SHARE
COPY LINK

MILITARY

Germany’s cowardly foreign policy

The German government’s decision not to participate in military action against Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi – primarily for domestic political reasons – is deeply irresponsible, argues Markus Horeld from ZEIT ONLINE.

Germany's cowardly foreign policy
Photo: DPA

The international community spent three weeks squabbling over whether to impose a no-fly zone over Libya. During these three weeks, Muammar Qaddafi bombed his own people and managed to retake most rebel-held territory in the North African country.

Then, when it was nearly too late, the United Nations Security Council agreed a no-fly zone and authorized military intervention last Thursday. But at least the international community showed that it is not totally indifferent to such horrific human rights abuses.

And this should not be taken for granted. In many countries, like Sudan, Congo, Iran, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and China, the world prefers to watch and do nothing rather than stand up for what is right.

Of course, to be honest, the United Nations probably could not have moved much faster. The support of the Arab League was crucial for the no-fly resolution and its enforcement, and it prevaricated for a long time before finally coming out in favour of military intervention in Libya.

The German government, on the other hand, took a more cowardly route. It abstained in the Security Council vote, aligning itself with the likes of Russia and China.

Such an irresponsible move will have consequences, and not only for the reputation of Germany among those protesting and dying for freedom in the Arab world. Our European partners will also remember this the next time Germany presses for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and demands more international influence.

Some of the concerns that German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle has voiced against this military intervention are certainly valid. And the consequences of attacks on Qaddafi’s forces could indeed be dramatic.

The international community risks being dragged into a bloody civil war. It will have to destroy Libya’s air defence systems to protect its pilots. So what happens if Qaddafi stations his artillery in school playgrounds? What about civilian casualties? And how will the West react if the rebels attack civilians loyal to Qaddafi?

The current conflict in Libya could become a long and dirty war. This is not to argue against a Western intervention with Arab participation, but the risks have to be acknowledged. Hardly any supporters of military intervention are doing that at the moment, and it’s dishonest.

But the German government’s abstention is downright cowardly, particularly because there is a strong suspicion that domestic political concerns influenced the decision. If Germany had voted in favour of the military strikes against Qaddafi in the Security Council, then German participation would have been virtually unavoidable.

With important state elections looming, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s centre-right wanted to avoid this at all costs, because a majority of Germans oppose military engagements abroad. However, a responsible foreign policy cannot be guided by such considerations.

If Westerwelle is now claiming that Germany cannot fight against oppression everywhere in the world, then he has irrevocably cheapened his argument. In that case, no military intervention – including Berlin’s current participation in Afghanistan – can be justified.

This commentary was published with the kind permission of ZEIT ONLINE, where it originally appeared in German. Translation by The Local.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

NATO

Erdogan links Swedish Nato approval to Turkish EU membership

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Monday he would back Sweden's Nato candidacy if the European Union resumes long-stalled membership talks with Ankara.

Erdogan links Swedish Nato approval to Turkish EU membership

“First, open the way to Turkey’s membership of the European Union, and then we will open it for Sweden, just as we had opened it for Finland,” Erdogan told a televised media appearance, before departing for the NATO summit in Lithuania.

Erdogan said “this is what I told” US President Joe Biden when the two leaders spoke by phone on Sunday.

Turkey first applied to be a member of the European Economic Community — a predecessor to the EU — in 1987. It became an EU candidate country in 1999 and formally launched membership negotiations with the bloc in 2005.

The talks stalled in 2016 over European concerns about Turkish human rights violations.

“I would like to underline one reality. Turkey has been waiting at the EU’s front door for 50 years,” Erdogan said. “Almost all the NATO members are EU members. I now am addressing these countries, which are making Turkey wait for more than 50 years, and I will address them again in Vilnius.”

Sweden’s prime minister, Ulf Kristersson, is due to meet Erdogan at 5pm on Monday in a last ditch attempt to win approval for the country’s Nato bid ahead of Nato’s summit in Vilnius on July 11th and 12th. 

Turkey has previously explained its refusal to back Swedish membership as motivated by the country’s harbouring of people connected to the PKK, a Kurdish terrorist group, and the Gülen movement, who Erdogan blames for an attempted coup in 2016. 

More recently, he has criticised Sweden’s willingness to allow pro-Kurdish groups to protest in Swedish cities and allow anti-Islamic protesters to burn copies of the Quran, the holy book of Islam.

In a sign of the likely reaction of counties which are members both of Nato and the EU, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said that the two issues should not be connected. 

“Sweden meets all the requirements for Nato membership,” Scholz told reporters in Berlin. “The other question is one that is not connected with it and that is why I do not think it should be seen as a connected issue.”

Malena Britz, Associate Professor in Political Science at the Swedish Defence University, told public broadcaster SVT that Erdogan’s new gambit will have caught Sweden’s negotiators, the EU, and even Nato Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg off guard. 

“I think both the member states and Stoltenberg had expected this to be about Nato and not about what the EU is getting up to,” she said. “That’s not something Nato even has any control over. If Erdogan sticks to the idea that Turkey isn’t going to let Sweden into Nato until Turkey’s EU membership talks start again, then Sweden and Nato will need to think about another solution.” 

Aras Lindh, a Turkey expert at the Swedish Institute of Foreign Affairs, agreed that the move had taken Nato by surprise. 

“This came suddenly. I find it hard to believe that anything like this will become reality, although there could possibly be some sort of joint statement from the EU countries. I don’t think that any of the EU countries which are also Nato members were prepared for this issue.”

SHOW COMMENTS