In the summer of 2014 several members of the Foreign Relations Committee of the German Bundestag visited Washington, DC. Their talks were overshadowed by media reports that the U.S. had been spying on the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND, Germany’s intelligence service) and the Verteidigungsministerum (German Ministry of Defense).
The Germans tried to help their American colleagues to understand the Empörung (indignation, anger, outrage) felt by the German people. They did not get very far, the ARD (one of Germany’s major tv networks) stated in their special report titled Problembewusstsein nicht vorhanden – Problem-consciousness non-existent.
The German parliamentarians left Washington with little hope that their colleagues in the Congress would be able to get the American intelligence agencies under control, if Members of Congress themselves were not aware (conscious) of the problems damaging German-American relations.
Entschuldigen Sie, ich bin nicht überzeugt! – “Excuse me, I am not convinced!“ In 2003, at the International Security Conference in Munich, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer ended the debate against his American colleague Donald Rumsfeld with this reproachful outcry.
But what had happened? Of what was Fischer not convinced? The debate was on the topic of aiding the intervention of U.S. military forces in Iraq. Rumsfeld wanted support from Germany, but the German government under the direction of Chancellor Schröder and Fischer strictly declined his request.
At the conference, Rumsfeld was making one last attempt at getting the still-doubtful Germans on board with his agenda. Nevertheless, his reasoning that Iraq was working on weapons of mass destruction, supporting terrorist groups, and ignoring the UN, was not enough to convince the German side.
The evidence was too scant, the intervention plans too poorly prepared, and the timing of the operation seemed badly selected. It would be better just to give diplomacy another chance, rather than send German soldiers into an adventure with an uncertain end and questionable justification.
Presumably, Fischer (a former participant in the student protest movement of 1968) was drawing on more recent German history to strengthen his resolve in declining. And in this case, he now has history on his side; the Iraq war indeed evolved into just the disaster which he had always warned it would be.
2003. The Munich Security Conference. Then German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer challenges then U.S. Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, “to make the case” for war in Iraq. Watch mins. 1:00 to 1:25, where Fischer speaks directly to Rumsfeld.
Menschen bei Maischberger (People with Maischberger) is a popular and respected political talkshow in Germany hosted by Sandra Maischberger.
The topic on February 24, 2015 was Zar Wladimir I. – Was will Putin wirklich? – Czar Wladimir I. – What does Putin want?, and it included prominent guests including Gabriele Krone-Schmalz, a German journalist and author who spent many years of her career reporting from Moscow.
The topic of the show guaranteed intense discussion and controversy. Krone-Schmalz had particular difficulty remaining calm and collected. Time and again she avoided the questions about Putin, Russian aggression, and the situation in the Ukraine.
Maischberger and other guests zeroed in on her responses, politely, but directly. Krone-Schmalz lost her cool. Her emotional responses and defensiveness themselves became the topic of the discussion, so much so that she threatened to get up and leave the studio, stating: „Dann machen Sie Ihre Sendung doch alleine!“ – Well, you can do the show without me!
The Augsburger Allgemeine – the city of Augsburg’s newspaper – described Krone-Schmalz as grantig – huffy, grouchy, grumpy. In an interview with the BILD-Zeitung – Germany’s most-read daily – she said that ihr die Pferde durchgegangen sind – literally: the horses bolted on me, meaning things got out of control.
Frustration. Emotions. Passions. Anger. Nothing could be less persuasive in the German context. See the video above, especially 6:30 mins. onward.
In a major speech given by Helmut Kohl in October 1978 he quotes the German sociologist Max Weber: “not to put yourself in the middle point”, which could tempt one into “becoming an actor.” (from Politik als Beruf – Politics as Profession – January 1919).
Schauspieler can be translated also into masquerader. Kohl, at that time the leader the opposition Christian Democrats, as well as during his years as chancellor 1982-1998, was not known for his rhetorical skills.
Helmut Schmidt (SPD – Social Democratic Party), chancellor 1974-81, and an embittered critic of Kohl, was considered a brilliant public speaker.
Franz-Josef Strauss, head of the Christian Social Party (the Christian Democrat’s sister party in Bavaria) referred to Schmidt as Germany’s Staatschauspieler, loosely translated into the (Staat) state or government , (Schauspieler) actor. Or masquerader.
H.R. McMaster, February 2017 until April 2018 National Security Advisor under President Donald Trump, describes how critical it was at the beginning of his tenure to get clarity on scope. Listen to minutes 3:00 to 4:15 about “the nature of the problem”, and about “framing out the problem”:
McMaster earned an M.A. and a Ph.D. in History, both from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He turned his dissertation on the strategy of the U.S. in the Vietnam War into his book entitled Dereliction of Duty.
The Louisiana Purchase (1803). President Thomas Jefferson authorized the purchase of the Louisiana Territory from France in a remarkably short period, despite constitutional uncertainties and lack of time for full deliberation. The decision to act quickly doubled the size of the United States and is celebrated as a bold, pragmatic move-valuing speed and opportunity over perfect legal clarity.
Mark Shields was a long-time political journalist. He had a nationally-sydicated column for decades, and was well known for his weekly analysis with David Brooks – a New York Times columnist – on the PBS NewsHour. Listen to minutes 7:28 to 9:25.
Die Unbeugsamen (The Indomitables, 2021): This documentary tells the story of women in the Bonn Republic who had to fight persistently and patiently for their participation in democratic decision-making processes. Their long-term, unwavering commitment and refusal to be rushed by societal or political pressures exemplify the German belief that significant decisions require time, perseverance, and careful deliberation.
In February 2015 Christian Lindner, the head of the Free Democatic Party (FDP), gave a speech in Dusseldorf, the capital of the German state Northrhine Westphalia.
“Entrepreneurship is a signal of confidence in a culture’s future. When people start new companies, they are not only creating a better future for themselves, they’re creating jobs for others.”
Hardly into his speech a state representative from the ruling Social Democrats (SPD) called out smugly that Lindner, indeed, had had personal experience with startups.
Lindner pounced on the opportunity. “Aha, look here. You say that I have experience. It is true, dear colleague. During the highpoint of the new economy I founded a company. It was not successful. But the leader of your party, the premier of this great state, in her speech today stated clearly that Germans should not stigmatize those whose startups fail.”
Lindner continued: “There you have it, in your own caucaus, Madame Premier, a colleague who doesn’t listen to you. This is exactly one of the reasons why so many people prefer to work as civil servants, instead of starting a company. For if they are successful then you Social Democrats want to tax and reallocate their profits. And if they are not successful, then they are derided.”
Auf YouTube wurde die Rede bereits millionenfach angeklickt. In DIE ZEIT vom 19. Februar 2015 schreibt Feliks Eyser, ein Gründer, der im zweiten Anlauf erfolgreich war, in einem Artikel mit dem Titel „Wer wagt, verliert“:
Within hours the speech was uploaded to YouTube and clicked on over a million times. A week later DIE ZEIT, a respected political weekly, published an article by Feliks Eyser, whose first startup failed but whose second succeeded.
The article’s title was „Wer wagt, verliert“ – those who risk, fail. This is the opposite of the well-known German figure of speech “Wer wagt, gewinnt” – those who risk, win.
“Failure is a part of entrepreneurship just like sore muscles are a part of sports. Those who start a company run the risk of failure. Courage is essential. Perhaps more people in this country would have that courage if a busines failure were not seen as human failure.”
Interestingly, Eyser wrote scheitern not seen as versagen. Both terms translate into failure. Could this mean that Germans see in failure human or personal failure?
A Fragestellung is literally a question formulation. It is the definition of the question to be addressed. Before Germans make a decision – answer a question – they place great effort into first being sure that they have a common understanding of the decision to be made, of the question to be answered.
From the German point of view it is not enough to be capable of making decisions, to answer complex questions intelligently, if you haven’t first defined accurately the decision to be made, the question to be answered.
Germans engage in a discussion upfront about: What is the nature of the decision we are about to make? What are its implications for other areas of our work? Are we addressing the right question? Are we in agreement about what decision we are making and why?
Schmal (narrow): Old High German smal: small, narrow; narrow in width, as seen in profile; little, few, not enough, bare, barren.
Breit (wide): Of greater length in profile; as in size(s), measurements, a certain width; large, stretched; in large measure.
The German word schmal is often used to describe poor performance, low quality, something deficient. An engineer who does delivers poor results is referred to as a Schmalspuringenieur, literally a narrow lane engineer. A Schmalspurforscher is a scientist who has achieved little professionally. Schmalbrüstig – literally small or narrow in the chest – is someone who is unathletic.
Grundsätzlich: Relating to what is foundational; in accordance with a principle, in principle; actual, fundamentally; in general, as a rule.
The German people are serious. They value principles, deep-felt beliefs. Er hat keine Prinzipien. He has no principles, is a very serious criticism in the German context. To have no principles, to have no values, which guide one in their behavior, is considered to be a sign of weak character. Germans tend to have discussions about bottom-line thinking, beliefs, and principles.
The German political parties have their Grundsatzprogramm, their foundational political principles, which are formulated for the long term. The Grundsatzprogramm encompasses their foundational political beliefs, upon which the specifics of their political platform are formulated. Their election campaigns are closely aligned with these ideas. The Grundsatzprogramm is seldom modified. To go against it, to follow a political course which strays from it, invites internal rebuke and sanction.