Bettina Stark-Watzinger advises universities to take radical steps against China

The Liberal also encouraged the universities to take radical steps. “If I were university president, I wouldn’t have a Confucius Institute,” said Stark-Watzinger. These institutes are “co-financed by Beijing and are politically exploited by the Communist Party”. “I reject such direct influence by China on our teaching and science – we should clearly differentiate ourselves”.

The minister explains the current weakness in innovation in the German economy with the aversion to risk, especially among medium-sized companies. In addition, “the economy was booming before Corona – and there is less pressure to innovate, even if that is not good for the future”.

In Germany, people are generally less willing to take risks than in other nations – which is why “so many young people strive for government service after their studies,” said Stark-Watzinger. “Germans experience losses emotionally twice as strongly,” she referred to studies by US psychologist Daniel Kahneman. As an antidote, “more financial education in school” could help.

Read the full interview here:

Ms. Stark-Watzinger, in the first year of Corona, German companies reduced their spending on research by more than six percent – all other industrialized nations have increased. Can you explain that?
One factor could be that our many medium-sized companies tend to shy away from risk, if only because of their size. In addition, the economy was booming before Corona – and there is less pressure to innovate, even if that is not good for the future. It is also clear that Germans are less willing to take risks than in other countries. You can see that from the fact that many young people want to go into government service after their studies. Risk is viewed negatively with us, hardly seen as an opportunity. The US psychologist Daniel Kahneman says that Germans experience losses twice as emotionally, so they are more afraid. That’s where we should go, for example through financial education in school, which we urgently need to expand anyway.

How are we supposed to be innovative when we lag behind digitally?
In addition to Digital Minister Volker Wissing, all departments have to help with this important topic – we, for example, with the AI ​​strategy and the digitization of schools and universities. It goes without saying that the Chancellery is also there.

Germany is even falling behind in key technologies – mainly because system rival China is catching up at breakneck speed. Do we also need decoupling in research?
We must not only whine that China is so strong, we must become stronger ourselves. In some cases, we can hardly do without cooperation with the research nation China – for example on climate change. But we have to draw clear boundaries in sensitive areas: in all dual-use cases where military use cannot be ruled out, and also in the case of artificial intelligence, which China misuses to monitor its citizens. In general, wherever we would help China to gain an advantage in system competition.

How do you draw the line?
That was just the topic at the G7 science ministers’ meeting: We will set up a joint virtual academy that will help researchers recognize where dangers lurk. My house will continue to support universities and research institutes in expanding their independent China expertise, i.e. advising on what works and what doesn’t. Because even if there are good personal contacts with researchers in China, one should not be naïve. In China today, everything serves the Communist Party.

>> Read here: “Freedom more important than free trade”: NATO Secretary General for decoupling from autocratic states

Will the federal government’s new China strategy draw red lines? Name specific fields in which our researchers should not or may not cooperate?
Science is free – and has a special responsibility. I have a clear stance on this: If I were university president, there would be no Confucius Institute here.

Why?
The Confucius Institutes at our universities are co-financed by Beijing and are being used politically by the Communist Party. I reject such direct influence by China on our teaching and science. We should set ourselves apart.

But leave research alone with the specific decision as to who to cooperate with in China.
We are available to science as an advisory partner. And we are actively involved in shaping the German government’s China strategy, which should formulate guidelines. But we saw it when the research cooperation with Russia was frozen: you have to critically examine each individual project.

Isn’t China already so far along in many fields that there is no threat of knowledge outflow, and that we should be happy if they still let us do research?
Yes, China has made great strides and is at the forefront internationally in some fields, especially with AI. We have to be all the more ambitious and do our homework. That also means cooperating even more intensively with countries that share our liberal values.

Speaking of homework: What are your most important strategies for us to catch up innovatively?
We have to build innovation bridges across the entire breadth of research and speed up the transfer. To do this, universities need to professionalize their transfer departments, and they need people who know the world of business. We also need many more courses that convey the entrepreneurial spirit – this shouldn’t only be available at the Technical University of Munich. The new transfer agency Dati will ensure that research findings reach the economy more quickly and become innovations there. With the start-up strategy, we will channel much more private money into spin-offs. Finally, before the end of this year we will push through the freedom law for the agency for disruptive innovations Sprind, which will then be able to promote revolutionary innovations with more money and free from state bureaucracy.

We need many more courses that convey the entrepreneurial spirit. Bettina Stark-Watzinger

How important is Robert Habeck’s new start-up strategy?
An indispensable part. We will take a close look at it – but it contains a lot that the FDP has been demanding for a long time. For example, strengthening the state as a client according to the motto “Don’t give us money, give us orders.”

Can the start-up strategy really take effect so quickly that it can still cushion the start-ups’ acute financing crisis?
We will speed things up, the draft is to be coordinated by all ministries involved before the end of the summer. In addition, the existing future fund with its ten billion euros must quickly develop its strength.

>> Read here: Big throw or room for improvement? – Habeck’s founding plan for start-ups

Your concept for the data has received massive criticism. Among other things, it is criticized that it is much too timid. Is that correct?
It’s a good start, you can always go bigger. We want a lean, agile system that fills a gap and works from the bottom up. The concept is completely new, it will grow.

Dati should become a lighthouse. But the Ministry of Finance has only approved you 15 million euros – and blocked them too…
This is completely normal as long as there is no draft law. I am convinced that we will build up the data on the legislature with a larger three-digit million amount.

Doesn’t climate change require new priorities? Hydrogen is good, when is nuclear fusion coming?
I am sure that in 10 to 15 years at the latest it will make a contribution to the energy supply. And when I look at the start-ups in this field, I believe that things can also go much faster.

More: Longing for private energy self-sufficiency overwhelms suppliers of solar systems and heat pumps