In the end there was an agreement, but also a protest: Not all members of the government support the decision that Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) pushed forward with determination.
Although the federal cabinet approved a so-called partial ban on Wednesday, according to which the Chinese state-owned company Cosco may only acquire a stake of less than 25 percent in a container terminal in the port of Hamburg – instead of the planned 35 percent – several ministries formally reported serious concerns after the compromise.
The Foreign Office of Federal Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen) brought a protocol statement to the cabinet, which other departments also joined.
“For the Federal Foreign Office, I expressly point out the considerable risks that arise when elements of the European transport infrastructure are influenced and controlled by China – while China itself does not allow Germany to participate in Chinese ports,” quoted the German Press Agency and Reuters from the note.
China has clearly shown that it is willing to use economic measures to achieve political goals. “The acquisition of shares in the container terminal in Tollerort by the Chinese state shipping company Cosco disproportionately expands China’s strategic influence on the German and European transport infrastructure and Germany’s dependence on China,” it said.
The uneasiness of the Foreign Office is shared by other ministries. Christian Lindner’s (FDP) Federal Ministry of Finance has joined the protocol statement, he said on Twitter. The DPA reported that this also applies to the other departments run by the Liberals. According to information from the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”, Robert Habeck’s Federal Ministry of Economics (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen) also endorsed the protocol declaration.
As early as September, Habeck had expressed skepticism about Cosco’s entry into the container terminal operator Tollerort. “I tend in the direction that we don’t allow that,” he said at the time. The container port is only a small part of the overall port, but China could then influence trade.
Foreign Minister Baerbock made a similar statement when she warned in an interview with the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” that the port of Hamburg was “not just any port”, “but one of the key ports not only for us as an export nation, but for Europe as a whole”.
The FDP-led Ministry of Finance had also raised criticism: “From the point of view of the BMF, a participation was a fatal economic and geopolitical signal,” quoted the “Spiegel” from a letter from State Secretary for Finance Steffen Saebisch to Chancellor’s Minister Wolfgang Schmidt.
Chancellor Scholz repeatedly had criticism of the decision rejected. When asked why Scholz ignored warnings from specialist departments, a government spokeswoman said that a stake of 24.9 percent does not create any strategic dependency and no strategic influence. The chancellor had made it clear that it was not about selling the port, but “only” about taking a stake in a single terminal.
A strategic stake in the terminal will be prevented and the acquisition will be reduced to a purely financial stake, the Ministry of Economic Affairs announced. Among other things, Cosco is prohibited from being contractually granted veto rights in strategic business or personnel decisions. Nevertheless, there is talk in government circles of an “emergency solution”.
The problem: If the cabinet had not decided this week, the sale would have been approved automatically and as originally agreed – i.e. with a 35 percent stake. To prevent this, a unified stance on the part of the government was necessary. Scholz’ chancellery, which had pushed for a compromise, played into the hands of time.
Despite the slimmed-down stake, economic experts continue to see risks. The Kiel Institute for the World Economy, for example, points out that it is not the question of the amount of the stake that is decisive, but the disposal of customer data. “Cosco gains an indirect influence and important information about a critical infrastructure in Germany and Europe through its stake in the terminal company,” warned Marcel Fratscher, head of the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW).
Meanwhile, Angela Titzrath, boss of the port operator HHLA, defended the decision. The cooperation between HHLA and the Cosco Group creates “no one-sided dependencies,” she said. “On the contrary: it strengthens supply chains, secures jobs and promotes value creation in Germany.”
However, the compromise could cause additional resentment in the traffic light coalition. After Scholz’s word of power to settle the nuclear dispute between the FDP and the Greens, the chancellor has now largely asserted himself for a second time in his government alliance on an important point of contention. Scholz obviously does not share the security concerns. The chancellor may also have had his inaugural visit to Beijing in mind.
Against this background, the Kiel trade economist Rolf Langhammer spoke of a “face-saving compromise for both sides”: A complete halt to the China deal would have put a heavy strain on the Chancellor’s trip to President Xi Jinping, who is about to take office again, next week – and that shortly before an important G20 summit, which will also deal with China’s position on the Ukraine war.
Sources: “Süddeutsche Zeitung”, “Der Spiegel”, German Press Agency, Reuters, editorial network Germany
