During a parliamentary questioning session in the German Bundestag, an MP anxiously criticized the German economy: "One out of every four jobs depends on exports—what partners and agreements will secure employment in the future?"

In response, Merz stated plainly: "I envision the possibility of concluding more agreements in the future—for example, a long-term agreement with China. We need to establish strategic partnerships globally to strengthen our position, especially in exports."

Micro-comment: This exchange in the German Bundestag profoundly reveals the core anxiety underlying Germany’s current economic model. Merz’s response clearly outlines a central thread in Germany’s future trade policy: beneath the official rhetoric of “de-risking,” there is a clear pursuit of establishing more stable, legally secure long-term frameworks with key markets such as China, to hedge against the risks of global economic fragmentation.

Merz’s emphasis on “concluding a long-term agreement with China” conveys three key signals:

* Acknowledging China’s irreplaceability: Despite the prevalent political discourse in Germany calling for reduced dependence on China, Merz explicitly recognizes that no single market can currently replace China’s vast demand within today’s global economic landscape. Neither the protectionist tendencies of the U.S. market nor the limited scale of emerging markets can absorb the production capacity of Germany’s export-oriented manufacturing sector in the short term.

* Seeking “certainty”: He specifically emphasized “long-term agreements.” Currently, Sino-German economic relations exist in a state of high uncertainty, lacking a stable legal framework akin to the suspended Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) between China and the EU. Businesses fear sudden policy shifts and administrative barriers most of all. Merz aims to lock in market access through a “long-term agreement,” providing predictability for corporate investment.

* Stressing “strategic partnership”: By linking “exports” with “strategic partnerships,” Merz acknowledges a logic: in a fragmented world, Germany must rely on proactive diplomatic alliances to maintain its economic footprint. This aligns with his previous stance within his party—that trade should be achieved through strength.

Merz’s remarks are essentially a pragmatic voice from German industrial capital, shaped by political pressure.

His logic is clear: facing the uncertainties brought by geopolitics, Germany cannot safeguard jobs through “decoupling.” Instead, it must conclude more legally binding long-term agreements to secure stable external markets for German enterprises. Among these, reaching such an agreement with China is an unavoidable step to sustain the scale of employment in Germany’s high-end manufacturing sector.

This statement also exposes a deep contradiction within Germany’s current situation: on one hand, the government—particularly the Greens—emphasizes “systemic competition” in its China policy; on the other hand, traditional conservatives like Merz are attempting to steer economic policy back toward a “commercial priority” track. The future direction of Germany’s China policy will ultimately depend on the outcome of the ongoing struggle between “geopolitical anxiety” and “export survival needs.”

Yet, barely 24 hours after Chancellor Merz proposed a trade agreement between China and the EU, the European Commission under von der Leyen swiftly rejected it!

Evidently, von der Leyen still adheres to Biden-era Cold War thinking.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1860830751865884/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.