Pragmatic Politics

Germany and China reportedly have a good relationship. An official Chinese publication has recently praised the mutual advantages which it said stems from a “pragmatic“ approach to problems. Others would call this “pragmatism“ servitude toward an undemocratic regime. The business community, in particular, strongly supports this kind of relationship management. Businesses always found it inappropriate to approach former Indonesian President Suharto about human rights issues. Every time the issue was addressed, augurs immediately warned against the potential harm to German investors in Indonesia. China's economy is far bigger than Indonesia's, and so the warnings are much louder. German politicians have long taken the pragmatic approach. Former Chancellor Helmut Kohl, for example, ignored the critics when he visited a unit of the “People's Liberation Army.“ His successor, Gerhard Schröder, pays regular annual visits to China - and always comes up with a lot of flattering words about his hosts.

These words do not always achieve (good) results. A case in point is the dispute within the government about a possible sale of a nuclear reprocessing plant in Hesse to China, which has fizzled out because of opposition by the Greens. But the chancellor has been remarkably stalwart on a different issue. During Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to Germany this week, Schröder confirmed his view that the European Union should lift the weapons embargo it imposed on China after the bloody suppression of student protests on Tiananmen Square in 1989. Such a move would probably not have an immediate impact on business, but it would certainly help improve the general “climate.“ Yet if the relationship is already good anyway, there should actually be no need to demonstrate to the world that, according to the Germans, there is a statute of limitations on human rights violations, even if the perpetrators continue to stand by their past deeds.

Has Germany gained anything from fostering its relationship with China? Such major projects as the Transrapid magnetic levitation railway hardly qualify as a real success story. Agreements at a lower level are more important. At that level, German companies seem to be in quite a good position, although some of the widely publicized agreements signed during state visits are no more than letters of intent which must still be fleshed out later on. Flattery does not work in these negotiations. In the end, the Chinese make very pragmatic decisions based on hard economics.

On the other hand, economic concerns may also prompt political change in China. Even Schröder has now rightly pointed out that the Chinese should ensure effective protection of immaterial ownership in joint ventures between technology companies. Indeed, this is one of China's biggest weak points. There is still no guarantee of legal certainty. But since China has joined the World Trade Organization, it has to stick to its rules. And if the Chinese judiciary goes by the book when dealing with companies, it may also start applying the rule of law with people.

Yet this is where the ruling, (supposedly) communist party drags its feet. While the business community can do almost anything, the Chinese people are expected to remain silent on political issues and meekly follow orders from Beijing. Many ask themselves how much longer this situation can last. A while ago, the German government tried to prompt changes through a “dialogue on the rule of law.“ The German justice minister occasionally even shows interest in political prisoners. If such activities, which Beijing considers “subversive,“ were intensified, Germany could polish its international image without harming German investors.

At a time when China has placed fresh political hope in Europe, Germany should be a bit less pragmatic with the People's Republic. Chinese leaders see Europe as a political counterweight to the United States. And if China wants to foster its relationship with Europe, the Europeans should not have to make unnecessary concessions to China. Those who, like the German government, talk about “civil security policy,“ should remind China that military threats toward Taiwan are not acceptable. The Tibet issue also belongs on the international agenda, even if many governments would rather avoid it. China also does not deal courteously with a number of other ethnic minorities. The United States has stopped criticizing Beijing's treatment of groups such as the Uigurs. And since the German government usually likes to distance itself from America, it could - quite pragmatically - do a lot of good here.