In 2025, while I was working in London, my colleagues produced a documentary on the Chinese electric vehicle industry that caused quite a stir in European auto circles. During a candid interview in Stuttgart, Stefan Reindl, director of the Institute for Automotive Management (IFA), was asked a pointed question: Would tariffs help European legacy carmakers beat Chinese competition?

His response was as unvarnished as it was accurate: “Bullshit. Sorry, it’s bullshit.”(Note: At 27’41” in the documentary) He quickly outlined the reality that politicians in Brussels prefer to ignore: German manufacturers produce heavily in China, and European and Chinese automotive supply chains are inextricably linked through deep-rooted joint ventures.

Yet, a growing disconnect has emerged between policymakers in Brussels and the industrial realities they aim to shield. Instead of heeding Reindl’s reality check, the European Union has quietly erected a formidable wall of regulatory barriers. The battleground in the China-EU economic relationship has effectively shifted from macro-level diplomatic friction to a quiet, attritional struggle over compliance.

The EU’s Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) has become the instrument of choice. In early 2024, the mere initiation of a deeply invasive FSR probe forced the Chinese rolling stock manufacturer CRRC to withdraw from a €610m electric train tender in Bulgaria. Fast forward to April 2026, and the EU went a step further, conditioning the approval of Lisbon’s ‘Violet Line’ metro project on the explicit exclusion of its Chinese subcontractor.

This defensive scrutiny is now spilling rapidly from public infrastructure into private commerce. The EU has recently launched an FSR probe into JD.com’s proposed €2.2bn acquisition of Ceconomy, the German parent company of MediaMarkt and Saturn. Concurrently, Brussels slapped a record €200m fine on the cross-border e-commerce platform Temu under the Digital Services Act (DSA). The message is unambiguous: Europe is abandoning its long-held free-market principles in favour of administrative strangulation.

Subscribe now

The Irony of Europe’s ‘Section 301’ Drift

There is a profound historical irony in this pivot. For decades, the EU was the primary victim of unilateral American trade bullying, most notably through Washington’s notorious Section 301 investigations. From digital service tax disputes to the endless Boeing-Airbus subsidy saga, European leaders consistently championed the World Trade Organization’s multilateral dispute mechanisms over unilateral aggression.

Today, however, under the guise of “economic security,” Brussels is forging its own Section 301 toolkit. By weaponising the FSR, the EU bypasses the WTO entirely, relying instead on domestic administrative powers to enforce a presumption of guilt upon foreign competitors. The former defender of globalised free trade is now actively dismantling it.

The Absurdity of ‘Overcapacity’

To justify this protectionist fortress, Western policymakers have coalesced around a singular, politically convenient buzzword: overcapacity. The narrative dictates that China’s competitive edge in green technology is purely the result of unfair state subsidies.

It is a narrative that fundamentally fails the logic test. Carl Bildt, Co-Chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations and former Prime Minister of Sweden, recently punctured this rhetoric with brutal clarity: “I find the concept of ‘overcapacity’ ridiculous. Does Germany have an overcapacity in cars? France one in wine? Sweden in heavy trucks? Italy in fashion? And don’t tell me that European food exports aren’t subsidised.”

Bildt’s observation exposes a glaring double standard. Decades ago, when German and Japanese automotive titans leveraged their absolute dominance in internal combustion engine (ICE) technology to aggressively enter and dominate the nascent Chinese market, the West proudly called it “comparative advantage.” Today, when China achieves the same via a 20-year strategic bet on battery technology and extreme vertical integration—honed in the most fiercely competitive domestic market on earth—that identical comparative advantage is suddenly branded a “national security threat.”

The Cost of the Green Transition and the Reality of Inflation

More concerning is that this defensive policy stance is generating negative spillover effects on broader macroeconomic objectives. Europe has long positioned itself as a model in advancing the global climate agenda. Particularly following the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the reshaping of Europe’s energy supply chains has become exceptionally urgent. Securing affordable and efficient green energy and related technologies is not merely a prerequisite for achieving its ambitious decarbonisation targets; it is also critical for curbing inflationary pressures and stabilising the broader economy.

The industrial advantages and economies of scale that China has amassed in the new energy sector—spanning photovoltaics, batteries, and electric vehicles (EVs)—could have offered robust support for Europe’s green transition. There exists immense potential for deep cooperation between the two sides in technological exchange and supply chain integration. However, the proliferation of trade barriers and compliance scrutiny is increasingly undermining this prospect. Sacrificing long-term climate cooperation for the sake of short-term industrial defence essentially inflates Europe’s own decarbonisation costs artificially, and risks delaying the region’s progress in reining in inflation.

Leave a comment

200,000 Tonnes of Pork for a Lithography Machine

Beneath the rhetoric of “overcapacity” lies the EU’s persistent complaint regarding its trade deficit with China. However, resolving a trade imbalance requires expanding the pie of high-value exports, not shutting the door to affordable imports.

The structural truth of the China-EU trade imbalance can be captured in a stark, brutal arithmetic: it takes the export of approximately 200,000 tonnes of European pork to equal the profit generated by the sale of a single high-end ASML lithography machine to China.

Europe cannot have it both ways. It cannot blindly follow Washington’s export control regime—cutting off its most lucrative, high-tech exports to China under the expansive umbrella of “national security”—and then complain that its trade ledger is unbalanced because it is only selling luxury goods and agricultural products in return. You cannot refuse to sell your partner the technology they want to buy, and then cry foul when they sell you the green industrial goods you desperately need.

The China-EU economic relationship is fundamentally complementary and mutually beneficial. Retreating behind a regulatory wall of FSR probes and tariffs is not a strategy for economic resilience; as Stefan Reindl pointed out, it is simply “bullshit” that masks a deeper confession of industrial inertia. To truly secure its economic future, Europe must muster the courage to face market competition and confidently resume high-tech, free trade.

This collision is not merely an aesthetic quirk; it is the manifestation of a profound historical pivot. For over a century, following the Opium War of 1840, China’s modernisation was largely synonymous with catching up to the West. From the early Qing Dynasty’s attempts to ‘open eyes to the world’ to the May Fourth Movement’s pursuit of democracy and science, the nation was locked in a relentless race. Today, however, amidst what the Chinese leadership terms “profound changes unseen in a century,” a striking shift in the zeitgeist is palpable. China is reclaiming its 5,000-year historical legacy with unprecedented confidence. This is vividly reflected in the daily lives of its citizens—from the resurgence of traditional Hanfu garments to the overwhelming popularity of museum exhibitions led by institutions like the National Museum of China.

These cultural symbols have even inadvertently crossed borders. Previously, when Elon Musk’s young son, X, accompanied Donald Trump on a visit to China, a photograph taken inside the Great Hall of the People unexpectedly went viral on Chinese social media. In the image, the boy was dressed in a traditional Chinese-style jacket and carried a folkloric “tiger-head” bag from Guangxi. At this very fair, I happened to interview the startup behind that exact bag. The founder explained that their designs are drawn entirely from authentic traditional Chinese patterns, with every stitch sewn by hand by local embroidery artisans in Guangxi. The Guochao (China Chic) phenomenon is no longer just a consumer trend; it is the physical manifestation of a nation re-anchoring itself in its own profound historical roots.

This seamless blending of eras extends beyond fashion into the realm of cutting-edge technology, where the line between cultural expression and technological prowess is becoming increasingly blurred. At one booth, a remarkably lifelike humanoid robot, resembling a two-year-old toddler, conversed fluently with international visitors. Nearby, robotic bands and table tennis-playing automatons drew massive crowds. In another corner, a fully automated robotic barista was hard at work: visitors simply uploaded a photograph to the system, and the robot precisely crafted a bespoke latte featuring their face in the foam art. It is astonishing to consider the rapid iteration of these machines; mere years after making their debut on national television during The Spring Festival Gala, they are now seamlessly transitioning from entertainment novelties to practical replacements for human labour in factories. The exhibition begs a compelling question: as artificial intelligence continues to weave itself into the fabric of daily life, how will it ultimately redefine the future of human creativity?

Shenzhen itself is perhaps the most fitting backdrop for this evolution. Having transformed from a modest fishing village forty years ago into a sprawling metropolis, it now projects an aura reminiscent of global hubs like Miami or Hong Kong. As the host city for APEC this year, Shenzhen is eager to showcase an inclusive, green vision for the future. This provoked a profound sense of time travel: at this very moment, thousands of miles away in London, the renowned Chelsea Flower Show is in full bloom. This time last year, I was on the ground reporting on that quintessential British horticultural event; now, strolling through Shenzhen, I witnessed a parallel dedication to ecology and greenery. The city’s myriad parks and green spaces echo the urban landscapes I grew accustomed to in London—albeit with a much more formidable subtropical climate. Yet, the city’s true character was best captured by a highly ‘Shenzhen’ phenomenon on the exhibition floor: a row of security guards standing firmly in front of a booth, holding signs declaring that the exhibitor had misrepresented their products. It was a stark, uncompromising demand for integrity, proving that in this city of innovation, trust and quality remain the ultimate currency.

However, for all its domestic vibrancy, the fair also highlights a glaring strategic gap.

The exhibition offers a comprehensive panorama of China’s cultural industry, showcasing undeniable strengths in hardware—with giants like DJI and Insta360—and thriving domestic digital platforms such as Xiaohongshu and Bilibili. The commercialisation of intangible cultural heritage is also yielding impressive results, as seen with local entrepreneurs successfully transforming traditional bamboo and rattan weaving into coveted international fashion accessories.

Yet, a distinct absence remains. While the domestic film and television sectors are undergoing massive transformations, China still lacks a globally resonant cultural production powerhouse—there is no Disney, Universal, or Netflix. China possesses world-class infrastructure, but the institutions capable of broadcasting Chinese narratives to a truly global audience are still in their infancy. Building these international cultural bridges must undoubtedly be the next great frontier for China’s cultural industry. Until then, China’s cultural renaissance remains a spectacular domestic phenomenon, waiting for its moment on the global stage.

Nine years ago, covering President Xi Jinping’s visit to the United States, I stood in a makeshift workspace not far from Mar-a-Lago in Florida. Through a monitor, I watched the first handshake between the Chinese and American heads of state under the warm southern sun. At that time, the air was thick with a mixture of cautious expectation and uncertain…

Read more

The CPC’s Central Political Bureau has greenlit a strategic overhaul of China’s backbone, transitioning from traditional “bricks and mortar” to a high-tech, integrated ecosystem known as the “Six Networks” (六张网). “加强水网、新型电网、算力网、新一代通信网、城市地下管网、物流网等规划建设。推动条件成熟的重大工程项目开工。”

According to China’s state media, Economic Daily (经济日报), with an estimated 7 trillion y…

Read more

Redrawing the Map of Southeast Asia

For decades, China’s southwestern provinces—Guizhou, Yunnan, and Sichuan—have faced a geographical paradox: they are “near the sea but have no access to it.” To reach international markets, goods had to travel over 500km east through the crowded waterways of the Pearl River Delta in Guangdong.

That is officially changing. The Pinglu Canal (平陆运河), the first major canal built in China since the founding of the PRC, is not just a ditch in the ground—it is a 134.2-kilometre structural realignment of Asia’s logistics.

As a backbone project of the New International Land-Sea Trade Corridor in western China, the canal links the Pingtang River estuary in Nanning, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, to the Beibu Gulf (北部湾， or Gulf of Tonkin) via the Qinjiang River. (See map below)

On 1 May, the Pinglu Canal project marked a historic transition as the cofferdam at the Qingnian Hub—the gateway nearest the sea—was officially demolished.

This critical step initiated flowing-water debugging, allowing engineers to test the waterway’s operational integrity under real-world conditions. By opening the gates to the tide, the project enters a high-stakes validation phase to ensure the ship locks and flow-control systems meet the rigorous standards required for China’s new southern artery.

The demolition signifies that the canal is no longer a construction site, but a living waterway preparing to connect the heart of Southwest China to the global ocean.

Subscribe now

If you have an interest in China’s mega project, read this article too:

The “Miracle” by the Numbers

While the Great Wall is a relic of the past, the Pinglu Canal is a testament to 21st-century civil engineering. To understand the scale of what is being achieved in the heart of Guangxi, consider these milestones:

• Earthwork Titan: The project requires excavating 339 million cubic metres of earth and rock. To put that in perspective, that is roughly three times the volume of the Three Gorges Dam excavation.

• The Water-Saving Giants: The canal features three massive inland ship locks—Maodao, Qishi, and Qingnian. The Maodao Hub is now the world’s largest water-saving ship lock, using a complex system of lateral basins to recycle over 60% of the water used during lockage.

• Eco-Engineering: This isn’t a concrete scar. The project includes “fish highways” (dedicated bypasses for aquatic migration) and China’s first “Ecological Bridges” designed specifically for terrestrial wildlife to cross the canal safely. (This is insane and of course GREAT. Check the video below: A bridge just for animals)

Leave a comment

The Strategic “Why”: More Than Just Shipping

Why spend an estimated 72.7 billion RMB on a canal?

1. The RCEP Accelerator

The Canal serves as the “backbone” of the New Western Land-Sea Corridor. With the RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) now in full swing, the canal allows China’s industrial heartland to bypass the congested South China Sea routes and drop goods directly into the Beibu Gulf, headed for Singapore, Vietnam, and Indonesia.

2. Ending the “Guangdong Dependency”

Currently, Guangxi’s inland shipping is bottlenecked at the Changzhou Lock in the Pearl River system. The Pinglu Canal provides a direct “southward exit,” cutting the shipping distance to the sea by 560km. This reduces logistics costs by over 5.2 billion RMB annually.

3. Turning Nanning into a “Seaport”

Through the canal, Nanning—a city 200km inland—effectively becomes a coastal hub. This shift is expected to trigger a massive industrial migration from the oversaturated eastern seaboard to the lower-cost western provinces.

Business Opportunities for foreign companies:

Read more

China has taken a decisive step to safeguard its industrial sovereignty, invoking its legal “blocking statute” to neutralise the impact of unilateral U.S. sanctions. In a formal announcement on Saturday, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) issued a prohibition order targeting recent economic measures imposed by the U.S. Treasury, effectively ordering Chinese entities to ignore Washington’s “long-arm jurisdiction.”

The move follows the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s decision in late April to add five prominent Chinese refining and petrochemical enterprises—including Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refining Co., Ltd., Shandong Shouguang Luqing Petrochemical, and Shandong Jincheng Petrochemical—to the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list. The U.S. alleged these firms facilitated the trade of Iranian petroleum, a claim the affected companies and Chinese authorities have categorically denied.

Subscribe now

A Shield for National Interests

According to the MOFCOM announcement (Order No. 21 of 2026), the working mechanism for counteracting foreign legislation determined that the U.S. measures meet the criteria for “unjustified extra-territorial application.”

Under the Rules on Counteracting Unjustified Extra-territorial Application of Foreign Legislation, the Chinese government has now mandated that:

• Non-Recognition: No individual or entity in China is permitted to recognise or comply with the U.S. sanctions.

• Legal Recourse: Impacted companies like Hengli Petrochemical are now legally entitled to sue for compensation in Chinese courts if any party (including banks or insurers) stops providing services to them in compliance with the U.S. order.

• Exemption Petitions: Entities finding it impossible to comply with the prohibition due to exceptional circumstances must apply to MOFCOM for a specific waiver.

Institutional Response

Read more

On April 14, the State Council issued one of the most consequential directives in years for China's services sector. Guofa [2026] No. 7 sets an explicit, government-backed target: push total services output past ¥100 trillion (~$14 trillion) by 2030. It's a mandate backed by sector-specific policy, financial tools, and a refreshed stance toward foreign investment.

Six Opportunity Clusters Worth Watching

🖥️ Cluster 01: Digital Infrastructure & AI Services

Read more

“Ni Hao!” Standing at the podium of Tsinghua University, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez opened his speech with this Chinese greeting. During his twenty-minute address, he repeatedly referenced a world map brought to China in 1583 by the Italian missionary Matteo Ricci. While technically precise and rich in detail, that map was Eurocentric, relegating Asia to the periphery—a clear bias in perspective.

From April 11 to 15, Sánchez conducted a five-day official visit to China, his fourth in four years. During his stay, he explored Beijing’s cultural landmarks, including the Drum Tower and the Summer Palace, met with President Xi Jinping and other top leaders, visited two of China’s elite universities, and toured the Xiaomi Science and Technology Park, where he experienced Xiaomi’s latest smartphones, electric vehicles, and AI glasses. His visit generated significant buzz on Chinese social media. His previous stances on Middle Eastern issues—specifically his willingness to say “no” to the United States—had already bolstered his popularity. Now, footage of his travels captured by onlookers has gone viral on short-video platforms. Chinese netizens have dubbed the tall, athletic Prime Minister “dashing,” turning him into something of a digital icon.

Correcting the Coordinates: From Periphery to Center

The metaphor of Ricci’s map introduced by Sánchez has become a focal point for Chinese media. Historians often marvel at Ricci’s adaptability: when the Jesuit missionary realized his Eurocentric map clashed with the worldview of the “Middle Kingdom,” he collaborated with Ming official Li Zhizao to create the Kunyu Wanguo Quantu (A Map of the Myriad Countries of the World). By shifting the prime meridian 170 degrees to the left, he placed China at the center of the world

This 400-year-old “cartographic correction” finds a modern echo between Madrid and Beijing. During his visit, Sánchez remarked that even today, some still view the world through that same “distorted map.” In an era of accelerating multipolarity, refusing to see Asia as a periphery is not just a geographical acknowledgment, but an act of strategic self-reflection.

Sánchez’s metaphor is more than a historical retrospective; it is a profound geopolitical allegory. It traces the journey from an era of “perceptual bias”—where Europe was the center and Asia the edge—to a present where both nations seek new coordinates in a turbulent international order. A redrawing of “strategic resolve” is quietly underway.

A Crisis of Order: Moral Consensus Amidst “Collapse of Rites”

In the early spring of Beijing, the talks between the two sides touched upon deeper anxieties. The Chinese side invoked the idiom “Li Beng Yue Huai” (the collapse of rites and music). Originating from the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods (770 BC–221 BC), this term describes the disintegration of social ethics and order—a description that strikes a chord with the current global state of affairs.

From Venezuela to Iran, the proliferation of unilateralism and the weaponization of sanctions are viewed as the squeezing of justice by raw power. Here, China and Spain reached a subtle moral consensus: in an age where the “law of the jungle” threatens to return, defending the UN-centered international system is no longer a mere formality, but a sovereign responsibility toward global order.

Official Chinese statements described this consensus as “jointly answering the questions of our time.” According to the press release, President Xi Jinping noted that how a country treats international law and order reflects its worldview, values, and sense of responsibility. Both China and Spain are principled, moral nations that wish to stand on the right side of history, jointly defending true multilateralism and opposing a retreat into the law of the jungle.

In response, Spain expressed its desire for close communication and coordination with China to uphold international law and address global challenges. Spain’s embrace of multipolarity is, in essence, an attempt to revise the “obsolete map” dominated by a few superpowers.

Industrial Transformation: From “Pure Trade” to “Tech Sharing”

If diplomatic rhetoric provides the latitude and longitude of the map, industrial cooperation represents the actual cultivation of the land. Under the shadow of EU tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, Sánchez’s visit carried a strong sense of “risk hedging.” Spain’s ambition is clear: it is no longer content to be a mere destination for Chinese exports. Madrid seeks “technology sharing rather than simple imports,” and Chinese companies are responding with tangible investment:

Reshaping Capacity: Chery Automobile took over and renovated the former Nissan plant in Barcelona. This partnership will create an EV production hub with an annual capacity of 150,000 vehicles, directly generating 1,250 jobs and serving as a benchmark for industrial transformation.

Upstream Layout: Envision Energy is building Europe’s first LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate) battery gigafactory in Extremadura, while CATL is partnering with Stellantis to build a battery plant in Aragon. These investments fill a void in Spain’s manufacturing of core battery components, propelling the country to the forefront of Europe’s green transition.

Market Competence: Consumer choice is the ultimate proof. Statistics show that 2025 marked a historic turning point for Chinese cars in Spain, with their market share surpassing 10% for the first time. Sánchez’s personal test drive of the Xiaomi SU7 was interpreted by observers as an official endorsement of the competitiveness of China’s high-end manufacturing.

“Strategic Resolve”: Stability in an Era of Uncertainty

Read more

At the invitation of the CPC Central Committee and General Secretary Xi Jinping, Cheng Li-wun, Chairperson of the Kuomintang (KMT), led a delegation to visit the mainland from April 7 to 12. General Secretary Xi Jinping met with Chairperson Cheng Li-wun and delivered an important speech, providing direction for the development of relations between the t…

Read more

I. Headlines: Inner Mongolia Pilot FTZ Officially Unveiled

On April 11, 2026, the China (Inner Mongolia) Pilot Free Trade Zone was officially inaugurated, marking a pivotal shift in China’s “Northward Opening” strategy.

• Background: Spanning 119.74 square kilometers, the FTZ is divided into three strategic areas: Hohhot (the capital hub), Manzhouli (the Russian border gate), and Erenhot (the Mongolian border gate).

• The Blueprint: The zone aims to transform Inner Mongolia from a “pass-through” logistics corridor into a high-value industrial powerhouse. It focuses on integrating “New Quality Productive Forces” with traditional border trade.

• Significance: It serves as the final “missing piece” in China’s national FTZ layout. By connecting the China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor, it creates a land-based alternative to maritime trade, securing national energy, food, and computing resource chains.

II. Global Opportunities: Who Stands to Gain?

The establishment of this FTZ opens specific “green channels” for international stakeholders, particularly in sectors previously restricted.

1. Target Countries & Regions

• Russia & Mongolia: Deepening integration in minerals, livestock, and cross-border payment systems.

• Central Asia & Europe: Enhanced efficiency for China-Europe Railway Express “customized trains.”

• Belt & Road Partners: Opportunities in joint laboratory research and agricultural technology transfer.

2. Strategic Industries & Foreign Investment Access

III. Tech Deep-Dive: “East-to-West Computing” & the AI Engine

The most forward-looking aspect of the Inner Mongolia FTZ is its designation as a Green Computing Power Hub for China’s AI industry.

What is “East-to-West Computing”?

Similar to “South-to-North Water Diversion,” this national strategy moves data processing from China’s overcrowded eastern megacities (Beijing, Shanghai) to the energy-rich west.

Why Inner Mongolia?

• The “Green” Edge: Inner Mongolia possesses China’s most abundant wind and solar resources. AI training is energy-intensive; the FTZ allows AI firms to utilize low-cost, carbon-neutral “Green Power.”

• Climate & Proximity: The naturally cold climate reduces cooling costs for massive data centers (Lower PUE). Its proximity to Beijing ensures low latency (under 10ms), making it the “Back-end Brain” for the capital’s tech giants.

Impact on the AI Industry

Read more

Read more

As the 2026 National People’s Congress unfolds in Beijing, the release of the “15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030) for National Economic and Social Development” offers a sobering window into the strategic recalibration of the world’s second-largest economy. This blueprint is less a collection of aspirational milestones and more a fundamental restructuring of China’s logic for survival and prosperity in a volatile geopolitical era.

The document marks a definitive departure from the export-and-investment-led expansion of the past three decades, signalling a pivot toward an era of “high-quality” growth where resilience and technological self-reliance take precedence over raw speed.

Moving beyond GDP

The most striking posture of the 15th Five-Year Plan (FYP) draft is its deliberate de-emphasis of rigid growth targets. The draft specifies that GDP growth should be maintained within a “reasonable range,” with specific targets to be proposed “as appropriate each year,” rather than anchoring the nation to a static, five-year numerical leap. This shift reflects a cold-eyed assessment by the leadership regarding the overlap of cyclical, structural, and institutional challenges currently facing the country.

This “de-sensitization” to growth numbers is not an admission of weakness but a strategic retreat toward focus. The draft instead emphasises the steady improvement of “Total Factor Productivity” (TFP) to lay the groundwork for doubling per capita GDP by 2035. From Beijing’s perspective, if the marginal utility of growth has diminished, pursuing sheer volume would only exacerbate debt risks and resource misallocation. Consequently, the core mission for the next five years is to “optimise increments and revitalise stock,” prioritising the “security” and “advanced nature” of the industrial system to hedge against the social pressures of a slowing economy.

“AI+”: Remodelling industry

Read more

In the Government Work Report delivered on March 5, Chinese Premier Li Qiang stated that, in accordance with the Recommendations of the CPC Central Committee for Formulating the 15th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development, the State Council has drafted the Outline of the 15th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Developme…

Read more

On an afternoon in late February 2026, light and shadow swept across a humanoid robot codenamed “G1” in the laboratory of Unitree Robotics in East China’s Hangzhou. Steady-handed, it picked up a brush and wrote a vigorous Chinese character — “福” (Fu, meaning “good fortune”) — on a piece of red paper.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz bent down to take a closer look. The scene was rich in symbolism: more than 30 years ago, German experts came to China with blueprints and Siemens machine tools, teaching local factories how to achieve precision manufacturing. Today, the German chancellor has come in person, seeking a new support point for German industry at the intersection of artificial intelligence and humanoid robotics.

This subtle shift in vantage point reflects a profound adjustment in Berlin’s China policy. If the defining theme of the Olaf Scholz era was the defensively framed notion of “de-risking,” then Merz’s first visit to China in the Year of the Horse signals that Germany is moving into a more hard‑headed, realist phase — a phase of “re-calibration.”

Subscribe now

Farewell to the “De-risking” Illusion

When the idea of “de-risking” first emerged, it was seen as a way for Europe to maintain a “middle ground” and save face amid the strategic rivalry between China and the United States. But as a new wave of tariffs rolls in with the “Trump 2.0” era, Berlin has gradually come to realize that if it were to sever its ties with the world’s largest market, German industry would not truly “de-risk.” Instead, stripped of scale effects and innovation sources, it would face the risk of functional decline.

Merz’s itinerary in China — from Hangzhou to Beijing — is a concrete enactment of this “re-calibration.” “Calibration” here no longer means simply reducing dependence, but achieving a defensive form of symbiosis through “deep embedding.” His appearance at Siemens Energy’s plant in Hangzhou sent a clear signal: rather than pacing anxiously outside the walls, Germany would do better to become an indispensable technological node in China’s forthcoming “15th Five-Year Plan.”

Share

Xi Jinping’s “Three Points” and Strategic Steadiness

At the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing, Chinese President Xi Jinping put forward “three points” to Merz, providing a Chinese frame of reference for this “re-calibration” of China–Germany relations.

Reliable partners: Against the backdrop of growing skepticism in Washington toward the multilateral trading system, Beijing has stressed “mutual support,” hoping Germany will continue to play the role of a stable “guardian of order.”

Innovation partners: This cuts right to Germany’s sore spot. Whether it is BMW integrating DeepSeek’s reasoning capabilities, or Siemens joining hands with Shanghai Electric to advance the green and digital transformation of power grids, China and Germany are trying to build a new industrial standard of “German precision plus Chinese algorithms.”

People-to-people partners: This is aimed at repairing the social and cognitive rifts widened by ideological narratives.

Embedded within these “three points” is a core logic: in a geopolitical landscape marked by overlapping turbulence, the stability of China–Germany ties is itself a strategic asset that can hedge against external uncertainties.

Leave a comment

Joint Statement: Growing Up in Competition

The “China–Germany Joint News Statement” issued during the visit charted the course for this round of policy re-calibration.

First, the statement defines bilateral ties as an “all-around strategic partnership,” emphasizing that their economic and trade relations should be long-term, balanced, reliable, and sustainable. For Germany, this is a defensive framework designed to buffer the shocks of Trump-style unilateralism.

Second, the two sides explicitly wrote their respective concerns into the joint document, no longer sidestepping problems in the relationship. In other words, China–Germany ties are entering a more mature stage in which competition and cooperation co-exist: the goal is no longer to avoid friction, but to “manage competition” through institutionalized consultation mechanisms.

“German Hardware, Chinese Soul”

Read more

The era of “Made in China” as a singular, low-cost manufacturing label has officially passed. In its place, Beijing has architected a sophisticated “Innovation Troika”—a trio of regional engines designed to transform the country from a technology adopter into a global technology definer. For the international investor, the challenge is no longer just whether to be in China, but precisely where to sit within this new map of “New Quality Productive Forces.”

2026年，中国将高水平推进三大国际科技创新中心建设，加快建设区域科技创新中心，打造辐射带动区域高质量发展的创新增长极，因地制宜发展新质生产力。

0. The Industrial Mosaic: Mapping Sector Specialization

While all three hubs are racing toward “high-tech” supremacy, they are not running on the same track. Their industrial priorities are shaped by deep-seated regional legacies: Beijing is the architect of the future, Shanghai is the master of complex systems, and the GBA is the engine of the commercial frontier.

Beijing: Sovereignty through the “Deep & Future”

Beijing’s industrial strategy is an extension of its political identity. It focuses on the “Invisibles”—the foundational technologies that underwrite national security. The city has become the undisputed home for Quantum Information and Advanced AI Algorithms, where the goal isn’t just to build an app, but to own the underlying framework. Beyond the digital, Beijing has carved out a unique niche in Commercial Aerospace. At its “Rocket Street” in E-town, the focus is on satellite constellations and reusable launch vehicles, turning the city into a strategic terminal for the low-altitude economy. If an industry requires immense capital, decades of patience, and a “Black Swan” breakthrough, it is likely being built in Beijing.

Shanghai: The Bastion of Precision and Scale

Shanghai operates at the intersection of high-end manufacturing and global finance. Its specialization lies in Integrated Sovereignty, specifically the entire semiconductor lifecycle. While others design chips, Shanghai makes them, hosting the country’s most advanced fabrication plants. This “heavy lifting” extends to Biomanufacturing and Innovative Drugs, where Shanghai is moving away from generics toward original molecular discovery. The region also remains the heart of China’s Automotive and Aviation industries. Here, the focus is on the “Big Machines”—the C919 large aircraft and high-end New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) that require a vast, high-precision supply chain that only the Yangtze River Delta can provide.

Greater Bay Area: The Pulse of Hardware and Speed

The GBA’s industrial DNA is market-driven and ruthlessly efficient. It has transformed from the “world’s factory” into the “world’s laboratory for hardware.” Its focus is on Mass-Market High-Tech—think 5G/6G telecommunications, high-end consumer drones, and the next generation of Wearable IoT. While Beijing writes the code, the GBA builds the device. Recently, the region has pivoted aggressively toward the Low-Altitude Economy and Robotics, leveraging its dense network of electronics suppliers to iterate humanoid robots and eVTOL (electric vertical takeoff and landing) aircraft at a speed that baffles global competitors. In the GBA, an industry is only as good as its ability to scale and dominate the global shelf.

1. The National Brain: Beijing and the “0 to 1” Frontier

Beijing remains the undisputed center of gravity for fundamental research. This is where the country’s “chokepoint” technologies are being tackled in the laboratories of Zhongguancun and the sprawling “Science Cities” of Huairou and Changping.

While the “Three Science Cities” handle the theoretical breakthroughs, the Yizhuang Economic-Technological Development Area (E-town) has emerged as the critical “hands” for this “brain.” E-town is where quantum computing patents and AI algorithms meet high-end assembly lines. For investors, Beijing represents the “Deep Tech” play—it is high-risk, high-barrier, and deeply aligned with national security and sovereign self-reliance.

( 北京：中关村科学城、怀柔科学城、未来科学城和北京经济技术开发区，即“三城一区”)

北京提出，提升雄安新区中关村科技园发展能级，建设北京—雄安人才科创走廊。天津将做优科创服务生态，大力发展研究开发、概念验证、知识产权、企业孵化等业态，建设20个校企联合实验室，加快重点产业和领域中试平台建设。河北明确，建强用好燕赵系列实验室，聚焦重点产业突破一批关键核心技术。

2. The Industrial Backbone: Shanghai’s Integrated Sovereignty

If Beijing is the brain, Shanghai and the Yangtze River Delta form the central nervous system of Chinese industry. The focus here is “1 to 100”—taking a proven technology and integrating it into a massive, high-precision industrial ecosystem.

Through the Zhangjiang Science City and the Lin-gang Special Area, Shanghai has achieved a complete, end-to-end semiconductor supply chain. This makes Shanghai the premier destination for institutional capital seeking scale and “Patient Capital” opportunities in sectors like biopharma and commercial aviation.

在推进国际科技创新中心建设中，强化科产创新跨区域协同是三省一市(安徽、江苏、浙江+上海)的共同发力重点。

3. The Agile Accelerator: Rapid Iteration in the GBA

The Greater Bay Area (GBA) excels at “100 to N”—the rapid commercialization and global scaling of hardware. The GBA is a sprawling, interconnected workshop where a prototype can move from a sketch to a production run faster than anywhere else on earth.

With the Hetao Shenzhen-Hong Kong Innovation Zone (河套深港科技创新合作区）bridging the gap, the GBA offers a unique “Dual System” advantage. Investors can leverage Hong Kong’s common law and familiar financial architecture to access the raw manufacturing power of the mainland. This is the heart of the world’s consumer drone, IoT, and EV hardware sectors.

🌍 Global Benchmarks: Learning from the World’s Best

Recent analysis highlights that China’s three hubs are increasingly adopting “Global Best Practices” from established innovation clusters like Boston, Munich, and Singapore. This convergence provides a more predictable framework for international investors:

• The “Boston Model” of Industry-Academia Fusion: Mirroring the success of MIT’s Technology Licensing Office, China’s hubs are bridging the “Valley of Death” between labs and markets. New policies are encouraging researchers to hold equity in startups, creating a “demand-oriented” R&D cycle similar to the AstraZeneca-London collaboration.

• “Patient Capital” Infrastructure: Following the “Tolerance for Failure” culture of Silicon Valley and the long-term credit models of Munich, China is restructuring its state-guided funds. Investors are seeing a shift toward 8-12 year investment cycles, providing a stable capital buffer for high-stakes ventures like solid-state batteries and quantum networking.

• The “Singapore/Paris” Open Ecosystem: To attract global talent, the three hubs are implementing “Tech Pass” style fast-track visas and tax incentives. By adopting international standards for Intellectual Property (IP) protection—where punitive damages are reaching global norms—China is attempting to build an environment where multinational R&D teams feel as secure as they do in Europe or Southeast Asia.

💡 Investor Insight: The Transfer Gap Alpha

For the global investment community, the primary opportunity lies in the deliberate friction between these three hubs. The real “Alpha” is often found in the Transfer Gap. As technologies move from Beijing’s labs to Shanghai’s integration centers, and finally to the GBA’s global export machines, there is a massive demand for specialized financial services, intellectual property brokerage, and cross-border legal consulting.

Read more

Date: February 16, 2026

The 62nd Munich Security Conference (MSC) has concluded not with a consensus, but with a palpable sense of dread. The flagship report, aptly titled “Under Destruction,” captures a world where the old guardrails are being systematically dismantled. But the real story wasn’t just in the printed reports—it was in the visceral, sometimes jarring, exchanges on the floor that signaled a profound shift in how the world’s powers view their survival.

The “Munich Moment”: Wang Yi’s Gamble on Historical Memory

The defining moment of the conference came during Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s session. It was a masterclass in “Bottom-line Diplomacy,” but delivered with a sharpness that left some diplomats unsettled.

The crux of the tension lies in Tokyo’s recent strategic pivot. The Takaichi administration in Japan has been increasingly vocal about its “survivability” in a Taiwan conflict, effectively linking the security of the Taiwan Strait to Japan’s own sovereign defense. Wang Yi didn’t just rebut this; he weaponized the venue itself. Standing on German soil—a nation that has spent eighty years performing the arduous work of historical “liquidation”—Wang drew a stinging parallel. He lauded Germany for its moral clarity while accusing Japan of harboring “unabandoned colonial ambitions” and allowing the “ghost of militarism” to dictate its modern defense posture.

His warning was devoid of typical diplomatic ambiguity: “If Japan seeks to gamble once more, it will face a swifter defeat and a more disastrous loss.” This was a calculated move to frame Japan as the “Revisionist Power” in the eyes of the West, using the memory of World War II to invalidate Japan’s current push for security “normalization.”

Subscribe now

A House Divided: The Transactional West

While Beijing was drawing red lines in Asia, the “Western” front showed deep fissures. The discourse from Washington has shifted from “leadership” to “leverage.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s presence in Munich was less about reassuring allies and more about setting the terms of a new, transactional contract. The message to Berlin and Paris was clear: the American security umbrella is no longer a public good—it is a conditional service. This has forced Germany into a state of “Anxious Realism.” Chancellor Merz’s government is now walking a razor’s edge—scrambling to build a “European pillar” of defense to appease Washington, while simultaneously resisting “de-coupling” from China to save its struggling industrial heartland.

Meanwhile, France continues to play the “Strategic Autonomist.” The French delegation’s rhetoric suggests they have already mourned the death of the old transatlantic order. For Paris, the instability is an opportunity to forge a “Third Pole,” seeking a pragmatic, if tense, coexistence with Beijing to offset the “Wrecking-ball Politics” coming out of a polarized Washington.

Leave a comment

Investor Insight: Pricing the “Destruction”

Read more

Welcome to this week’s edition of China Decoded. Every year, as late January or February rolls around, a familiar debate sparks across international media, corporate PR departments, and online forums: Should we call it Chinese New Year or Lunar New Year?

What seems like a simple question of translation actually sits at a fascinating intersection of astr…

Read more

This is a conversation space exclusively for subscribers—kind of like a group chat or live hangout. I’ll post questions and updates that come my way, and you can jump into the discussion.

Join chat

Read more

1. The New Red Packet War: Qwen, Yuanbao, Doubao

This Chinese New Year, China’s internet didn’t just revive the old “payments red packet war” – it rebooted it for the AI era. Instead of coupons buried in apps, people opened their phones and watched AI models pay for breakfast, milk tea and late‑night snacks.

Three players dominated the battlefield:

• Alibaba’s Qwen: The milk‑tea avalanche
  Alibaba’s Qwen app launched a “30‑billion‑yuan mega free‑order” campaign: users typed one sentence to ask the AI to order milk tea, snacks, or takeout, and the bill was wiped. Within three hours, Qianwen processed over 1 million milk‑tea orders; an hour later that number doubled, and some stores in major cities flipped to “closed” simply because they were overwhelmed. Crucially, Qianwen was not acting alone. It was wired directly into Taobao, Feizhu, Freshippo and Alipay, turning the AI assistant into an entry point to Alibaba’s entire commerce ecosystem rather than a standalone app.​

• Tencent’s Yuanbao: WeChat social graph + 1 billion yuan
  Tencent’s Yuanbao announced a 1‑billion‑yuan New Year cash giveaway: users logged in to grab cash, completed tasks to enter draws, and could win big‑ticket rewards such as “Pony Cards” worth up to 10,000 yuan. The mechanics were built around sharing to WeChat and QQ contacts to maximise viral spread. Once the campaign kicked off, Yuanbao shot to the top of the free‑app chart in Apple’s App Store in China, at one point overtaking ByteDance’s Doubao.​ Yuanbao’s core asset is WeChat. By embedding AI assistants into the WeChat ecosystem and leaning on the social graph for retention and conversion, Tencent is playing to its most durable advantage.​

• ByteDance’s Doubao: Grabbing the Spring Festival Gala stage
  Doubao, ByteDance’s general‑purpose AI assistant, chose a different route: on 10 February, it was announced as part of the tech stack behind China Central Television’s Spring Festival Gala, with ByteDance’s Volcano Engine serving as the show’s exclusive AI cloud partner. During the Gala and the holiday window, Doubao gave out over 100,000 “tech red packets” – robots, drones, smart devices – plus cash rewards, directly tying “AI red packets” to hardware‑driven tech consumption.

If the last generation of red packet wars pitted Alipay against WeChat Pay, 2026’s version is the first time Qwen (Alibaba), Yuanbao (Tencent) and Doubao (ByteDance) have collided explicitly as AI platforms.​

Subscribe now

2. Why Spend This Much? It’s Not About Milk Tea

On the surface, this looks like a classic “big tech burning cash for user growth” story. In reality, it is a coordinated – and very expensive – crash course in turning AI models into national‑scale consumer products.

• They’re fighting for the “first AI touchpoint”
  Chinese media has framed this as a battle for the “new AI traffic gateway”: whoever wins mindshare during China’s most important holiday has a better shot at becoming the default assistant for everyday tasks – search, shopping, food delivery, travel and payments. This is less about pure downloads and more about answering a strategic question: when a Chinese user has a problem in three years’ time, which AI do they instinctively open first?

• Subsidies crush the “try it once” barrier
  For non‑technical users, generative AI has mostly been a buzzword. With Qianwen wiping bills, Yuanbao sending cash, and Doubao giving away gadgets, people are experiencing a direct, tangible loop: say one sentence to an AI, something real happens in the physical world – and it benefits you.
  That is a much stronger form of onboarding than a generic “try our chatbot” campaign.

• Massive real‑world data to train on
  The campaigns are generating interactions at extraordinary scale: millions of orders, hundreds of millions of prompts, tied to time, location, preferences, and success/failure patterns.
  For the model builders, this is not just marketing. It amounts to a nationwide A/B test and stress‑test of multi‑modal models across ordering, recommendations, natural language understanding and error handling.

• Filtering for users who stay when the subsidies vanish
  Industry estimates put the total subsidy envelope for this year’s “AI red packet war” in the 4–5 billion yuan range, but capital has become more cautious since the first wave of “model hype.”
  What really matters for valuations is what remains after the party: retention, daily active users, average time spent, and the ability to convert AI usage into e‑commerce, advertising and B2B service revenue.

Seen that way, the frenzy around free drinks and cash is an expensive but deliberate “national onboarding exercise” for AI – and a data‑rich stress test for the underlying business models.

Leave a comment

3. Domestic vs Global: Two Diverging AI Playbooks

This New Year’s battle also crystallises how China’s AI trajectory is diverging from the US‑led model.

• At home: from “big models” to “everyday infrastructure”
  China’s large‑model market is expected to exceed 70 billion yuan in 2026, with a three‑year compound growth rate above 40%. More than 80,000 enterprises are already deploying models, with that figure forecast to pass 100,000 this year.
  The key takeaway from the holiday campaigns is that Chinese tech giants are focused on burying AI inside concrete services: e‑commerce, food delivery, local services, mobility, and even public services.
  The narrative is less about “frontier science” and more about: can AI actually do something useful inside the apps people already live in?

• Abroad: “model + API” and enterprise SaaS first
  The US‑centric ecosystem still emphasises the “model + plugins/API” approach: OpenAI, Anthropic and others provide general‑purpose capabilities, and third‑party developers build applications and SaaS products on top. Consumer assistants exist, but they are not tightly coupled with a national payments rail, commerce platform, or super‑app in the way WeChat, Taobao or Douyin are in China.
  In short:

  • China is pushing a “super‑app‑embodied AI” paradigm.

  • The US is leaning into an “AI as the new cloud layer” paradigm.

• Strengths and gaps: strong at home, weaker globally
  In Chinese‑language understanding, long‑form content, commerce recommendations and local‑services orchestration, top Chinese models can already stand alongside global leaders – and in some conversion metrics they are stronger because they are tightly integrated with transactions.
  But on frontier research, truly general foundational models, and building a global developer ecosystem, China still lags the US bloc. That gap shows up in API usage patterns, open‑source community activity, and where global startups choose to build first.

A crude but useful mental model:

• China is building an “AI‑powered version of China Internet 2.0”, anchored in domestic demand and dense application scenarios.

• The US is building an “AI‑powered version of Cloud 2.0”, anchored in exporting infrastructure and tools globally.

Those two strategies will inevitably collide in overseas markets and in the standards battles ahead.

Share

4. For Investors: Four Things to Watch Under the Foam

Read more

(This image is created by Gemini and Adobe firefly)

The era of Chinese companies simply shipping containers to European ports is ending. In its place, a more sophisticated, “boots-on-the-ground” strategy is emerging. From the whimsical world of designer toys to the high-stakes industry of electric vehicle batteries, Chinese giants are moving their intellectual and operational hearts to the West.

Last week’s announcement that Pop Mart—the creative powerhouse behind the viral Labubu—will establish its European headquarters in London is the latest signal of this “Great Localization.” But they aren’t alone. Whether it’s CATL powering German EVs from Hungarian soil or Chery reviving manufacturing in Liverpool, the Chinese corporate map is being redrawn with London and the EU at its center.

🧸 The Labubu Effect: Why Pop Mart Picked London

Pop Mart’s decision to plant its European roots in London is a calculated move to transform from a “Chinese brand selling toys” into a “global IP house.” By setting up a regional hub in the UK, the company is positioning itself at the intersection of global finance and the “world’s creative ecosystem.”

This isn’t just about administrative offices. Pop Mart is embarking on an aggressive retail blitz, with plans to open 27 new stores across Europe this year alone. Seven of these will be in the UK, including high-profile flagships in Birmingham, Cardiff, and London’s iconic Oxford Street. This expansion is expected to create over 150 jobs in the UK, a figure that Prime Minister Keir Starmer personally welcomed during his recent diplomatic visit to China.

For Pop Mart, London is a talent magnet. By being physically present, they can recruit European artists to “localize” their IPs, moving beyond the blind box novelty to create high-end collectibles that resonate with Western aesthetics. They have already found success partnering with British icons like Harry Potter, and the new HQ will serve as a lab to deepen these collaborations. However, the “Pain” remains the high cost of retail—Oxford Street rents are a far cry from the malls of Chengdu—and the brand must now prove its “ugly-cute” characters can maintain longevity in a market dominated by heritage players like Lego and Disney.

Subscribe now

⚡ The Industrial Backbone: Energy & EVs

While Pop Mart handles the “soft power,” the “hard power” of Chinese industry is undergoing a similar metamorphosis. The strategy here is simple: Invisibility through Integration.

In the energy sector, CATL has shifted from a mere supplier to an essential part of the European infrastructure. By investing over €7 billion in its Debrecen Gigafactory in Hungary, it has effectively bypassed the EU’s “Battery Passport” regulations and potential tariffs on imported cells. CATL is no longer a Chinese exporter; it is a European manufacturer, creating thousands of local jobs and powering the electric fleets of BMW and Mercedes-Benz.

Meanwhile, in the automotive world, the narrative is shifting from “threat” to “partner.” Chery Commercial Vehicles recently announced Liverpool as its first European headquarters, aiming to bolster the UK’s advanced manufacturing base. Similarly, XPENG is rolling out an “AI-first” roadmap for the UK, launching the G6 SUV and the luxury X9 through a network of local dealers. These companies have learned that to win over European drivers, they must provide local servicing, local parts, and local accountability.

Leave a comment

📦 Logistics & Tech: The Omnichannel Movement

The localization trend extends to how Europeans shop. JD.com has moved past the “cross-border” phase by acquiring a significant stake in the German retail giant Ceconomy (the parent of MediaMarkt and Saturn). This gives JD.com instant access to over 1,000 physical stores across Europe.

The goal? To fuse China’s hyper-efficient automated logistics with traditional European brick-and-mortar retail. By using London and Berlin as testing grounds for their “Joybuy” platform and automated warehouses, they are attempting to beat Amazon at the “last mile” game. The gain is scale; the pain is the friction of integrating high-tech Chinese management styles with Europe’s rigid labor laws and work-life balance expectations.

⚖️ The Verdict: Gain vs. Pain

The Gains (Why They Stay)

Tariff Shield: Local production sidesteps the 20-35% duties facing Chinese-made goods.

Talent Access: Tapping into London’s creative and Berlin’s engineering pools.

Brand Prestige: Moving from “Made in China” to “Managed in London” boosts premium pricing.

The Pains (Why It’s Hard)

The “Geopolitical Tax”: Increased legal and compliance costs due to FDI vetting.

ESG Rigor: Meeting the EU’s strict 2026 sustainability and carbon reporting standards.

Cultural Friction: Managing the transition from China’s “996” culture to EU labor rights.

📈 Strategic Advice for Investors: The “Glocal” Opportunity

Read more