‘In Germany’s national interest’

Junior partner in the Middle East

The wider background to Germany’s Middle East policy has, for years, been the United States’ push to concentrate its political and military capacities as far as possible on a power struggle with China. In Washington, this shift is regarded by all parties and elites as the central foreign policy field of action for the present and the foreseeable future. The plan to project military power across the Asia-Pacific region demands the withdrawal of military assets from the Middle East as comprehensively as possible. This began under President Barack Obama and was advanced by his successor, Donald Trump. US forces have already been brought home from Afghanistan and the US presence in Iraq has been greatly reduced. For more than ten years, the transatlantic strategy has been based on an understanding that Germany and the EU, which Germany dominates, should take over from the United States in the Middle East. It is hoped that the EU, in consultation with Washington, will step up and assume many control functions that, for decades, have been exercised by the US.

The ‘arc of crisis’ around Europe

The direction of travel was formulated in Berlin as early as autumn 2013 in a comprehensive strategy paper entitled ‘New Power - New Responsibility’, which outlined Germany’s future role in a world dominated by the transatlantic alliance. The paper states, among other things, that “a pragmatic German security policy, especially when costly longer-term military operations are called for, will have to concentrate primarily on the increasingly unstable European vicinity, from Northern Africa and the Middle East to Central Asia.” This focus, which involves a wide-ranging power play by Germany, is intended “not least” to relieve Germany’s US NATO ally, “as the United States increasingly focuses on Asia,” continues the paper.[1] The foreign policy debate in Berlin over subsequent years has thrown up the notion of an unstable ring of states, or ‘arc of crisis’ around Europe that includes the Middle East and has to be managed and controlled. The ‘arc of crisis’ scenario also found its way into the debate on the 2016 Bundeswehr White Paper and remained an important plank of German government policy in the years that followed.[2]

Not keeping pace

In practice, German policy has not really kept pace with the Berlin elites’ appetite for enhanced power. The government has made an appreciable effort to bolster the Bundeswehr presence in the Middle East. The German Navy, for instance, has been participating in the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) since 2006. Its job is to monitor the waters off the Lebanese coast in order to prevent the supply of weapons to Hezbollah. It has also been training the Lebanese navy and has supplied it with coastguard boats and coastal radar stations.[3] As part of the so-called anti-terror mission against IS, the German Air Force has stationed several aircraft at the Al Azraq airbase in Jordan. German soldiers are also participating in the NATO Mission Iraq (NMI).[4] In February 2024, the German government deployed the naval frigate ‘Hessen’ to the Red Sea to participate in efforts to protect shipping against Yemeni Houthi militias (Ansar Allah), as part of the EU mission Aspides.[5] However, even working together with other military units from European countries, these deployments have not been enough to seriously take the pressure, militarily, off the US in the Middle East.

Unwavering partnership

It is in the context of Berlin’s efforts to become a significant player in the Middle East that Israel is accorded such an important role. In the region, Israel is the country closest to the West socially and politically. It has been Germany’s closest partner for cooperation in the Middle East for decades. Berlin’s official position is that German support for Israel is moral, a consequence of having committed the historically unique mass crime of the Shoah. In fact the longstanding, ever closer partnership with the Israel has also offered a useful platform for building a presence in the Middle Eastern crisis region. This strategy makes all the more sense by being advanced in concert with Washington, which needs to shift its forces to the Asia-Pacific region. The economic ties are very close. “Germany is Israel’s most important economic partner in the EU,” the Federal Foreign Office (AA) confirms. “German products enjoy an excellent reputation in Israel.”[6] “Science and research relations are particularly intensive,” adds the AA. These ties are in addition to cooperation on arms supplies, which has been cemented and strengthened over decades, not to mention military cooperation, which has recently expanded. german-foreign-policy.com will report on this shortly.

A ‘raison d’état’ for Germany?

Germany’s close and profitable cooperation with Israel and its hope of consolidating and expanding Western positions in the Middle East through collaboration with Israel underpins Berlin’s policy towards the region. As early as 2005, the former German ambassador to Tel Aviv, Rudolf Dreßler, put it like this, “The secure existence of Israel is in Germany’s national interest and is therefore part of our raison d’état.”[7] On 18 March 2008, Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel reiterated this message. Merkel justified Germany’s unconditional support for Israel with reference to the mass crimes committed by the Nazis: German’s “historical responsibility” was, she said, “part of my country’s raison d’état”, which “means that Israel’s security is never negotiable for me as a German Chancellor.”[8] Building on this, the German government gives full support the Israeli government’s policy – including in the Gaza war and the now escalating war on the Lebanese Hezbollah.

No support

In adopting this stance, the German government has not only increasingly isolated itself from the countries of the Arab world and, indeed, from most countries of the Global South; it is also seen to be supporting a Zionist policy that prioritises violence and, according to critics, is creating new dangers for Israel. “The question that should be asked,” stated Jordan’s Foreign Minister, Aiman al Safadi, at a recent joint press conference with his German counterpart, Annalena Baerbock: “Does support for this Israeli government mean support for Israel’s long-term interests in living in a region where it can live in peace, where it is accepted and has normal relations. Or should we face the fact that what this Israeli government is doing is turning Israel into a pariah state that is unacceptable in the region?”[9] Al Safadi argued that, “Supporting this Israeli government is not supporting Israel. On the contrary, supporting Israel means opposing what the Israeli government is doing – namely violating international law, pushing for escalation, killing innocent people.” Only with a clear stance against the war policy of the current Israeli government can, according to this line of argument, peace be achieve over the long term in the Middle East.

[1] Neue Macht – Neue Verantwortung. Elemente einer deutschen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik für eine Welt im Umbruch. Ein Papier der Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP) und des German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF). Berlin/Washington, Oktober 2013. See also: Die Neuvermessung der deutschen Weltpolitik.

[2] See also: Modernes Strategieverständnis (II) und Nachbarschaft in Flammen.

[3] See also: Waffen für Israel.

[4] See also: The sovereignty of Iraq.

[5] See also: Gaining war experience.

[6] Deutschland und Israel: Bilaterale Beziehungen. auswaertiges-amt.de 04.01.2024.

[7] Rudolf Dreßler: Gesicherte Existenz Israels – Teil der deutschen Staatsräson – Essay. bpb.de 04.04.2005.

[8] Markus Kaim: Israels Sicherheit als deutsche Staatsräson. bpb.de 30.01.2015.

[9] Franziska Kais: Annalena Baerbock: “Lehrstunde in Diplomatie” – Außenministerin öffentlich scharf angegriffen. news.de 09.09.2024.