German Chancellor Merz prepares for delicate talks with Trump
A month into his job, conservative Merz, 69, is a staunch transatlanticist at pains to maintain good ties with what he considers post-war Germany's "indispensable" ally, despite Trump's unyielding "America First" stance.
Merz will hope his pledges to massively boost Germany's NATO defence spending will please Trump, and that he can find common ground on confronting Russia after the mercurial US president voiced growing frustration with President Vladimir Putin.
On Trump's threat to hammer the European Union with sharply higher tariffs, Merz as leader of its biggest economy has argued that the 27-nation bloc must be self-confident in its negotiations with Washington, declaring that "we're not supplicants".
Despite the dangers, his office has voiced confidence Merz will be spared the kind of public dressing down Trump delivered in the Oval Office to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and South Africa's Cyril Ramaphosa.
Merz is looking ahead to his first in-person meeting with Trump "with great calmness and joy", his spokesman Stefan Kornelius said, pointing to their "very good relationship" so far.
"Germany is the third largest economy in the world, and we have a lot to offer as an economic partner of the USA," Kornelius said.
"At the same time, a very constructive and positive relationship with America is very important to us, for our own economy and for the security of Germany and Europe."
The two leaders -- both with business backgrounds and keen golf players -- are on first-name terms after several phone calls, Kornelius said, and Merz now has Trump's cell phone number on speed dial.
Defence and trade
Merz has been given the honour of staying at Blair House, the presidential guest residence on Pennsylvania Avenue across from the White House.
Merz has even felt comfortable enough to have a little fun at Trump's expense, recently telling a TV interviewer that his every second or third word was "great".
Advertisement
Whatever the personal chemistry, the policy issues are potentially explosive.
Trump launched his roller-coaster series of trade policy shifts in April, with the threat of
50-percent US tariffs on European goods
looming.
Merz, who has sat on many corporate boards, is "very experienced in business, too -- the world from which Donald Trump comes," his chancellery chief of staff, Thorsten Frei, told the
Funke
media group.
On the Ukraine war, where Germany strongly backs Kyiv, Merz will hope to convince Trump to heighten pressure on Putin through new sanctions to persuade him to agree to a ceasefire.
Trump, 78, has recently expressed frustration with Putin, calling him "crazy", but without announcing concrete new measures.
(COMBO) This combination of file photos created on June 3, 2025 shows Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz (L) and US President Donald Trump (R). (Photo by Ludovic MARIN and SAUL LOEB / various sources / AFP)
Merz's visit comes ahead of a G7 summit in Canada on June 15th to 17th and a NATO meeting in The Hague at the end of the month.
At that meeting Merz has said Germany is willing to follow a plan to raise defence spending to 3.5 percent of GDP over coming years, with another 1.5 percent dedicated to security-related infrastructure.
'Calm and reasonable'
Another potential flashpoint issue looms -- the vocal support Team Trump has given to the far-right and anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which came second in February elections.
US Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and former Trump adviser Elon Musk have all weighed in in support of the AfD, which in Germany is shunned by all other political parties.
When Germany's domestic intelligence service recently designated the AfD a "right-wing extremist" group, Rubio denounced the step as "tyranny in disguise".
Advertisement
Merz slammed what he labelled "absurd observations" from Washington and said he "would like to encourage the American government... to largely stay out of" German domestic politics.
In recent days, Merz said he was relaxed about the upcoming Trump meeting, quipping that he won't need to take valerian, prescribed to treat nervous tension and anxiety.
"I don't need valerian to stay calm and have a reasonable conversation with the American president," Merz told public broadcaster
ZDF
.
"We will have to talk about common interests. There are differences, but there are also many similarities, and that's exactly what we'll talk about."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
31 minutes ago
- Int'l Business Times
The Risks of Foreign Investment in U.S. Life Sciences Companies — Why Founders Should Take Heed
In recent years, Chinese investment in U.S. and global biotech and medtech has increased significantly. These partnerships can serve as strategic footholds, raising complex questions around security, sovereignty, and long-term strategy. Consider Grand Pharmaceutical Group, also known as Yuanda Pharmaceutical and Grand Pharma, which jointly acquired Australian firm Sirtex Medical, forged a nuclear medicine collaboration with Sirtex Medical U.S., and took an 87.5% stake in BlackSwan Vascular, a U.S.-based developer of vascular embolization technologies. On the surface, Grand Pharma looks like a modern success story. Hu Kaijun, a Chinese billionaire, holds a majority stake in Grand Pharma, positioning him as a key figure in the company's global expansion in the life sciences sector. Under his leadership, Grand Pharma has diversified its portfolio through strategic acquisitions and collaborations, enhancing its presence in the international market. But for U.S. life sciences stakeholders, don't be misled: Grand Pharma's rise isn't just a story of business savvy—it's a case study in how state-backed capital can reshape a company. And for founders, it's a reminder that funding sources can carry strategic baggage. Grand Pharma's aggressive expansion may reflect a broader trend of Chinese firms investing in advanced markets to access Western R&D and expand China's presence more deeply in the future of global biomedical innovation—a trend that raises serious concerns for U.S. interests. From State-Owned Roots to Global Reach Through strategic investments and collaborations, Kaijun and Grand Pharma continue to expand their footprint, resulting in the transfer of cutting-edge medical technologies from European and U.S. startups to China. Behind Grand Pharma's rapid rise lies a more complex history—one that raises questions about influence, oversight, and strategic intent. Before Grand Pharma was a global healthcare investor, it was a modest state-owned enterprise (SOE) in China under the purview of the Poverty Alleviation Office. Its mission: deliver pharmaceutical products as a public good, not a profit engine. But in the late 1990s and early 2000s, that began to change. A 2013 investigation by China Finance (CNFINA) suggested that Kaijun played a significant role in transforming the SOE into China Grand Enterprises through a series of complex transactions that have raised questions about corporate governance and asset valuation. One notable transaction highlighted in the CNFINA report involves Yanhuang Real Estate, a private firm not previously affiliated with the company. The firm purchased 50% of China Grand Enterprises from two state-owned shareholders for 50 million yuan. This transaction was justified using China Grand's initial registered capital of 100 million yuan. However, estimates based on the net assets held by China Grand at the time suggested that those shares were worth at least 145 million yuan, indicating a potential undervaluation of approximately 95 million yuan. The CNFINA report details that two additional state-owned entities transferred their 50% stake to four private investment firms, including Beijing Taihua Yongchang Investment and Beijing Dongfang Weichuang, for similarly underpriced amounts based on outdated registered capital. CNFINA's analysis estimated the value of these two transfers combined to have resulted in a total undervaluation of over 218 million yuan. This suspicious restructuring is significant because it offers a window into how power and capital were initially consolidated, and under what terms. Transactions that undervalue assets and move them out of public hands raise fundamental concerns about transparency, governance, and intent. When such origins lead to foreign acquisitions in sensitive sectors like biotechnology, it becomes even more important to scrutinize the business culture and strategic motivations behind the capital. In short, where the wealth comes from and how it was made offer important clues into how business leaders operate their companies. The Fine Print of Chinese Capital For U.S. life sciences startups, the lesson is clear: capital isn't neutral. The wrong investor can bring not just regulatory headaches but long-term strategic consequences. A growing list of cases tells a cautionary tale. Sirtex Medical When Grand Pharma and CDH Investments outbid Varian by a reported 20% to acquire Sirtex Medical, observers raised questions about the surprisingly high acquisition price. Through its subsidiary Chengdu Shetai, Grand Pharma has since leveraged Sirtex's platform to accelerate its development of nuclear medicine therapies. In cases of majority foreign ownership, especially by companies with potential state affiliations, it invites questions about data governance, manufacturing control, and regulatory visibility. More Lessons from BGI, WuXi, and Others Grand Pharma isn't the only example. Chinese biotech giants like BGI Group and WuXi AppTec have drawn attention in recent years over concerns related to data use, military ties, and participation in U.S. research networks. These cases underscore a growing sensitivity: capital flows from companies with strategic state interests may pose challenges in sensitive sectors like life sciences. A recent TechTimes article breaks down the core risks facing U.S. life sciences companies in the face of growing Chinese investment, from academic partnerships enabling access to sensitive research to financial ties that quietly shift control, and nefarious enterprises evading regulatory scrutiny. The piece argues that while the proposed BIOSECURE Act legislation is a step in the right direction, it lacks the enforcement teeth needed to truly safeguard American innovation in the life sciences sector. Ultimately, U.S. biotech and medtech startups must take proactive responsibility for who they partner with because policy alone won't protect what's not carefully guarded from the start. A Critical Reminder for Founders and CEOs: Capital Comes with Consequences U.S. life sciences startups face an increasingly complex landscape. Fast, global capital may seem like an obvious win, but it can introduce long-term complications. These include heightened regulatory oversight, potential deal restrictions, and reputational considerations. As geopolitical tensions evolve, particularly between the U.S. and China, biotech and medtech are emerging as points of scrutiny. In an interview on Chinese firms facing U.S. Commerce Department action related to AI, Gordon Chang, a senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute and a specialist on U.S.-China relations, stated, "all Chinese companies are a threat." While his comment was made in the context of national security and advanced technologies, it reflects a broader concern among some policymakers and analysts: that Chinese firms, regardless of sector, may operate with implicit state alignment, especially when national strategic interests are involved. For biotech and medtech companies, choosing the right partner now depends as much on who they are as what they offer. For the foreseeable future, U.S. startups should approach foreign investment, especially from state-influenced entities, with caution and care. This isn't just about one company or one country. It's about building resilient innovation ecosystems that can withstand geopolitical shifts while preserving trust, competitiveness, and scientific integrity.
Int'l Business Times
6 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
Musk Fires Back With Slur After Steve Bannon Called for Trump to Seize SpaceX, Deport the CEO
Elon Musk hurled slurs after former Trump strategist Steve Bannon called for the president to seize SpaceX and deport Musk following his public tirade against President Donald Trump and his support for Republicans' "one big, beautiful bill." Bannon railed against Musk and his work with the Department of Government Efficiency during the Thursday episode of his "War Room" podcast, in which he claimed that Trump was upset that Musk "didn't find any fraud." STEVE BANNON: "President Trump, TONIGHT, should sign an executive order calling up the Defense Production Act, and seize SpaceX TONIGHT, before midnight." — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) June 5, 2025 "When he threatens to take one of the big programs out of SpaceX, President Trump tonight should sign an executive order calling for the Defense Production Act to be called and seize SpaceX tonight before midnight," Bannon declared. Clips of this part of the podcast were then shared to X, Musk's social media platform, where Musk had some choice words to reveal his thoughts toward Bannon's ideas. Bannon is peak retard — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 6, 2025 "Bannon is peak r*****," the Tesla CEO commented after the video was reposted to by the popular X account "R***** Finder." Musk then doubled down on the sentiment hours later in another comment after another user shared the same clip: "Bannon is a communist r*****." Bannon is a communist retard — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 6, 2025 Earlier in the day, Bannon had called for Musk to be deported, telling the New York Times , "They should initiate a formal investigation of his immigration status because I am of the strong belief that he is an illegal alien, and he should be deported from the country immediately." Bannon's support for Trump continued after Musk posted a series of scathing tweets directed at the president over Republicans' "big, beautiful bill" which Trump has expressed support for. Although Musk served as a close ally of Trump for the past several months, he explained that he believes the spending bill would undermine the work of DOGE, as current estimates suggest the bill will raise the national deficit by several trillion dollars. While Musk's tweets initially just railed against the bill and dug up tweets from Trump's past where he expressed opposition to raising the national deficit, the tirade later became more accusatory, claiming that the files on Jeffrey Epstein have not been released yet because Trump's name is in them. Trump and the White House have not addressed this accusation, though he told ABC News Friday that he is "not particularly" interested in talking to Musk anytime soon. Originally published on Latin Times Elon musk Donald trump Spacex
Int'l Business Times
8 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
Musk's Rage 'Helps Bolster' GOP Senator's Efforts Against Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' Lawmaker Says
Sen. Ron Johnson said Elon Musk's explosive criticism of Donald Trump's sweeping tax-and-spending plan helps reinforce Republican opposition to the bill, which some in the GOP warn will worsen the federal deficit. The latest divide within the party comes as lawmakers debate Trump's so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill," a legislative package that his allies say fulfills campaign promises but that fiscal conservatives like Johnson argue is too costly. Musk's public meltdown over the bill, paired with his threats to oust supporters and revelations that he donated over $250 million to Trump's campaign, has further complicated the politics surrounding the measure, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. In a series of social media posts this week, Musk claimed Trump wouldn't have been reelected without him, accused the former president of ties to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, and called for his impeachment. Trump fired back by threatening Musk's federal contracts and accusing him of trying to sabotage the legislation to protect electric vehicle tax breaks for Tesla. While Johnson welcomed Musk's support in questioning the bill's fiscal impact, other Republicans brushed off the feud. Rep. Derrick Van Orden called the dustup a "tempest in a teapot" and reiterated his loyalty to Trump. "I think it has an impact," Johnson said. "I think it helps bolster, certainly, my case that we have to address this." Rep. Tom Tiffany said Musk's input came too late to make a difference. Still, some lawmakers acknowledged that the billionaire's comments aren't helping the GOP unify behind the bill. Rep. Scott Fitzgerald said Musk's attacks weren't "helpful," and Rep. Troy Nehls accused Musk of having "lost [his] damn mind." Despite the fallout, Van Orden said the legislation will move forward and insisted Trump is still leading the GOP. Originally published on Latin Times
