability for the association. “The transformation to carbon neutrality, the challenges in the international context and acceptance in society” are what the 52-year-old sees as the main tasks in her new role. In her current job as spokeswoman for the board of the German Corporation for International Cooperation GmbH (GIZ), Goenner has already advocated for a green reconstruction of the global economy after the Covid pandemic. She frequently stresses that economic policy must always be climate policy as well.
Gönner has headed the GIZ since 2012. In a press release, she stated that she had found her time at GIZ very enriching, but that she now wanted to pursue new career paths after ten years. GIZ was also her first major experience with China: GIZ operates a large office in Beijing and is active throughout the country.
Her new job will see her dealing with China more than ever before. The BDI is an important pacesetter in Germany’s China policy. This is demonstrated by association decisions in 2019 that still have an impact today. At that time, the BDI published demands on China that struck a critical tone toward Beijing for the first time. Since then, the country has also been regarded as a “systemic competitor,” no longer just a partner. This change of course has ushered in a shift in German policy: Since “even the BDI,” as it is now often put, complains about its members’ dependence on a single market, even the traditionally pro-business German government could distance itself more.
Born in 1969 in Sigmaringen, Tanja Goenner began her career after school with an apprenticeship as a legal officer. She then studied law at the Eberhard Karls University in Tuebingen and, after passing her state exam and completing her legal clerkship, worked for a law firm.
Alongside her legal career, she early on also pursued a political one. In 1986, she joined the Junge Union (Young Union of Germany), and has been a member of the CDU since 1987, including serving on the national board from 2000 to 2012. Between 2002 and 2004, she was a member of the German Bundestag.
In 2004, she was appointed Minister of Social Affairs in Baden-Wuerttemberg. From February 2010 to May 2011, Tanja Goenner served as Minister for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Transport in the state of Baden-Wurttemberg. The appointment of Goenner to the BDI leadership is expected to take place at the meeting of the Presidium and Executive Board of the BDI on June 20.
Have you been struggling to learn the Chinese language for a while now? In the beginning, you may have enthusiastically downloaded a learning app. But when you wanted to show off your language skills on your next visit to a Chinese restaurant, it turned out that this strategy wasn’t the best one. Because instead of eloquently ordering the check in Chinese (买单！Mǎidān! “Check, please!” – literally “buying the bill”), you pronounced it wrong and turned yourself into an “egg vendor” (卖蛋！Màidàn! “Eggs for sale!”).
It is hardly easy, though! Not only the pronunciation, but also many of the characters in Chinese seem to be identical. Keep calm, take a deep breath and simply let off some linguistic steam. And do it with eggs! Eggs are a great way to curse in Chinese. Here’s a quick guide!
In China, the egg-beginner variant for kid-glove swearing is 笨蛋 bèndàn (“stupid egg”), which means “idiot,” “dimwit,” or “dumbass,” and is also sometimes used playfully. It is followed by 傻蛋 shǎdàn (“stupid egg” – “fool, numbskull”), which is already a touch higher on the insult scale. If the Chinese really get into a grouchy mood, they reach into their linguistic bag of tricks for the “bad” or “rotten egg” (坏蛋 huàidàn “bastard, scoundrel”). And if the blood gets really boiling, they start throwing “mixed eggs” (混蛋 húndàn “bastard”) at each other.
The pinnacle of egg-related swear words is the “wangba egg” (王八蛋 wángbādàn “shithead, asshole”). The latter, by the way, is – who would have guessed it – a swear word with a long tradition that goes back to Confucius, so to speak. It originally alludes to the concept of the eight Confucian virtues (八德 bā dé or 八端 bā duān). In ancient China, it was equivalent to verbal ostracism to accuse someone of having abandoned or “forgotten” all eight morals (忘八端 wàng bā duān). Over time, in the heat of word-fighting, the term has mellowed to its current form – 端 duān became 蛋 dàn and the initial 忘八蛋 wàngbādàn later became the similar-sounding 王八蛋 wángbādàn.
But back to the egg fight: In Chinese, slackers are also referred to as eggs, namely as “lazy” or “work-shy eggs” (懒蛋 lǎndàn). Cowards, on the other hand, are often called “soft-shell egg” (软蛋 ruǎndàn). And those who are unlucky are known as 倒霉蛋 dǎoméidàn (“bad luck egg” or “unlucky egg”). Those who are then verbally outmatched or are otherwise beaten are proverbially “finish egg” (完蛋 wándàn). As a true egg, however, one does not simply crawl away, of course, but “rolls” away in style (滚蛋 gǔndàn – literally “rolling egg; rolling eggs” – a synonym for “getting lost” or for shouting “Fuck off! Get the hell out of here!”).
Finally, let us wrap it up with two egg-cellent Chinese expressions: “If many chickens come together, they do not lay eggs” (鸡多不下蛋 jī duō bú xià dān – meaning: “many cooks spoil the broth”). And as a motivator to start the week with: Don’t always “look for a bone in the egg” (鸡蛋里挑骨头 jīdàn lǐ tiāo gǔtou – meaning: “always find a fly in the ointment” or “always have something to complain about”). This brings us to the end of our linguistic therapy exercise and leaves us with a clear head for new learning impulses.
Verena Menzel runs the online language school New Chinese in Beijing.
