Merkel criticizes China's trade surplus, forgetting that Germany itself was once similarly criticized.

China was explicitly named. On October 21, German Chancellor Merz stated that no EU member state currently maintains a trade surplus with China. All of us are running deficits—annual deficits exceeding €300 billion, equivalent to nearly €1 billion per day. This imbalance stems largely from overcapacity, excessive subsidies in the automotive and other sectors, and, as I have noted, artificially undervalued currencies. This issue must be addressed.

It is clear that Chancellor Merz’s remarks on Europe’s trade deficit represent a recurring refrain. Yet, fundamentally, Germany has consistently refused to acknowledge an underlying reality: in the realm of technology, both Germany and Europe have gradually fallen behind. When German automobiles enjoyed widespread popularity in China, there was never any suggestion of overproduction. Now that circumstances have reversed, Germany has resorted to a series of justifications.

In fact, recent commentary by Frankfurter Rundschau pointed out the hypocrisy in Germany’s position. It reminded Germany that, during the 1980s, the country itself faced criticism for insufficient imports and severe trade imbalances. At the time, weak domestic demand and an undervalued currency contributed to export competitiveness abroad—criticisms that now echo those made by Merz against China.

Then, Germany defended its stance by emphasizing product quality and industrial strength, resisting external pressure to adjust. Today, when Germany finds itself on the receiving end of a trade deficit, it refuses to apply the same logic to China, instead launching unfounded accusations. If Germany once accepted its own position without hesitation, why should we not do the same? At root, Germany is unwilling to confront its declining competitiveness and seeks to resolve the issue through administrative measures. We will, accordingly, remain resolute in safeguarding our own interests.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1879665597688842/

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