Germany ain’t decoupling from China anytime soon

The Hill

November 4, 2022

Marc Ross OpEd

This week’s biggest geopolitical business event is Germany to China. As the Biden administration imposes new export controls on semiconductor technology to China and Republicans suggest that, upon taking control of the House of Representatives, as expected, they plan to review everything from Chinese military threats and COVID-19 to intellectual property theft, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is visiting Beijing with a delegation of business leaders.

Setting expectations for the first EU leader to visit China since the start of the pandemic, Scholz’s spokesman Steffen Hebestreit said the chancellor is not in favor of “decoupling” from China. Examining the numbers, you can see why.

The German and Chinese economies remain deeply intertwined. According to a study by the Rhodium Group, the four German industrial giants — carmakers VW, BMW and Mercedes and chemical company BASF — alone account for a third of European direct investment in China. It is not a stretch to say that many thousands of German jobs depend directly on the relationship.

Consider Volkswagen in China. VW sells over 3 million cars annually in China. The Volkswagen Group China website states that the company’s efforts in China “is one of the earliest and most successful international partners of China’s automobile industry. The Group has grown together with China’s auto industry, overcoming many challenges and achieving significant growth during the 30 years’ partnership with China.”

So established is VW in China that, as part of my China immersion coursework for my EMBA degree from UNC’s Kenan-Flagler Business School, when in Shanghai, we visited and toured one of the joint-venture SAIC Volkswagen plants. We could have visited a VW plant every day for a month and not have seen them all. Volkswagen Group China has 33 plants across the country — all to manufacture vehicles and components for the China market.

Last week, BASF CEO Martin Brudermueller, who will accompany Scholz, urged an end to “China bashing.” Instead, BASF sees expansion in China as the best path forward. The company is building a $10 billion chemical complex in Guangdong province. Expected to come online in 2030, the world-class facility will be a “role model of sustainable production both in China and around the world,” according to a BASF statement.

The Financial Times reports that since the turn of the millennium, China has gone from accounting for just over 1 percent of German exports to commanding a 7.5 percent share of sales abroad, putting it second to the U.S. In 2021, more than $100 billion worth of German goods were sold there. Plus, the tactics outlined in the 1989 classic global business book, “Beijing Jeep: A Case Study of Western Business in China,” are still in play today.

China long has played a divide-and-defuse strategy. Dividing nations to dampen a united front while defusing focus allows China to enjoy economic concessions. This strategy is happening daily across world capitals under the guise that Western businesses will have a chance to sell their goods and services to one of the world’s most dynamic marketplaces.

To ensure a smooth visit and a red-carpet welcome in Beijing, Scholz overrode controversy and negativity towards China’s desire to invest in Europe’s third-busiest port. Scholz pressed German ministries to back investment from Cosco, a Chinese state-owned enterprise focused on shipping and logistics services, in a container terminal at the Port of Hamburg. The Hamburg port deal was approved last week. And though Cosco took a smaller-than-planned equity amount, the German government’s agreement to sell a stake of 24.9 percent in one of Hamburg’s port terminals is an undisputed globalization win for Beijing.

For democratic governments, nearly all foreign policy is driven by domestic policy. Germany’s export-driven economy can’t escape increased geopolitical tensions in the Indo-Pacific, China’s stifling zero-COVID policy, and a growing weariness of an overreliance on China’s market for revenue and economic growth. Politely whispered in the past, this sentiment is now driving the dialogue with leading German economic thinkers. “The German economy is much more dependent on China than the other way round,” according to Juergen Matthes of the German Economic Institute.

Germany’s Mittelstand companies, which represent 99 percent of all German companies, increasingly realize that they cannot rely on Chinese profits as they once did. Quoted in the Financial Times, Jörg Wuttke, president of the influential trade lobby EU Chamber of Commerce in China, said of the state of the economic relationship, “It’s a lost love affair.”

In Berlin, there will be more talks, white papers, conference panels, and legislative hearings on the need for Germany to reduce dependencies on China and do more to diversify supply chains and foster new trading partners, but that will take time — time that Scholz does not have.

Election Day is tomorrow: Here’s how things could shake out

What does a war criminal look like?

A good rule of thumb for governing in a democracy is that good economics makes bad politics. Scholz appears committed to the economics, regardless of the politics. His Germany-to-China moment has four goals: shoring up the German-Chinese commercial relationship; pressuring ministries to overlook Chinese investment in Germany; keeping the big multinational German companies happy at the expense of small and medium-sized enterprises; and reminding the U.S. elected officials that nations will do what is best for their economic security.

So, no, Germany ain’t decoupling from China anytime soon.

Marc Ross is the founder of Caracal, a global political communications firm. He was communications director for the US-China Business Council. Follow him on Twitter @marcaross.

The geopolitics of Apple

At the close of trading last week, Apple was valued more than Alphabet, Amazon, and Meta combined.

The iPhone maker's market capitalization stood at $2.307 trillion, while its fellow tech competitors added up to $2.306 trillion.

Wow.

Today it is best to think of Big Tech as Apple as the biggest planet surrounded by smaller moons.

Apple was able to secure its place as the biggest in Big Tech by securing a grand bargain with Beijing.

Apple's grand bargain with China was twofold - access to factories and consumers.

First came access to factories.

Steve Jobs transferred most of Apple's final assembly to China because, at the time, it was the only country in the world with a vast labor force and an integrated supply-chain network that could scale up production as needed.

Apple's reliance on China for its manufacturing base today is immense.

Counterpoint, a market intelligence group, reports that China is responsible for 95 percent of iPhone production.

Second came access to customers.

In 2009 Apple began marketing the iPhone in China. Then in 2011 came retail outlets in tier-one cities of Beijing, Shanghai, and Hong Kong.

So successful was the launch of these retail outlets that a "creative" Chinese entrepreneur set up a fake Apple store in Kunming, Yunnan province.

The store was such a flawless reproduction that even employees hired as staff believed it was the real deal.

In a 2011 Reuters article on the fake store, the news organization reported it was "complete with the white Apple logo, wooden tables and cheery staff claiming they work for the iPhone maker; the store looks every bit like Apple Stores found all over the world."

Today, Apple maintains at least 50 actual stores in China, making the American company the most profitable tech company operating in China, far succeeding Chinese national champions Alibaba or Tencent.

Apple's empire with China has not gone unnoticed in America.

The cute public affairs message "Designed by Apple in California. Assembled in China" is stamped on the back of iPhones, iPads, and Macs.

The message is a subtle geopolitical message to American consumers, shareholders, and government officials that the real magic of what makes Apple so magical, the R&D, the software coding, the branding, and marketing, is still happening in California.

But this cute public affairs message can't halt the growing geopolitical realities the company is facing.

A few weeks ago, the company put on hold plans to use memory chips from China's Yangtze Memory Technologies Co. in its products.

Plus, China's COVID-zero restrictions are hurting Apple's ability to assemble a slew of the company's products in China.

The New York Times reports that for much of this year, Apple has also been the focus of a bipartisan intervention in Washington, where alarm over Beijing's military provocations and technology ambitions has upended orthodoxy about free trade.

Apple's rise from near bankruptcy in the 1990s to now being the biggest of Big Tech has closely followed China's economic ascent powered by world-class factories and brand-savvy consumers.

Don't expect this best-of-both-worlds business model, where Apple's products are designed in California, assembled in China, and then sold to the country's expanding middle class, to last for many more years.

Already Apple is looking to expand assembly for some of its products to India and Vietnam.

Not only is this a good business by adding supply chain resilience, but it is good geopolitics to add more nations (and US allies) to the Apple constellation.

Going forward, geopolitics will only play a more significant role in business. No company can escape this gravitational reality. Not even Apple.

And it is not just the geopolitics of China that matter.

The European Union recently approved legislation that mandates the use of the USB-C port across a wide range of consumer electronic devices.

The pedestrian USB-C differs from Apple's preferred design choice, seeing Lightning cables and ports as more civilized.

Apple launched a lobbying effort in Brussels, saying that "strict regulation mandating just one type of connector stifles innovation rather than encouraging it, which in turn will harm consumers in Europe and around the world."

Brussels was unmoved.

Apple reacted by announcing that the company will switch to USB-C chargers for its upcoming iPhone devices.

Apple SVP of World Marketing Greg Joswiak confirmed to Wall Street Journal reporter Joanna Stern that USB-C ports are coming.

"Governments get to do what they're gonna do," Joswiak said at the WSJ Tech Live conference. "Obviously, we'll have to comply. We have no choice."

Greg knows what's up.

Apple can't escape geopolitics.

Enjoy the ride + plan accordingly.

-Marc

Can we call this the first "beerwashing" campaign?

BrewDog has unveiled a bold and creative World Cup anti-sponsor initiative.

BrewDog's goal with the campaign is to shine a light on the negative issues of FIFA's decision to host the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.

Qatar is awash in problems.

Problems with:

LBGTQ+ rights

Migrant workers' rights

Women's rights

Voting rights

Let's just say Qatar is not a Jeffersonian enlightened government.

According to the CIA World fact book, ruled by the Al Thani family since the mid-1800s, Qatar, within the last 60 years, transformed itself from a poor British protectorate noted mainly for pearling into an independent state with significant oil and natural gas revenues.

Significant oil and natural gas revenues that will cover a sporting event expected to cost a whopping $220 billion.

From a soft power perspective, Qatar is desperate to convince the world of the event's lasting legacy as a nation transformed. However, the soccer tournament will not help stop the talk of corruption and criticism of Qatar's rights record.

With this as the background, BrewDog decided to get on the pitch with a robust corporate philanthropic effort.

The Scottish brewing company announced that it was the "proud anti-sponsor of the World F*Cup."

As an anti-sponsor, the company will donate all profits from selling its Lost Lager beer during the tournament to causes that fight human rights abuse.

+ “To be clear, we love football, we just don’t love corruption, abuse, and death.” -- BrewDog

Sounds compelling.

Sounds wonderful.

That said, BrewDog as a communications wonder brand...

I recommend doing the opposite.

For me...

BrewDog is overly reliant on gimmicks that satisfy like a sugar rush.

BrewDog is overly reliant on tactics that move like a weather vane.

BrewDog is overly reliant on social consciousness set in sand.

BrewDog also has a checkered past with workers' rights. As reported by Fortune, past and present workers of the brewery signed an open letter detailing a 'culture of fear,' with workers demanding an apology for 'harassing, assaulting, belittling, insulting, or gaslighting them.'

+ "This is yet another disingenuous advertising campaign designed to distract customers from the fact that BrewDog is one of the worst employers in the brewing industry when it comes to doing the right thing by workers." -- Bryan Simpson, Unite's industrial organizer for the hospitality sector

Ouch.

Plus, while donating all profits from beer sales is worthy and good CSR, why just one product?

The decision for only Lost Lager beer profits to be directed to human rights charities seems overly calculated and CFO-driven do-gooding. Does Lost Lager beer have the biggest profit margins?

As someone who works on public affairs daily, this effort appears to have only involved the CMO, CFO, and CEO, with no input from a public affairs team.

Graphics. Design. Posters. Campaign. All coupe du monde.

But no specifics on which human rights charities will be on the receiving end; that is a curious own goal.

Due to several factors, companies headquartered in the West are no doubt being asked to engage more in civic affairs.

From corporate social responsibility to environmental, social, and corporate governance efforts, companies are under assault from government regulators, reporters, shareholders, activists, and employees, all demanding substance and not style.

Winning commerce happens when a company is trusted to provide high-quality services and products coupled with business decisions that reflect shared values.

Business decisions that reflect shared values from day one of the company.

Not "beerwashing" with advertising or marketing spin designed to persuade the public that the company is suddenly committed to civic involvement and shared values.

Also, get a public affairs pro at the decision-making table. They are uniquely skilled in spotting problems and potential blowback before you go live with an advertising campaign.

Enjoy the ride + plan accordingly.

-Marc