德意志银行发布德国市场观察报告指出，过去一年德国企业界对华贸易关系的思考出现"鹰派转向"，且这一重新评估正迅速发生。当日德国两大最具影响力的行业协会发布了新的对华政策文件，被解读为进一步的"鹰派"转变。最明显的变化体现在BDI（德国工业联合会）的立场文件中：虽承认去风险可能带来成本（包括中国报复），但认为不作为在经济上的长期代价更高，从安全政策角度也不负责任，这标志着辩论重心从"降低依赖的成本"转向"维持依赖的成本"，但不应被解读为呼吁全面的新贸易壁垒。两份文件均倾向使用现有贸易防卫工具（如反补贴税）应对系统性扭曲，同时警告不要创设新工具，并强调欧洲须先解决自身经济政策短板。上述文件可能影响德国政府即将出台的对华战略，预计在10月15-16日欧盟理事会会议前公布。
Shift in German China policy – counting the cost of inaction. As we have noted repeatedly over the last year, there has been a hawkish shift in corporate Germany's thinking about trade relations with China. This re-assessment is now happening rapidly. Two of Germany's most influential industrial associations today published new China policy papers that can be interpreted as further "hawkish" shifts. The clearest change is evident in the BDI's position paper. While acknowledging that de-risking could incur costs, including Chinese retaliation, it argues that "inaction would be far more costly economically in the long run and irresponsible from a security policy perspective". That marks a notable change in emphasis. The debate is no longer centred on the costs of reducing strategic dependencies, but increasingly on the costs of maintaining them. Even so, this should not be read as a call for sweeping new trade barriers. In line with our expectations, both papers favour the use of existin