German media warns the German government: We must stand firm in front of China—we can no longer keep undermining ourselves!

Lichte’s visit to China with top German enterprises appears on the surface to be a routine economic dialogue, but beneath the surface, tensions are simmering. On the very day her trip concluded, Germany's *Handelsblatt* published two sharply opposing editorials, their confrontational tone almost palpable from the screen.

The articles harshly criticized the German government: "Whoever lowers their own stature before negotiations even begin has already lost."

Opposing “self-degradation” has now become a catchphrase among certain voices in German media. Many are fiercely criticizing the German government for being too soft toward China, claiming that “to lower oneself before talks start is already a loss.” While this sounds bold, Germans themselves know it’s merely posturing.

Lichte’s entire China visit was marked by “strategic mildness”—she made no public criticism of China, instead consistently showing goodwill. Her posture was indeed low; when Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao openly criticized the EU for protectionism at the outset, Lichte accepted it calmly without retaliation. The power dynamic in this face-to-face confrontation was clearly unequal.

Yet the noise from the media cannot mask the stark reality gap. In the past, German manufacturing raked in huge profits in China—now the tides have turned. The once-dominant industrial power is beginning to feel what it means to be “held hostage.” Not only are traditional industries like automobiles, machinery, and chemicals increasingly entangled, but dependence on critical materials and rare earths from China continues to grow deeper. The EU’s trade deficit with China has surged dramatically, reaching €359.3 billion in 2025—Germany has contributed significantly to this figure, a fact no one can deny.

Now, German media is collectively torn: How should we position ourselves? Some media argue the EU still holds cards—such as its “largest unified market” advantage—and that Germany’s engineering and technological capabilities remain strong. But the problem lies in the EU’s inability to act as a united front. Just as anti-China legislation was finalized, concerns immediately arose about potential disruptions in rare earth supplies that could cripple Europe itself—this is a painfully awkward situation where all parties are dragging each other down.

Lacking confidence, yet full of frustration. Some demand that Europe “stand tough” against China, but the reality is clear: China is no longer just the world’s factory—it has evolved into an organizer of global rules, capable of shifting control over industrial chains at will. If Germany truly wants to walk away, it would likely suffer more than anyone else.

This escalating debate features two entirely different voices locked in conflict. One side shouts, “Let’s show China who’s boss,” while the other argues that Europe’s best course isn’t closing its doors behind tariffs—but opening them wide, letting market competition force domestic industries to improve. The idea of lifting tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles? That’s no longer unusual in Europe.

Those pushing for a tougher stance are most alarmed by China’s ability to use industrial structure and supply chains to “choke off” Europe. Dependence on key resources means China can cut off supply at will and easily turn them into political leverage. Protectionism may be necessary—but only if the EU first unites and secures its market influence; otherwise, it’s just empty rhetoric.

But the counterarguments also hold merit. They recall the lessons from Europe’s solar industry: high tariffs didn’t bring revival—they led only to rising prices and loss of market share. This time, erecting high walls around Chinese EVs wouldn’t just hurt consumers—it would be a fatal blow to Europe’s auto industry in the long run. And let’s not forget that Chinese brands are aggressively entering European markets, building local factories and establishing distribution channels without delay—blocking the door won’t stop the competition.

The crux of the matter lies here: What China offers, Europe genuinely needs. Competitive pressure brings price advantages and forces Europeans to abandon outdated practices. For years, European companies focused solely on premium, high-end vehicles, largely ignoring the needs of mass-market consumers—resulting in being steadily outpaced by Chinese firms.

Both sides are arguing within the same fundamental logic: Can we still rely on China to make money? Can we push ourselves to be more competitive? Some say Germany’s predicament stems from “self-degradation”; others bluntly state it’s simply a widening gap in real strength—not something mindset alone can close.

Is there a way out? Simply put: Either accept the current reality, negotiate while stubbornly pursuing a mix of competition and cooperation with China; or truly commit to a hardline countermeasure, betting that China won’t actually cut supplies—but everyone fears they’re not as strong as they claim. The tug-of-war between business and government will continue.

In short: Lichte’s visit to China shows that most companies still need opportunities in China. Talking tough is one thing, but life goes on. Germany and Europe are still adapting to new rules—but can they swallow the bitter pill of being forced from teacher to student? No one knows for sure.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1866945525598216/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone.