原标题：国是访问丨德国“隐形冠军之父”谈中国制造：要实事求是，不要空想
德国人开始意识到，德国在工业领域的优势正在逐渐消失。
中国、韩国等后发工业国家通过发展先进技术、海外并购等措施迅速崛起，正在不断缩短与德国之间的差距。
但善于反思的德国人并没有简单地用加征关税的方式解决这个问题，而是反问了自己一个问题：在全球化趋势不断发展、创新进程极大加快、其他国家扩张性和保护主义工业政策日益抬头的背景下，如何维护“德国制造”的领先优势和可持续发展？
德国人用一份国家战略回答了这个问题，在最近发布的德国《国家工业战略2030》中，提出通过国家适度干预重点工业领域，打造德国或欧洲的龙头企业，继续保持德国工业在欧洲乃至全球的竞争力。
值得一提的是，在《国家工业战略2030》中，特别强调了“隐形冠军”对德国工业的重要性。
德国管理学教授赫尔曼·西蒙提出了“隐形冠军”的概念，他也因此被称为“隐形冠军之父”。他对于隐形冠军的定义是：全球市场占有率第一或第二；年产值在二十亿欧元左右；鲜为大众所知。
德国管理学教授赫尔曼·西蒙 受访者供图
按此标准，德国是全球隐形冠军企业最多的国家，有近1400家，占全球总数的近50%。
德国是步入服务化社会的发达国家，仍然提出提高制造业在GDP中的比重，仍在不断强调制造业的主导地位。对于中国而言，加快从“制造大国”走向“制造强国”愈发显得必要而紧迫。
这一目标该如何实施？为此，中国新闻社国是直通车专访了赫尔曼·西蒙。他思考缜密，见解独到，特别是对中国有相当程度的研究，对复杂多元问题的深刻细致回答，使这一专访的学术内涵和实践意义凸显。
以下为访谈实录翻译：
中新社国是直通车：在我们谈论具体问题之前，你能否与我们分享一下你对作为“世界工厂”的中国的制造业能力的总体印象？
西蒙：正如多年来人们所预料的那样，中国已经成为“世界工厂”。中国经历了从低成本、低价格、低质量的生产者到中等成本和价格、有质量的生产者的转变。在某些行业，中国企业已成为世界级的制造商，铁路就是一个很好的例子。但总的来说，中国产品的质量还没有达到德国产品的水平。重要的是要做到实事求是，而不要空想。客观质量是一方面，感知质量是另一方面。感知质量是通过客观质量加上品牌来塑造的。品牌塑造仍然是中国企业的一个短板。世界百强企业中只有两家是中国企业，华为排在第70位，联想排在第100位。
中新社国是直通车：作为话题的延续，在改革开放政策坚定实施的过去四十年中，你如何评价中国的技术进步？为什么技术和创新在新经济中如此重要？
西蒙：当然，众所周知，中国的技术进步已经远远超出预期。仅仅在十年前，没有人会想到中国能在如此短的时间内达到现在的水平。在德国，我们谈到了20世纪50年代的“经济奇迹”。中国的“经济奇迹”至少和德国的一样令人印象深刻，如果不是更令人印象深刻的话。但我也再次强调现实主义的重要性。中国不能因为如此巨大进步而变得过于自信和自满。在许多领域，美国仍然是技术的领导者，并将在未来长时间里保持这一地位。空中客车是一家强大的欧洲公司，但据其首席执行官称，空客飞机上90%的电子设备均来自美国。
中新社国是直通车：中美贸易紧张局势已对世界贸易和经济产生重大负面影响，这是有目共睹的，并且目前尚未有彻底的解决方案。你对这一问题有何看法？如果世界最大的两个经济体之间冲突不断升级，德国商界应该如何应对？
西蒙：我希望在3月底之前能找到一个可行的解决方案。这次贸易冲突对中国、美国和德国都是真正的风险。特朗普是无法估量和预料的。他的顾问纳瓦罗的书是非常反华，但中国也应该改变其策略。只要人们认为他们可以窃取技术，就会存在严重贸易战的风险。如果中国和美国均坚持展示自己的实力，就难以达成好的结果。需再次强调现实主义的重要性。我希望有关各方能够坚信相互依存性，而不是坚信自己能打赢贸易战。正如德国从上世纪30年代吸取的教训，贸易战中不存在赢家。在德国，我们也非常担心。我们比中国和美国更加依赖和平贸易，德国近一半的GDP来自出口，许多德国公司在中国生产产品并将产品从中国出口到美国。
中新社国是直通车：2018年12月19日，德国联邦议院修订了《外国投资监管条例》，将监管审查的股权比例从25%降至10%。虽然它可能不是直接针对中国企业在德国的并购活动，但可能对中国企业产生巨大影响。你认为新法规的真正目的是什么？如何进一步解决国家安全与经济合作，特别是与中国合作之间的两难困境？
西蒙：我个人认为新法规没有意义。但它反映了政治家、业界人士，或许还有大多数德国人的情绪。在我看来，德国政府应该致力于为德国和外国公司在华创造一个公平的竞争环境，而不是阻碍外国和中国在德投资。我不认为新规则会产生太大影响。在一些关键领域，例如基础设施或国防，这些限制是可以理解和有意义的，但对90%的经济来说，这些限制都是无稽之谈。过去3年，中国投资者收购了162家德国公司，与之相对应，我们只收购了32家中国公司。这种数字的不平衡本身不是问题。问题在于，一些中国企业的收购相当激进。我认为，“中国制造”的过度宣传对中国在海外的投资造成了损害。的确，中国的海外投资非常成功。但我建议中国少夸耀这种成功以及随之而来的实力。中国收购者往往付出很高的代价。虽然这可能对卖家有利，但政界和公众并不看好。为什么？因为过高的价格会让人怀疑这些是政治性收购而非纯粹的商业收购。
中新社国是直通车：从以货物出口导向的国家到以资本和技术为重点的对外投资国家，中国的投资足迹广泛延伸。由于德国的制造业实力以及两国之间的互补性，德国一直是中国资金最重要的东道国之一，从经济和ESG的视角，你如何看待中国投资在德国的作用？关于新出台的法规，对中德合作有什么重大影响？会对德国经济产生什么影响？
西蒙：正如我所说的，我不认为会有大的影响。德国实际上需要更多的中国投资。目前，只有一家中国绿地工厂在德国运营。实际上，各州和各城市都在争夺中国的投资，这与联邦政府的限制截然相反。中德是理想的合作伙伴，必须找到合作的方式和途径。在过去这种合作非常有效，但如果过于自信，双方都不会获益。
中新社国是直通车：中国是德国最大的贸易伙伴，有一派观点认为，德国商界必须摆脱对中国的过度依赖。事实上，中国在学习和实践德国的技术专长和管理技能，中国对德国的依赖似乎表现得更为明显。你认为这种双向贸易和经济交流对双方甚至世界其他地区都有利吗？如果中国企业在并购交易中存在不当行为，你有何建议来解决这些问题？
西蒙：我不会谈及每个国家普遍的过度相互依赖。这是全球化的一大优势，它是一种风险分散机制。如果我们与许多国家进行更多和更大的贸易，这意味着每个国家对单一市场的依赖度更低。我也不会说依赖关系是非对称的。德国非常依赖中国作为目标市场，在这方面比中国对德国的依赖更多。另一方面，中国强烈依赖德国的投资和制造能力。在中国有大约有8500家德国公司，他们经营着2000多家工厂，在太仓就有300多家德国公司。如果这种现状受到阻碍，肯定对中国不利。我不认为我们可以普遍指责收购德国公司的中国收购者行为不当。对绝大多数人来说，情况恰恰相反。确实存在一些不端行为的案例，但我认为他们的比例低于收购德国公司的美国收购者比例。同样，我们遇到了沟通问题。中国人应该更加公开地就他们的计划进行沟通。媒体倾向于报道负面的案例并将其放大，但如果事情进展顺利，则不会进行报道。
中新社国是直通车：目前全球化在一定程度上出现倒退，但商品、资本、人员和信息的交流必将延续下去。你认为德中两国如何共同应对贸易保护主义和地缘政治角力的短期挑战，以开启人类美好未来的长期征程？
西蒙：我们不是需要更少，而是需要更多的全球化。如果印度或非洲不能向发达国家出口更多，也不能从发达国家进口更多，他们就没有机会迎头赶上。中国和德国可以成为自由贸易的榜样。他们是全球贸易的领导者，因此可以通过在欧洲、中国和其他地区之间创造的自由贸易流动来发挥巨大的影响力。这应该会促使美国最终效仿。
中新社国是直通车：中小企业被认为是任何经济体的支柱。德国在这方面非常成功，尤其是在中小企业领域，大量的“隐形冠军”已经出现。你是这个领域的杰出学者之一，或许是对中小企业这个独特领域的发展分析最透彻也是最有资格给出建议的学者。那么你认为，以中小企业为核心的“德国模式”自下而上促进整体经济的本质是什么呢？在整个过程中嵌入了哪些技术因素？
西蒙：在德国，并不是政府造就了强大的中等规模行业和众多隐形冠军，事实恰恰相反。通过提供一个稳定的政治环境，让他们自由生长，中小企业方可以蓬勃发展。没有单一的因素可以解释中小企业和隐形冠军的持续成功。重要因素包括寻求成为世界最优的企业家雄心，专注于细分市场，以及全球化。隐形冠军也非常具有创新性，这不单纯是技术问题，而是客户需求与技术的整合。不过，作为德国竞争力支柱之一的职业培训，是政府发挥决定性作用的领域。公司提供学徒制培训，政府管理职业学校。技术大学在与公司密切合作方面也发挥着关键作用。
中新社国是直通车：近年来，中国再次展现了对外开放的高度承诺，进一步优化了外商投资负面清单和持股比例条件。如何评价中国发展开放型经济的决心和行动，这将给德国企业带来哪些机遇？
西蒙：我非常认可中国的开放和相关限制的取消，这是正确的做法。但坦率地说，人们并不认为这是一种始终如一的做法。某些事件确实损害了人们对开放的严肃性的认识。中国必须更加严格地保护知识产权并消除腐败。
中新社国是直通车：在谈到中国的海外投资时，“一带一路”地区是不可或缺的，中国对在“一带一路”倡议下开展合作持开放态度。作为一名杰出的学者，对这一发展倡议有何看法？
西蒙：“一带一路”倡议意义重大。但中国不应忘记，它正在与许多弱小得多的国家打交道，这些国家很容易感到被一个非常强大的中国所主宰。我认为应该更加细致地处理这一倡议。这绝不是你做什么的问题，而是你如何做，尤其是你如何做好沟通。
中新社国是直通车：技术转让和商业互惠是跨国投资研究的热点和不可避免的话题。对所谓的“强制技术转让”你有何建议？我们如何在德国和中国之间建立更加互惠的关系，特别是在金融和工业投资领域？
西蒙：在发展的早期阶段，强制技术转移可能是必要的。今天，中国处于优势地位，任何强制或不适当的技术转让都应该放弃。我认为两国也应该停止从德国公司或中国公司角度考虑问题。现代的公司没有国籍。德国公司在中国经营一家好的工厂，对中国来说是一件幸事。一家在德国经营优质工厂的中国公司对德国来说是也一件幸事。我经常说，德国企业必须成为中国企业，中国企业同样也必须成为德国企业。我创建的咨询公司，雇员来自68个国家，在全球38个办事处工作。我们的原产地是德国，但我们不是德国公司。在北京和上海，我们是一家中国公司，我们所有的员工都是中国人。我个人认为我们公司已经超越了民族主义的范畴。但政客们和大多数人仍在以国家如果不是民族主义的角度思考问题。其结果就是我们今天所看到的贸易紧张局势和全球价值链被破坏的危险。
中新社国是直通车：德国主要商业游说团体德国工业联合会（BDI）在一份政策报告中建议，政府应保护德国的开放模式不受“国有经济主导的”中国经济的影响，对此你有何看法？
西蒙：德国工业联合会（BDI）发布的《合作伙伴和系统性竞争对手——我们应该如何应对中国国有经济》是一份全面的报告，涉及中德合作的许多重要方面。该报告对中国持批评态度，但并非不友好。我认为，双方都意识到他们相互依赖，必须找到妥协的办法。同时，报告也明确指出，中德两国的政治制度有着根本的不同。这在纯粹的商业层面上并不重要，但在中国政府干预的情况下，这就变得至关重要。到目前为止，这些分歧都被掩盖起来了。由于中国企业的成功，尤其是大量收购交易的成功，德国和世界其他地区对这种差异的认识已大幅提高。这一变化并不总是给人以中方完全理解的印象。在西方，人们怀疑中国政府或政党是否系统性地置身于商业事务之外。在我看来，如果中国想在出口和外国投资方面继续像以前那样成功，这是极其重要的。信任是国际贸易中最重要的因素之一。当然，在西方也不是所有的东西都是百分之百独立的。西方情报机构是否以及如何获取商业数据或许我们只能猜测，但至少有明确的法律分界线。德国企业和协会也应该承认，它们无法改变中国的某些政治状况。如果想在中国做生意，就必须接受中国的制度框架。然而，要有平等和公平对待的权利，每个伙伴都应坚持这一权利。
中新社国是直通车：我们注意到近期德国政府发布《国家工业战略2030》，旨在面对中美激烈竞争时继续保持领先。几个产业被认定为是德国制造的杰出代表，政府将予以支持。换言之，就是政府更趋于保护主义。你怎么解读德国政府更加介入商业活动的这种方向性变化？对作为德国产业支柱的中小企业有何影响？同时，如何在充分考虑政策变量的基础上实现中国和德国的双赢？
西蒙：对德国经济部发布的这份新产业战略各界意见不一，主流观点认为类似的产业政策在法国更为典型，而非德国。不过，该方案对中小企业和隐形冠军的影响有限。
中新社国是直通车：在后默克尔时代，部分以AKK成为基督教民主联盟新的领导人为标志，你认为可能会出现哪些变化，对中德经济关系有哪些重大影响？
西蒙：我对德国持乐观态度。但是，我们非常依赖欧洲、美国，也非常依赖中国。在这种背景下，中德关系是最不紧迫的问题之一。正如我在多次会谈中所说，中德两国非常融洽。我们有一种工业精神，人们努力工作，文化上也没有冲突。例如，大约有30万中国人生活在德国。不像其他少数民族，他们不会造成任何麻烦。我想在德国看到更多的中国工厂和公司。我也希望德国和外国公司能够更加自由地进入中国市场。这将惠及所有国家。
附英文实录：
CNS： Before we touch upon the specific questions， could you share with us your general impression on China’s manufacturing capability given its “world factory” or “the workshop of the world” status？
Simon： China has become the factory of the world， as expected for many years。 It has gone through a transformation from low cost， low price， low quality producer to a medium cost， price， quality producer。 In some sectors Chinese companies are world-class manufacturers， a good example are railroads。 But in general the quality of typical Chinese products is not yet at the level of German products。 It is important to be realistic about these facts and not to dream。 The objective quality is one side， the perceived quality is the other side。 Perceived quality is created through objective quality plus branding。 And branding remains a weakness of Chinese firms。 There are only two Chinese companies among the top 100 in the world， Huawei is No。 70 and Lenovo is No。 100。
CNS： As a natural follow-up， how do you evaluate China’s technological progress over the past 4 decades after the Reform and Opening-up policy was steadfastly implemented？ And why the technology and innovation is so critical in the context of the new economy？
Simon： Of course as everybody knows the technological progress of China has by far surpassed the expectations of the past。 Nobody would have thought only ten years ago that China could reach the current status within such a short time。 In Germany we talked of the “economic miracle” in the 1950s。 The Chinese “economic miracle” is at least as impressive， if not more impressive， than its German predecessor。 But again I call for realism。 The pride of the enormous progress must not seduce China to become overly self-confident and complacent。 In many areas the United States is still the technology leader and will remain in that position for many years to come。 The recent ZTE case is a telling example。 Airbus is a strong European company。 But according to its CEO 90% of the electronics in the Airbus planes are from the US。
CNS： Being widely witnessed， the Sino-US trade tensions have demonstrated substantial negatives impacts on the world trade and economy as a whole， and the resolution is not yet around the corner。 What is your view on this matter， and what should the German business community act if the conflicts between the two world biggest economies are escalating？
Simon： I hope that a viable solution can be found until the end of March。 This is a real danger for China， for the US， and for Germany。 Trump is incalculable。 The book by his advisor Navarro is very strongly anti-China。 But China should also change its strategy。 As long as people think that they can steal technology the danger of a serious trade war will prevail。 And if China and the US insist that they demonstrate their power a good outcome is endangered。 Again realism is indicated。 I hope that everybody involved understands the mutual interdependence and does not believe that anybody can win a trade war。 There are no winners in a trade war as we know from the 1930s。 In Germany we are very concerned。 We depend more strongly on peaceful trade than both China and USA。 Almost one half of our GDP comes from our exports。 And many German companies which manufacture in China export their products from there to the US。
CNS： On December 19， the Bundestag revised the foreign investment regulation， which brought down the shareholding threshold from 25% to 10% for the regulatory review。 Although it may not directly target Chinese M&A activities in Germany， the effects could be born hugely by Chinese companies。 What do your think is the real purpose of the new regulation， and how to further tackle the dilemma between the national security and economic co-operation， in particular to Chinese partners？
Simon： Personally I don’t think that the new regulation makes sense。 But it reflects the mood of the politicians， the industry and probably the majority of Germans。 In my opinion the German government should focus on creating a level playing field for German and foreign companies in China rather than impeding foreign and Chinese investments in Germany。 I do not expect that the new rules will have much impact。 There are some critical areas like infrastructure or defense where such restrictions are understandable and make sense， but for 90% of the economy they are nonsense。 But I have also to criticize the Chinese。 We have seen 162 acquisitions of German companies by Chinese investors in the last three years， in the opposite direction we had 32。 This imbalance in the numbers as such is not a problem。 The problem is rather that some of the Chinese takeovers were seen as rather aggressive and as coordinated within the “Made in China 2025”- initiative。 I think that the aggressive communication of that campaign has done damage to Chinese investments abroad。 Yes， China has been very successful。 But I would recommend the country to boast less about this success and the ensuing strength。 Chinese acquirers have often payed very high prices。 While this may be advantageous for the seller， it is not perceived well by politics and the public。 Why？ Because overly high prices create the suspicion that these are political rather than pure business acquisitions。
CNS： From a goods-oriented export country to a capital-related and technology-focused outbound investment country， China’s investment footprints will broadly reach out。 Germany has been one of the most significant host countries for China’s money due to its manufacturing prowess and the complementarity between the two， how do you view the role of the Chinese investments in Germany， from the economic and ESG points of views？ With regards to the newly-enacted regulation， is there any tremendous impacts on the Sino-Germany co-operations？ And what might be the effects on Germany’s economy？
Simon： As I said I do not expect a strong impact。 Germany actually needs more Chinese investments。 Currently there is only one Chinese greenfield factory operating in Germany。 And actually the states and cities are vying for Chinese investments – opposite to the restrictions on the federal level。 China and Germany are ideal partners。 They have to find a way to cooperate。 That has worked very well in the past。 Both sides do not gain if they are too assertive。
CNS： China is Germany‘s largest trading partner， there is one school of thought that the German business community must wean from the over-dependence on China。 In fact， the dependence the other way around is much more expressed， being China learning and practicing Germany’s technological expertise and managerial skill。 Do you think this two-way trade and economic exchanges are for the benefits of both， even the rest of the world？ If the Chinese companies have done something improperly in M&A transactions， what are your suggestions to address those concerns？
Simon： I would not talk of a general overdependence of each country。 This is one of the big advantages of globalization， it is a risk diversifier。 If we do more and bigger trade with many countries it means that each country depends less on a single market。 I would also not say， that the dependence is asymmetric。 Germany depends very strongly on China as a target market。 More so than China depends on Germany。 On the other hand， China depends strongly on German investments and manufacturing competencies。 There are about 8500 German companies in China。 They run more than 2000 factories。 In Taicang alonge there are more than 300 German companies。 It would certainly not be good for China if this presence is impeded。 I don’t have the impression that we can generally accuse Chinese acquirers of German companies for doing something improperly。 For the vast majority the opposite is true。 There are some cases of misconduct， but I hold that their percentage is lower than for American acquirers of German companies。 Again， we experience a communication problem。 The Chinese should communicate more openly on their plans。 The press tends to pick up negative cases and blows them up， but it does not report if something runs smoothly。
CNS： Globalization might be in retreat to certain extent， however the exchanges of goods， capital， people and information will definitely continue。 How could Germany and China jointly meet the short-term challenges of trade protectionism and geopolitical tussle， and embark on the long-term journey of a better future for human being？
Simon： We don’t need less， we need more globalization。 India or Africa have no chance to catch up if they cannot export more to and buy more from advanced countries。 China and Germany can become role models for free trade。 They are leaders in global trade and thus can exert enormous influence by creating free trade flows between Europe， China and other regions。 This should induce the US to eventually follow。
CNS： The SMEs are supposed to be the backbone of any economies。 In this respect， Germany has been very successful in driving the economy especially from the mittelstand sector， within which the huge amounts of “hidden champions” have emerged。 You are one of the most capable academics， if not the one of analyzing and advising us on the development of this unique sector， so what is the essence of German’s model in promoting overall economy from the bottom-up？ What are the tech factors being embedded in the whole process？
Simon： It is not the government that has created the strong mid-sized sector and the numerous Hidden Champions in Germany， rather the opposite is true。 By providing a stable political environment and leaving them alone the mittelstand could flourish。 And there is no single factor which explains the mittelstand’s and the Hidden Champions’ continuing success。 Important factors are the entrepreneurial ambition to become the best in the world， focus on a narrow market， and globalization。 The Hidden Champions are also very innovative， which is not a pure matter of technology but the integration of customer needs and technology。 There is one are， though， where the government plays a decisive role， vocational training， a pillar of German competitiveness。 The companies provide the practical training of apprentices and the government runs the vocational schools （Berufsschulen）。 The technical universities also play a key role in cooperating very closely with the companies。
CNS： Recently， China once again demonstrates the high commitments to the opening-up policy， and further optimizes the negative list and ownership percentage for foreign investment。 How do you evaluate China‘s determination and actions towards a more open economy and what opportunities will this bring to German companies？
Simon： I explicitly acknowledge the opening and the removal of restrictions。 This is the right way to go。 But to be very candid， the belief that this is really practiced consistently is not there。 And certain incidences really damage the belief in the seriousness of the opening。 China must become more rigorous in taking care that intellectual property rights are respected and that corruption is removed。
CNS： In talking about China’s overseas investments， the Belt and Road region is an indispensable construct， and China is open to any ideas regarding the co-operations in the context of the B&R Initiative。 As a prominent scholar， what is your take on this new policy development？
Simon： The Belt and Road initiative makes a lot of sense。 But China should not forget that it is dealing with many states which are much smaller and weaker and thus may easily feel dominated by a very powerful China。 I think that this initiative should be handled with more sensitivity。 It is never a pure matter of what you do， but how you do it and especially how you communicate it。
CNS： The technology transfer and the business reciprocity are the hot and inevitable topics when the cross-border investments are discussed。 What is your advice in terms of the so-called forced tech transfer and how can we build up a more reciprocal relationship between Germany and China， especially in the area of financial and industrial investments？
Simon： Forced tech transfer was probably necessary in an earlier stage of development。 Today China is in a position of strength， where any forced or inappropriate transfer of technology should be abandoned。 I think both countries should also stop to think of German or Chinese companies。 Companies as such have no nationality。 A German company which runs a good factory in China is a blessing for China。 And a Chinese company which runs a good factory in Germany is a blessing for Germany。 I often say that German companies have to become Chinese， and in the same vein Chinese companies have to become German。 The consulting company I founded， Simon-Kucher & Partners， has employees from 68 countries who work in 38 offices all over the world。 Our origin is in Germany， but we are not a German company。 In Beijing and Shanghai we are a Chinese company， all our employees there are Chinese。 I personally think that we have transcended the state of nationalism in our company。 But the politicians and most people are still thinking in national， if not nationalistic terms。 The result is what we see today in the trade tensions and the danger that global value chains are destroyed。
CNS： What is your opinion on a policy paper from the BDI， Germany’s main business lobby， suggesting the government to protect Germany’s open model from China’s “state-dominated economy”？
Simon： The policy paper “Partners and systemic competitors - How do we deal with China‘s state-controlled economy” by the Federation of German Industries （BDI） is comprehensive and addresses many important aspects of Chinese-German cooperation。 The paper is critical of， but not unfriendly to China。 I think that both sides are aware that they depend on each other and have to find compromises。 At the same time， the paper leaves no doubt that the two political systems in China and Germany are fundamentally different。 This is not of great importance at the pure business level， but where the state or the party on the Chinese side intervenes， it becomes critical。 So far， these differences have been swept under the carpet。 Due to the success of Chinese companies and， in particular， the numerous takeovers， awareness of the difference has risen sharply in Germany and other parts of the world。 One does not always get the impression that this change is fully understood by the Chinese side。 In the West， there are doubts as to whether the Chinese state or party is systematically keeping out of business issues。 In my opinion， this is extremely important if China wants to continue to be as successful as before in exports and foreign investments。 China must do everything it can to avoid further cases like Huawei。 Trust is one of the most important elements in international trade。 Of course， not everything is 100% separate in the West either。 Whether and how Western secret services obtain business data can only be guessed at。 But at least there are clear legal dividing lines that even apply to secret services。 But German companies and associations should also accept that they cannot change certain political conditions in China。 If one wants to do business with and in China， one has to accept the institutional framework there。 Nevertheless， there is a right to equal and fair treatment and every partner should insist on this right。
CNS： We have noticed that the German government has recently launched the National Industrial Strategy 2030， which aims to maintain the leading position facing the tremendous competitions from the US and China。 Several industries have been identified to be ones representing Germany’s manufacturing excellence and the government is urged to be more supportive， in another sense， to be more protective。 So how do you view this directional change of the government to be more involved in the business activities？ What are the impacts on the mittelstand sector， which is the backbone of Corporate Germany？ Meantime， how can Germany and China achieve a win-win situation taking into account the variables of the government policies？
Simon： The new initiative from the Minister of economic affairs meet with mixed reception in Germany。 It is mostly seen as a kind of industrial policy which is typical for France， but not for Germany。 The impact on the Mittelstand and the Hidden Champions will remain very limited。
CNS： In the post-Merkel era partly symbolized by CDU’s new leadership of AKK， what do you think are the possible changes， and what are the major impacts on the Sino-Germany economic relationships？
Simon： I am optimistic for Germany。 But we depend strongly on Europe， the US， and also on China。 In this context the Sino-German relation is one of the least pressing problems。 As I said in many of my talks， China and Germany fit very well together。 We have an industrial spirit， people are working hard， even culturally there are no conflicts。 Just as an example， there are about 300，000 Chinese living in Germany。 They don’t cause any trouble， unlike some other minorities。 I would like to see many more Chinese factories and companies in Germany。 And I hope that the access to the Chinese market will become freer and freer for German and foreign companies。 It will benefit all countries。
责任编辑：张申
