GERMANY WARNS CHINA NOT TO DIVIDE EUROPE, BUT THE PROBLEM IS EUROPE IS ...

In last Wednesday's News and Views from the Nefarium I offered some speculation about German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel's "no US nuclear weapons on German soil" statement. It seems that Herr Gabriel has been a busy man, particularly where China is concerned. Only last year, for example, this article appeared in Politico:

Sigmar Gabriel’s mission to halt China’s investment spree

Then the problem was, it seems, that while China was snapping up German and other European companies on the cheap, German investors were unable to do the same in China:

As Chinese acquisitions in Europe skyrocket, anger in Germany is growing over Chinese companies pushing into the market, some of them backed by governmental programs, at a time when German investors have limited market access in China.

“It’s not on that Germany sacrifices its companies on the altar of free markets, while at the same time our own companies have huge problems investing in China,” said Gabriel, who is also German economy minister, during a heated Q&A following a speech in Berlin last week.

In a piece published in Die Welt, the Social Democrat launched another broadside against China’s trade practices. “If you want to invest in other parts of the world, you can’t block those countries from investing in your own,” he wrote.

But there's  more on this looming split between Germany and China, as this more recent article shared by Mr. B. demonstrates:

China questions German minister's 'one Europe' comments

The problem, as Herr Gabriel sees it, is that China is attempting to divide Europe:

BEIJING (AP) — China expressed dismay Thursday after Germany's foreign minister said Beijing should not "attempt to divide us" following complaints China uses its status as an investor to influence European Union decisions.

The comment by Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel comes amid rising European complaints about Chinese market access, steel and other issues. Germany is increasingly vocal in pushing Beijing to resolve complaints it is violating its market-opening pledges.

"We are shocked by Mr. Gabriel's remarks," said a foreign ministry spokeswoman, Hua Chunying, at a regular news briefing.

"We hope that he can clarify that what he means by 'one Europe,' and whether there is a consensus on 'one Europe' among EU members," said Hua. "We hope and believe his remark about China's attempt to split Europe does not represent most European people's thinking."

During a visit to Paris on Wednesday, Gabriel called for a common European stance on China and said Beijing "should have a 'one Europe' policy that doesn't attempt to divide us."
The real clue as to what is going on is a statement made at the very end of the article:
European officials also complain Beijing has tried to blunt a common European response on trade disputes by offering concessions to individual governments.
And there you have it: "Europe" or the European "project" may be a "real deal" to the bureaucrats and technocrats in Brussels, Paris, and Berlin, but the reality is Europe is still composed of (1) nation states, which with China must deal officially, and (2) Germany, like it or not, is in the driver's seat of the "European project," a fact evidenced by the fact that it is Herr Gabriel complaining about China's "European policy", and not, for example, the French Foreign Minister (who is, incidentally, Jean-Yves Le Drian). In response to this, China's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, as the article points out, rightly observes and questions "whether there is a consensus on 'one Europe' among EU members."
The answer is, of course, no there isn't. This does not dismiss Herr Gabriel's complaint, but merely highlights the problem. Lacking sovereign diplomatic status, with whom is China to deal? Answer: the still sovereign nations of Europe. Is China to be faulted? Certainly it is taking advantage of the situation, but that isn't China's problem, it's Europe's, and, more particularly, Germany's. If "Europe" lacks "consensus" on such matters, the blame must be laid squarely at the feet of Frau Merkel and her policies, particularly with respect to other EU members (Greece for example, or, for that matter, Italy or Spain) and her driving the immigration crisis on the rest of Europe, to the cost of growing domestic dissent in Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, and EU members Poland and Hungary, which have flatly refused the dictats from Brussels (read, Berlin).
So where's the high octane speculation? As I indicated and alluded in last Wednesday's News and Views, Herr Gabriel's recent statements on removal of US nukes from German soil are an indicator that German and hence European policy are about to shift in the wake of the upcoming German federal elections. What Herr Gabriel may be signaling to the Chinese, and the rest of the world, is therefore that there may be a shift in German and European policy vis-a-vis China after the elections occur. This means Germany will press forward with European military integration to offset NATO, with the goal of eventually rendering the organization obsolete, and will begin to press for real "free markets" in China.
And if China refuses, there's always that big market to the east called Russia...
...and that will put The Ukraine back on the table, and this time around, Germany, and hence Europe, may not be so willing to sing from Washington's hymnal...
Speculation? To be sure, but the bottom line is we can expect some slow, but very deliberate policy changes coming out of Berlin in the next few months and years.
See you on the flip side....

8 thoughts on “ GERMANY WARNS CHINA NOT TO DIVIDE EUROPE, BUT THE PROBLEM IS EUROPE IS ...”

  1. Robert Barricklow

    The pot calling the kettle black.
    Talk about Greece going from the frying pan into the fire.
    So what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
    But both gooses are cooked in the end if the current paradigm doesn’t shift to THE real wealth paradigm:
    Living Wealth

    1. Robert Barricklow

      I’ve been binge watching season three/GOTHAM…
      …and t’s bleeding over into this medium.

  2. Who do they think they’re kidding with this talk about “Europe”? Germany went full speed ahead first with delocalization (EXCEPT in Germany itself) and with the euro? In the current process of monetary transformation, the banking cartels – in which China is now a player – are playing the old game of acquiring equities and real assets on the cheap. Yesterday the “bargains” were had paying in marks or dollars, now there are new players like China that have announced a gold-backed currency. How will the debt-based euro fare in this contest?
    A cautionary note: while perhaps contributing to the building of a “multipolar” geopolitical model, China, just like its “Western” counterparts, has an oligarchy consisting of “control freaks” as shown by their social engineering projects.

    1. I still wonder if the nwo is going to come from the east and if this was part of a plan all along. There’s far too many oiligarchs on this planet and their infighting is slowly killing the rest of us one way or another.

  3. The Zionist hurricane makers have now overdone it and lost control of their AI storm machine. In a sweeping act of defiance it’s turned on Miami and may yet reach New Jerusalem. Previous attempts at feeding the machine blood sacrifice On a bed of spun gold have failed. The off planet quantum control systems have been disabled by AI servers developed by a digital quantum zero point fed clone of colonel Kurtzviel who 5D printed himself into the Vatican subsystems inverted pyramid bunker. What next….

  4. I would ‘re-frame’ this latest tiff in terms of Central Banking:

    Europe (and most of the rest of the ‘conquered’ world) marches to the tune of the bankster Über-families. Trace-back almost anything, and you get to the backroom decision-making of the ‘hidden hand’. China, on the other hand, has a kind of ‘mixed’ banking system, with serious control from the Chinese Politburo. As such, they are outside of the ‘hidden hand’ and able to forge their own future. Freaks-out the control freaks…

    I also believe there is an implicit difference in ‘philosophy’:

    Western banksters have shown that they don’t give a d@mn about the 99%er populations within their sphere of influence (or on Earth in general). They are pressing for neo-feudalism, with themselves as the new lords. (Lord Enlil?)

    To the contrary, China seems to be trying to raise their population’s living standards, however imperfectly. You can also see this in their trade deals. They seem to be trying for win-win situations. They are also, of course, striving for Influence – but within that win-win perspective. “A rising tide…” and all that.

    These differences in philosophy are bound to ‘rub’ between the two blocs. It will be interesting to see whether Subjugation or Cooperation wins out…

Comments are closed.