The China trip of Bavarian Minister President Markus Söder has drawn sharp criticism from the Social Democrats. SPD foreign policy spokesman Michael Roth accused Söder of “making a laughingstock of his proud country.” Roth stated that Söder is cozying up to authoritarian regimes and harming Bavaria and the CSU party. Roth also criticized Söder for failing to promote equal partnership with China, as the country restricts European, German, and Bavarian companies while demanding favorable conditions for its own. Roth questioned Söder’s motives and accused him of becoming a willing ally of autocrats, to the amusement of political professionals.
Söder’s visit to China marked the first time a German Minister President had visited the country since the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the visit, Söder met with Chinese Premier Li Qiang and discussed hopes for improved competition conditions for German companies in China, as well as the removal of trade restrictions on agricultural products from Bavaria. Söder claimed that Li Qiang was receptive to the idea of a fair and transparent partnership. He also mentioned advocating for the resumption of agricultural product exports to China, noting a positive response from the Chinese Prime Minister. Söder described the discussions as respectful and friendly, emphasizing that all topics were addressed on an equal footing, which he considered significant.
Roth dismissed Söder’s statements from the meeting, comparing Söder’s behavior in China to that of Bavarian “Fairy Tale King” Ludwig II. Roth accused Söder of showing “delusions of grandeur” akin to Ludwig II, claiming that Söder boldly asserted a partnership of equals between Bavaria and the Chinese regime. Roth highlighted the need for a radical shift in Germany and the EU’s handling of China, which Söder allegedly ignores. He ridiculed Söder’s claims, stating that Söder’s behavior in China would be laughable if it weren’t so sad. Roth emphasized the importance of acknowledging China’s political changes before promoting equal partnerships or alliances.
The criticism from Roth stems from a broader concern about Söder’s approach to international relations and foreign policy. Roth accused Söder of failing in his attempts to conduct external policies, particularly when it comes to China. Roth argued that Söder’s actions undermine the efforts of Germany and the EU in dealing with China on equal terms. Roth warned of the consequences of Söder’s behavior, suggesting that Söder’s actions could harm Bavaria, the CSU party, and even Germany’s external relations. Roth’s remarks underscored the challenges of balancing national interests with international cooperation, especially when dealing with autocratic regimes like China.
In response to Roth’s criticisms, Söder defended his visit to China and his efforts to promote economic partnerships. Söder reiterated his commitment to fostering better cooperation between Bavaria and China, emphasizing the importance of open dialogue and mutual benefits. Söder acknowledged the differences in political systems but highlighted the potential for collaboration in trade, agriculture, and other sectors. Söder’s defense of his actions reflected a desire to strengthen international ties and create opportunities for economic growth, despite the scrutiny from critics like Roth. The ongoing debate over Söder’s China trip raises questions about the complexities of diplomatic relations and the challenges of navigating political differences on the global stage.
