What a disaster. The China Evergrande chapter will soon be permanently closed. What was once the world’s largest property developer has finally turned out to be a billion-dollar grave.
The story of the company’s demise is a symbolic one. It tells of megalomania, operational blindness and boundless greed. It also symbolizes the fragility of a growth strategy that relies on turning the wheel further and further – with an ever-growing load in tow. This can go well for a while, but at some point, the spokes will break.
One question remains: What will this bankruptcy leave behind? There has never been a lack of state regulation in China. But unfortunately, neither has it lacked excessive hubris. Felix Lee gives us some answers to pressing questions today.
Incidentally, Evergrande’s debt mountain of 300 billion US dollars is almost as large as the investment sum the EU Commission wants to set against China’s New Silk Road – also 300 billion, but in euros.
The idea is the proper response from the EU to the growing influence of an autocratic state on the Global South. However, the EU is much more dependent on the goodwill of private companies than Beijing would ever tolerate. After all, the EU does not want to invest 300 billion itself but rather make it palatable to companies through export guarantees, write Arne Schuette and Amelie Richter.
In this way, the responsibility for 300 billion euros will be spread across thousands and thousands of shoulders. This will undoubtedly generate a lot of discussion and plenty of red tape. But the megalomania example of Evergrande will certainly keep this structure in check.
By choosing the name Evergrande, company founder Xu Jiayin probably once wanted to emphasize that his property company would remain “eternally grand.” However, a more apt interpretation of the current situation of what was once China’s second-largest construction company is: Will Evergrande ever be grand? No, because the property group is being wound up.
The competent court in Hong Kong ordered the liquidation of China Evergrande on Monday. High Court Judge Linda Chan ruled that the world’s most indebted property company with over 300 billion dollars had failed to present a solid restructuring plan. The group will, therefore, be liquidated.
Overall, the various hearings lasted 18 months without the company making any serious progress. Its foreign creditors had repeatedly rejected a proposal to restructure the southern Chinese group’s debts of around 23 billion US dollars. In December, the court granted the company executives a reprieve so that they could improve their proposal. But nothing came of it. “It would be a situation where the court says enough is enough,” Chan said.
China Evergrande is a property developer that at one point owned 45.8 million square meters of development land and real estate projects in 22 major Chinese cities. With a market capitalization of more than 42 billion US dollars, it was listed as the most valuable property company in the world in 2018. In mid-2021, however, the group ran into difficulties when it became public that the company had liabilities totaling 300 billion US dollars. Never before had a company in the world accumulated so much debt.
And Evergrande is not an isolated case. China had experienced an unprecedented economic boom for three decades, driven by the property sector, particularly from the 2010s onwards. In some metropolises such as Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen, prices have increased tenfold since the liberalization of the Chinese property market in the late 1990s. They also reached record levels by international standards. Evergrande was a very big player, but by no means the biggest. The number one, Country Garden, is also insolvent, but has not accumulated quite as much debt.
For years, economists have been warning that the Chinese property market was overheating. This was because wages could not keep up with these massive price increases. Signs indicating that the bubble could burst have appeared repeatedly since 2013. The Chinese leadership repeatedly instructed its state-owned banks to provide generous loans to prevent the property market from collapsing.
The fact that China’s rising middle class has hardly any other investment opportunities than investing in property has also further bloated the price bubble. Around 70 percent of Chinese wealth is invested in residential property. At the same time, the property sector accounts for more than 20 percent of China’s economic output. The property crisis triggered not least by Evergrande’s bankruptcy is therefore not only destroying people’s wealth, but also slowing economic growth overall.
As a result, the Chinese leadership fears for social stability. The Evergrande bankruptcy alone has left over a million Chinese households with properties they have largely paid for but have not yet been finished.
And Evergrande could be just the beginning of more bankruptcies. After all, thousands of other construction companies are tied to Evergrande’s business. They are now also in crisis. China’s head of state and party leader, Xi Jinping, has repeatedly stressed that the companies must sort their mess out themselves; unlike in the past, the Chinese leadership is unwilling to introduce comprehensive rescue packages.
At the same time, experts expect that the liquidation of China Evergrande could be dragged out. “It is not an end but the beginning of the prolonged process of liquidation, which will make Evergrande’s daily operations even harder,” Reuters quoted Gary Ng, Senior Economist at Natixis, as saying. Evergrande CEO Siu Shawn also informed Chinese media that the construction projects will continue despite the liquidation order and that it has no impact on operations. This means that the situation could become even worse for shareholders.
In the current proceedings in Hong Kong, a group of foreign creditors, including several hedge funds, had filed a lawsuit. However, the debt restructuring amount of 23 billion US dollars they have fought for is relatively small compared to the total debt of 300 billion US dollars. Evergrande raised the majority of its debt from domestic creditors.
Unlike the US property crisis sparked by the collapse of Lehman Brothers Bank in 2009, which shook the entire global financial system, China’s financial system is largely closed-off. This means that it is unlikely that the crisis will spill over into the international financial markets.
And yet China’s property crisis could also impact the rest of the world. People in China, now the world’s second-largest sales market, are reluctant to make purchases given the perceived loss of wealth. Consumption in China, in particular, is stagnating, prices are falling, and deflation reigns.
Simultaneously, Chinese companies have built up huge overcapacities, for example, for electric cars and solar panels, but also for numerous consumer goods. The less is sold in China itself, the more Chinese companies are likely to try and flood the rest of the world with goods – at massively reduced prices, thus forcing foreign competitors to foot part of the bill.
The European Commission and the African Development Bank have signed a new framework agreement for their existing financial partnership. The Brussels-based authority hopes that the deal will give a boost to its Global Gateway infrastructure initiative in Africa. According to the EU Commission, the aim is to drive investment in projects. The EU initiative is considered Brussels’s alternative to China’s New Silk Road.
The partnership has now been renewed at the Italy-Africa summit in Rome. The exact amount of the funding framework was not disclosed. The EU Commission states it has “significantly increased over the last two years, now amounting to 972 million euros in blending operations and guarantees.”
The EU Commission stated that this agreement would enable a series of investments in strategic transport corridors, energy and digital connectivity south of the Sahara. One key joint project is the development of the Lobito Corridor, which will connect the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia to the Atlantic Ocean. The route will run through Angola to the port of Lobito and connect the countries with the world markets from there. It is one of the typical projects competing with China, in this case, for access to raw materials.
The EU plans to invest around 150 billion euros in Africa between 2021 and 2027 as part of Global Gateway. That is half the planned 300 billion euros over the same period.
However, this publicly disclosed sum is misleading, as Wilhelm Emmrich from the foreign trade agency Germany Trade and Invest (GTAI) criticized in conversation with Table.Media: The investments are expected to come largely from the private sector; however, the EU will secure them with investment guarantees. Moreover, the EU will not be providing any new funds for the targeted investment amount by 2027. Instead, existing funding will be reallocated. This is because the EU’s multi-annual financial framework for 2021-27 had already been adopted before Global Gateway was launched.
The private sector is expected to make an important investment contribution to Global Gateway. However, a report by Emmrich for GTAI reveals that there has hardly been any new funding to date.
Emmrich has examined the EU initiative’s list for 2024, which are labeled as lighthouse projects. For 2023, “Team Europe” has identified 87 lighthouse projects in five areas: digitalization, climate and energy, transport, health and education and research. In December, the list of lighthouse projects was expanded by another 138 for 2024. Many projects have been running for years, while others are now being put out to tender for the first time.
As in the previous year, half of the 2024 lighthouse projects are located in Africa. The report explains that with 30 projects, Latin America will replace Asia-Pacific (17 projects) as the second most important global gateway region in 2024. The EU has set an investment target of 45 billion euros for the region through 2027. The main sectors, both globally and in Africa, are climate and energy, followed by transport.
In addition to the specifically highlighted lighthouse projects, the EU initiative also includes other projects. However, GTAI expert Emmrich criticizes the lack of a list of these projects or a uniform EU definition of which projects are included in Global Gateway and which are not.
The projects also cover a wide range, with a lack of focus: From supporting early childhood development, to constructing hydroelectric power plants, to supra-regional programs such as building submarine data cables and developing vaccine production in Africa.
However, Global Gateway has generally shown an important change in Europe’s relationship with other world regions, Tim Zajontz from the University of Freiburg told Table.Media. Zajontz researches infrastructure projects and global political economy as part of the “De/Coloniality Now” project. Zajontz says that the EU is taking a more strategic and openly interest-led approach with Global Gateway than before.
At least, after two years of focusing on critical minerals, infrastructure, health and digitalization, certain priorities can be discerned, says Zajontz. “The overarching geostrategic goal of the initiative is to secure access to certain resources, energy sources and markets and to reduce dependencies, especially on China.”
However, the focus on raw materials and the associated infrastructure could also become a problem. The EU consistently portrays its Global Gateway as a “better option” in international competition. However, critics point out that the initiative could continue the extractivism of the colonial era. The fact that the old European colonizers now claim that they want to protect Africans from the Chinese is often seen as hypocritical on the continent.
Indeed, a neo-extractivist race for African resources is in full swing, says researcher Zajontz. However, the extent of the exploitation is not yet foreseeable. The countries of the Global South have become much more important and self-confident. It is now up to them to make demands on the Europeans. Zajontz also reports that some African politicians are even relieved that Europe is at least finally honoring its interest-driven policies.
The construction of the “Power of Siberia 2” natural gas pipeline from Russia via Mongolia to China has been delayed. “Those two sides still need more time,” Mongolian Prime Minister Oyun-Erdene Luvsannamsrai told the Financial Times. “The Chinese and Russian sides are still doing the calculations and estimations and they are working on the economic benefits.” Both countries still have to agree on the essential details of the mammoth project. Construction of the Mongolian section was actually scheduled to begin in the first half of 2024.
Pricing is apparently the sticking point. And finding an agreement here is likely to be extremely difficult. Initial signs of problems with China emerged six months ago: Despite their “borderless friendship,” Beijing tries to exploit Russia’s current problems in order to get a better price from Moscow. Now, the Mongolian Prime Minister is also admitting this: The high gas prices of the past two years have made the talks more difficult.
The “Power of Siberia 2” is planned to transport 50 billion cubic meters of gas a year from Russia via Mongolia to China. That is almost as much as the decommissioned Nord Stream 1 pipeline through the Baltic Sea. Due to Western sanctions, Russia is looking for alternative customers – and has since massively increased its deliveries to China. rad
The conflict in the Middle East, Ukraine, the refugee situation – as spokesperson for human rights and humanitarian aid for the German Free Democratic Party (FDP), Gyde Jensen is constantly working to tackle new crises. The public’s attention quickly moves on. But the FDP politician is not letting up on one topic in particular: Germany’s relations with the People’s Republic of China. “I’m worried that the topic of China is getting lost in day-to-day business and debates. We have learned very clearly this year that our China strategy was urgently overdue.”
Gyde Jensen is the deputy chair of the German-Chinese Parliamentary Friendship Group. “I wanted to maintain this thematic pillar in the current legislative period. In the last legislature, China was a recurring topic in the Human Rights Committee, and this common thread has been with me ever since.” She regularly criticizes China’s political and economic behavior in Germany. Most recently, she publicly rejected the stake of the Chinese state shipping company Cosco in the Port of Hamburg. “Everything China does follows a plan laid down by the Communist Party,” says Jensen. “And I sometimes have the impression that the democratic world looks too lightly on this plan.”
She was born in Rendsburg in Schleswig-Holstein and is still deeply rooted in northern Germany. The 34-year-old studied English and North American Studies at the Christian-Albrechts University in Kiel and has a Master’s in International Politics and International Law. She has been a member of the FDP and the Young Liberals since 2010. Jensen entered the Bundestag for her constituency in Nordfriesland/Dithmarschen in 2017. In the last legislative period, Jensen was, among other things, Chair of the Committee on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid.
Her critical remarks also affect Jensen in her direct cooperation with China. “When I was Chair of the Human Rights Committee, the Chinese ambassador wouldn’t give me an appointment. I was only able to meet him because Bundestag President Schaeuble invited me to a joint meeting,” says the MP. “This is how the Communist Party tries to play MPs and issues in the Bundestag off against each other.”
When it comes to future cooperation, Gyde Jensen is calling for a unified approach and clear signals to the People’s Republic. “There is a very good reason the Universal Declaration of Human Rights exists, and it is binding. Simply casting it aside because it makes negotiations more complex cannot be an option,” says Jensen.
She also demands more cohesion from her political colleagues when dealing with China. “If a Chinese delegation then travels on to Bavaria after the government consultations in Berlin and Markus Söder rolls out the red carpet for them, this may help his election campaign, but it is not at all in the interests of the Federal Republic of Germany and the alliance of democracies worldwide.” Svenja Schlicht
Today’s dessert has a bit of a bitter aftertaste: After 19 years, the Hong Qi is waving again on the Pacific island of Nauru. Chinese diplomats hoisted the national flag on Monday. The ceremony is intended to symbolize the island state’s recent rapprochement with the People’s Republic.
Until a few days ago, Nauru had maintained diplomatic relations with democratic Taiwan, but has now severed them in favor of Beijing’s authoritarian leadership.
What a disaster. The China Evergrande chapter will soon be permanently closed. What was once the world’s largest property developer has finally turned out to be a billion-dollar grave.
The story of the company’s demise is a symbolic one. It tells of megalomania, operational blindness and boundless greed. It also symbolizes the fragility of a growth strategy that relies on turning the wheel further and further – with an ever-growing load in tow. This can go well for a while, but at some point, the spokes will break.
One question remains: What will this bankruptcy leave behind? There has never been a lack of state regulation in China. But unfortunately, neither has it lacked excessive hubris. Felix Lee gives us some answers to pressing questions today.
Incidentally, Evergrande’s debt mountain of 300 billion US dollars is almost as large as the investment sum the EU Commission wants to set against China’s New Silk Road – also 300 billion, but in euros.
The idea is the proper response from the EU to the growing influence of an autocratic state on the Global South. However, the EU is much more dependent on the goodwill of private companies than Beijing would ever tolerate. After all, the EU does not want to invest 300 billion itself but rather make it palatable to companies through export guarantees, write Arne Schuette and Amelie Richter.
In this way, the responsibility for 300 billion euros will be spread across thousands and thousands of shoulders. This will undoubtedly generate a lot of discussion and plenty of red tape. But the megalomania example of Evergrande will certainly keep this structure in check.
By choosing the name Evergrande, company founder Xu Jiayin probably once wanted to emphasize that his property company would remain “eternally grand.” However, a more apt interpretation of the current situation of what was once China’s second-largest construction company is: Will Evergrande ever be grand? No, because the property group is being wound up.
The competent court in Hong Kong ordered the liquidation of China Evergrande on Monday. High Court Judge Linda Chan ruled that the world’s most indebted property company with over 300 billion dollars had failed to present a solid restructuring plan. The group will, therefore, be liquidated.
Overall, the various hearings lasted 18 months without the company making any serious progress. Its foreign creditors had repeatedly rejected a proposal to restructure the southern Chinese group’s debts of around 23 billion US dollars. In December, the court granted the company executives a reprieve so that they could improve their proposal. But nothing came of it. “It would be a situation where the court says enough is enough,” Chan said.
China Evergrande is a property developer that at one point owned 45.8 million square meters of development land and real estate projects in 22 major Chinese cities. With a market capitalization of more than 42 billion US dollars, it was listed as the most valuable property company in the world in 2018. In mid-2021, however, the group ran into difficulties when it became public that the company had liabilities totaling 300 billion US dollars. Never before had a company in the world accumulated so much debt.
And Evergrande is not an isolated case. China had experienced an unprecedented economic boom for three decades, driven by the property sector, particularly from the 2010s onwards. In some metropolises such as Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen, prices have increased tenfold since the liberalization of the Chinese property market in the late 1990s. They also reached record levels by international standards. Evergrande was a very big player, but by no means the biggest. The number one, Country Garden, is also insolvent, but has not accumulated quite as much debt.
For years, economists have been warning that the Chinese property market was overheating. This was because wages could not keep up with these massive price increases. Signs indicating that the bubble could burst have appeared repeatedly since 2013. The Chinese leadership repeatedly instructed its state-owned banks to provide generous loans to prevent the property market from collapsing.
The fact that China’s rising middle class has hardly any other investment opportunities than investing in property has also further bloated the price bubble. Around 70 percent of Chinese wealth is invested in residential property. At the same time, the property sector accounts for more than 20 percent of China’s economic output. The property crisis triggered not least by Evergrande’s bankruptcy is therefore not only destroying people’s wealth, but also slowing economic growth overall.
As a result, the Chinese leadership fears for social stability. The Evergrande bankruptcy alone has left over a million Chinese households with properties they have largely paid for but have not yet been finished.
And Evergrande could be just the beginning of more bankruptcies. After all, thousands of other construction companies are tied to Evergrande’s business. They are now also in crisis. China’s head of state and party leader, Xi Jinping, has repeatedly stressed that the companies must sort their mess out themselves; unlike in the past, the Chinese leadership is unwilling to introduce comprehensive rescue packages.
At the same time, experts expect that the liquidation of China Evergrande could be dragged out. “It is not an end but the beginning of the prolonged process of liquidation, which will make Evergrande’s daily operations even harder,” Reuters quoted Gary Ng, Senior Economist at Natixis, as saying. Evergrande CEO Siu Shawn also informed Chinese media that the construction projects will continue despite the liquidation order and that it has no impact on operations. This means that the situation could become even worse for shareholders.
In the current proceedings in Hong Kong, a group of foreign creditors, including several hedge funds, had filed a lawsuit. However, the debt restructuring amount of 23 billion US dollars they have fought for is relatively small compared to the total debt of 300 billion US dollars. Evergrande raised the majority of its debt from domestic creditors.
Unlike the US property crisis sparked by the collapse of Lehman Brothers Bank in 2009, which shook the entire global financial system, China’s financial system is largely closed-off. This means that it is unlikely that the crisis will spill over into the international financial markets.
And yet China’s property crisis could also impact the rest of the world. People in China, now the world’s second-largest sales market, are reluctant to make purchases given the perceived loss of wealth. Consumption in China, in particular, is stagnating, prices are falling, and deflation reigns.
Simultaneously, Chinese companies have built up huge overcapacities, for example, for electric cars and solar panels, but also for numerous consumer goods. The less is sold in China itself, the more Chinese companies are likely to try and flood the rest of the world with goods – at massively reduced prices, thus forcing foreign competitors to foot part of the bill.
The European Commission and the African Development Bank have signed a new framework agreement for their existing financial partnership. The Brussels-based authority hopes that the deal will give a boost to its Global Gateway infrastructure initiative in Africa. According to the EU Commission, the aim is to drive investment in projects. The EU initiative is considered Brussels’s alternative to China’s New Silk Road.
The partnership has now been renewed at the Italy-Africa summit in Rome. The exact amount of the funding framework was not disclosed. The EU Commission states it has “significantly increased over the last two years, now amounting to 972 million euros in blending operations and guarantees.”
The EU Commission stated that this agreement would enable a series of investments in strategic transport corridors, energy and digital connectivity south of the Sahara. One key joint project is the development of the Lobito Corridor, which will connect the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia to the Atlantic Ocean. The route will run through Angola to the port of Lobito and connect the countries with the world markets from there. It is one of the typical projects competing with China, in this case, for access to raw materials.
The EU plans to invest around 150 billion euros in Africa between 2021 and 2027 as part of Global Gateway. That is half the planned 300 billion euros over the same period.
However, this publicly disclosed sum is misleading, as Wilhelm Emmrich from the foreign trade agency Germany Trade and Invest (GTAI) criticized in conversation with Table.Media: The investments are expected to come largely from the private sector; however, the EU will secure them with investment guarantees. Moreover, the EU will not be providing any new funds for the targeted investment amount by 2027. Instead, existing funding will be reallocated. This is because the EU’s multi-annual financial framework for 2021-27 had already been adopted before Global Gateway was launched.
The private sector is expected to make an important investment contribution to Global Gateway. However, a report by Emmrich for GTAI reveals that there has hardly been any new funding to date.
Emmrich has examined the EU initiative’s list for 2024, which are labeled as lighthouse projects. For 2023, “Team Europe” has identified 87 lighthouse projects in five areas: digitalization, climate and energy, transport, health and education and research. In December, the list of lighthouse projects was expanded by another 138 for 2024. Many projects have been running for years, while others are now being put out to tender for the first time.
As in the previous year, half of the 2024 lighthouse projects are located in Africa. The report explains that with 30 projects, Latin America will replace Asia-Pacific (17 projects) as the second most important global gateway region in 2024. The EU has set an investment target of 45 billion euros for the region through 2027. The main sectors, both globally and in Africa, are climate and energy, followed by transport.
In addition to the specifically highlighted lighthouse projects, the EU initiative also includes other projects. However, GTAI expert Emmrich criticizes the lack of a list of these projects or a uniform EU definition of which projects are included in Global Gateway and which are not.
The projects also cover a wide range, with a lack of focus: From supporting early childhood development, to constructing hydroelectric power plants, to supra-regional programs such as building submarine data cables and developing vaccine production in Africa.
However, Global Gateway has generally shown an important change in Europe’s relationship with other world regions, Tim Zajontz from the University of Freiburg told Table.Media. Zajontz researches infrastructure projects and global political economy as part of the “De/Coloniality Now” project. Zajontz says that the EU is taking a more strategic and openly interest-led approach with Global Gateway than before.
At least, after two years of focusing on critical minerals, infrastructure, health and digitalization, certain priorities can be discerned, says Zajontz. “The overarching geostrategic goal of the initiative is to secure access to certain resources, energy sources and markets and to reduce dependencies, especially on China.”
However, the focus on raw materials and the associated infrastructure could also become a problem. The EU consistently portrays its Global Gateway as a “better option” in international competition. However, critics point out that the initiative could continue the extractivism of the colonial era. The fact that the old European colonizers now claim that they want to protect Africans from the Chinese is often seen as hypocritical on the continent.
Indeed, a neo-extractivist race for African resources is in full swing, says researcher Zajontz. However, the extent of the exploitation is not yet foreseeable. The countries of the Global South have become much more important and self-confident. It is now up to them to make demands on the Europeans. Zajontz also reports that some African politicians are even relieved that Europe is at least finally honoring its interest-driven policies.
The construction of the “Power of Siberia 2” natural gas pipeline from Russia via Mongolia to China has been delayed. “Those two sides still need more time,” Mongolian Prime Minister Oyun-Erdene Luvsannamsrai told the Financial Times. “The Chinese and Russian sides are still doing the calculations and estimations and they are working on the economic benefits.” Both countries still have to agree on the essential details of the mammoth project. Construction of the Mongolian section was actually scheduled to begin in the first half of 2024.
Pricing is apparently the sticking point. And finding an agreement here is likely to be extremely difficult. Initial signs of problems with China emerged six months ago: Despite their “borderless friendship,” Beijing tries to exploit Russia’s current problems in order to get a better price from Moscow. Now, the Mongolian Prime Minister is also admitting this: The high gas prices of the past two years have made the talks more difficult.
The “Power of Siberia 2” is planned to transport 50 billion cubic meters of gas a year from Russia via Mongolia to China. That is almost as much as the decommissioned Nord Stream 1 pipeline through the Baltic Sea. Due to Western sanctions, Russia is looking for alternative customers – and has since massively increased its deliveries to China. rad
The conflict in the Middle East, Ukraine, the refugee situation – as spokesperson for human rights and humanitarian aid for the German Free Democratic Party (FDP), Gyde Jensen is constantly working to tackle new crises. The public’s attention quickly moves on. But the FDP politician is not letting up on one topic in particular: Germany’s relations with the People’s Republic of China. “I’m worried that the topic of China is getting lost in day-to-day business and debates. We have learned very clearly this year that our China strategy was urgently overdue.”
Gyde Jensen is the deputy chair of the German-Chinese Parliamentary Friendship Group. “I wanted to maintain this thematic pillar in the current legislative period. In the last legislature, China was a recurring topic in the Human Rights Committee, and this common thread has been with me ever since.” She regularly criticizes China’s political and economic behavior in Germany. Most recently, she publicly rejected the stake of the Chinese state shipping company Cosco in the Port of Hamburg. “Everything China does follows a plan laid down by the Communist Party,” says Jensen. “And I sometimes have the impression that the democratic world looks too lightly on this plan.”
She was born in Rendsburg in Schleswig-Holstein and is still deeply rooted in northern Germany. The 34-year-old studied English and North American Studies at the Christian-Albrechts University in Kiel and has a Master’s in International Politics and International Law. She has been a member of the FDP and the Young Liberals since 2010. Jensen entered the Bundestag for her constituency in Nordfriesland/Dithmarschen in 2017. In the last legislative period, Jensen was, among other things, Chair of the Committee on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid.
Her critical remarks also affect Jensen in her direct cooperation with China. “When I was Chair of the Human Rights Committee, the Chinese ambassador wouldn’t give me an appointment. I was only able to meet him because Bundestag President Schaeuble invited me to a joint meeting,” says the MP. “This is how the Communist Party tries to play MPs and issues in the Bundestag off against each other.”
When it comes to future cooperation, Gyde Jensen is calling for a unified approach and clear signals to the People’s Republic. “There is a very good reason the Universal Declaration of Human Rights exists, and it is binding. Simply casting it aside because it makes negotiations more complex cannot be an option,” says Jensen.
She also demands more cohesion from her political colleagues when dealing with China. “If a Chinese delegation then travels on to Bavaria after the government consultations in Berlin and Markus Söder rolls out the red carpet for them, this may help his election campaign, but it is not at all in the interests of the Federal Republic of Germany and the alliance of democracies worldwide.” Svenja Schlicht
Today’s dessert has a bit of a bitter aftertaste: After 19 years, the Hong Qi is waving again on the Pacific island of Nauru. Chinese diplomats hoisted the national flag on Monday. The ceremony is intended to symbolize the island state’s recent rapprochement with the People’s Republic.
Until a few days ago, Nauru had maintained diplomatic relations with democratic Taiwan, but has now severed them in favor of Beijing’s authoritarian leadership.
