Professional Documents
Culture Documents
partners and institutions. In Minsk Mrs Merkel had in tow Franois Hollande of France, Germanys
partner in the European tandem. (He looked like her notary, it was said.)
In this spirit, Germany eagerly adopts any diplomatic jargon that suggests togetherness, such as a
Weimar triangle (of Poland, France and Germany) or a Normandy format (of Germany, Russia,
Ukraine and France). In the euro crisis German officials make sure that they have support from other
members of the euro group.
Another hallmark of German style is wariness of one basic tool of foreign policy: armed force. True,
Germany does its bit for NATO and sent troops to Kosovo and Afghanistan; but those forces were
mainly in a support role and tried to avoid firefights. It is now actively helping NATOs efforts to react
faster in eastern Europe. With Dutch help it started this month to build a spearhead force that can
be deployed in two or three days. With Poland and Denmark, it is expanding NATOs eastern
command centre in Szczecin. But outside its collaborative role in NATO, Germany still hews closely to
its post-war pacifism. In the fight against Islamic State it sends kit but no soldiers. In the Ukraine
crisis Mrs Merkel has ruled out arms shipments or any military response, with a firmness that sounds
dogmatic to many American or British ears.
Compared with Britain and France, nuclear and globally oriented powers, Germany has a modest
military budget (see chart). To their martial allies, German foreign-policy thinkers retort that
disavowing conflict makes sense for a middle power which could not defeat, say,Vladimir Putin, or
bear the cost in lives. Better, then, to stick with economic and political sanctions.
Neither style nor instruments amount to a strategy. Does Germany have one? It certainly has a wishlist. One is to prevent crises surging into full-fledged war. (Mrs Merkel and Mr Steinmeier have been
poring over the events of July 1914, when Europe sleepwalked into total conflict.)
Another desire is moral clarity. This reflects the countrys trauma over its past, says Jan Techau of
Carnegie Europe, a think-tank. But such clarity is not always available in foreign policy and war, with
their collateral damage and murky ethics.
A third wish is to defend the international system of rules. In Ukraine this includes the integrity of
borders and the countrys right to self-determination. In the euro zone it translates into reminding
countries like Greece of commitments they have made, and refusing to bend treaties. A fourth
objective is maintaining unity of the EU, NATO and the West.
But strategy is most needed when an existing international order threatens to collapse. In this sense,
says Gustav Gressel of the European Council on Foreign Relations, Germanys strategy might at best
be described as save the rest. In the euro zone Germany and others have built a firewall around the
remaining currency area in case Greece exits. Cutting off the Greeks would need toughness and
willingness to incur hatred. Germany is fast learning to deal with both.
Meanwhile Germany has implicitly accepted that Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine are lost. It
wants to stop the fire spreading to the rest of Ukraine and neighbouring states. But save the rest
falls short as a strategy against foes such as Mr Putin, who might view it as an incentive to keep
reducing that salvageable remainder.
To be credible, strategy needs a full tool-box, for diplomacy without arms is like music without
instruments as Frederick the Great said. But with voters still insisting on ethical clarity, Germany
lacks the consensus to be a confident leader. Its allies should not expect too much too soon.
2