Danish industry representatives are urging a pragmatic approach to trade with China, emphasizing the need to engage with countries willing to do business. However, this stance has sparked debate about the ethical and strategic implications of such partnerships.

Critics argue that while trade is essential, it should not come at the expense of core values and security considerations. Engaging with countries that lack democratic principles, respect for human rights, and independent legal systems poses significant risks to businesses and national interests alike. These risks include the potential for intellectual property theft, contract disputes, and political manipulation.

The Confederation of Danish Industry (DI) suggests a division of labor where businesses focus on compliance with laws and sanctions, leaving political and moral judgments to the government. However, some argue that companies have already blurred this line by incorporating political and moral values into their corporate reporting, making them vulnerable to accusations of hypocrisy.

The DI’s view that concerns about trading with China could lead to limited trade options has also drawn criticism. Comparing issues in countries like Poland, Hungary, and the USA to those in China is seen as an unreasonable relativization, particularly given concerns about China’s long-term expansive plans.

While advocating for trade with China, the editorial urges caution. Companies should exercise greater diligence when engaging with China compared to countries with stronger democratic institutions. The authorities must prioritize security and ensure adherence to WTO rules. Furthermore, the government should firmly uphold the values of democracy, human rights, and independent courts.

The call for criticism of China to be diplomatic and polite, but clear, underscores the need to balance economic interests with the preservation of Western values. Avoiding excessive praise and admiration for economic gain is crucial, as is ensuring that China understands that trade cannot come at the cost of compromising fundamental principles.