politics – Page 6 – understand-culture

Scholz “stepping on the brakes”

The Guardian: “Coalition partners accuse Olaf Scholz of failing to live up to promises as major Russian offensive looms”

Germany’s chancellor is under growing pressure to authorise the delivery of heavy weaponry to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia’s looming eastern offensive, with Olaf Scholz’s coalition partners accusing him of failing to live up to his promises.

“I can only speculate why the chancellor is stepping on the brakes like this. I can see no logical reason for it. But with his actions, the chancellor is not only damaging the situation in Ukraine, but he is also massively damaging Germany’s reputation in Europe and the world.” Anton Hofreiter – leader figure of the Green Party.

Frederick August the Procrastinator

Frederick August, the King of Saxony, was one of history’s great procrastinators. While he began as one of Napoleon’s greatest foes, he soon became his greatest ally. In return, Napoleon elevated him from prince elector to king.

But by 1813, his alliance with Napoleon would cause him to lose the Battle of Leipzig. Though Frederick August was careful in attempting to side himself with the great forces who opposed him, a treaty that he had made with Austria eventually dissolved. Taken into captivity by the Prussians, Frederick August was forced to turn more than half of his territory over to his archrivals.

But why was Frederick August on the losing side of the Battle of Leipzig? Historians consider him to have been incapable of making decisions. He is credited with coining the phrase “no decision is better than a bad decision.”

During the revolt he spent his time sitting almost apathetically in the basement in the city hall of Leipzig. To add to the confusion, Frederick August was an exceptionally unpredictable monarch; very few rulers changed their mind so often.

Not only was he incapable of making decisions, but as soon as a decision was made it essentially would have lost all meaning in the moment of its creation, having already been undermined in significance and seriousness by the probability that Frederick August would again change direction.

Careful, cautious, change-averse

Oliver Nachtwey – Professor of Sociology at the University of Basel in Switzerland – and a sharp-eyed observer of German politics wrote this guest essay in the New York Times the day after the September 26, 2021 federal elections in Germany:

“It could have been a fresh start. In the face of a number of pressing challenges, rising inequality, run-down infrastructure and spiraling climate change among them, the election was a chance for the country to chart a better, more equal course for the 21st century. Instead, Germany is stuck. Ms. Merkel may be leaving. Yet the Germany she cultivated — careful, cautious, averse to major change — will carry on as before.

The campaign gave us early clues. Typically, candidates for the highest political office seek to distance themselves as much as possible from incumbents, to demonstrate the superiority of their vision for the country. But in Germany, the main candidates vied to imitate Ms. Merkel’s centrist political style. It delivered four successive electoral victories, after all.”

Germany’s future? Look at its cars

A well-done description of the current – September 2021 – situation in Germany. By the economist. Using the German automobile industry as a window into the wider challenges to the German economy and to German society.

It’s bottom-line question is whether the German people are capable of responding to the challenges of today and the near future.

German Reunification (1989–1990)

The process of reunifying East and West Germany after the fall of the Berlin Wall involved months of negotiations among German leaders and with international powers. Rather than rushing to immediate reunification, German officials and their allies took time to address legal, economic, and security concerns, ensuring a stable and lasting outcome .

Scholz indecision

(Bloomberg) — German Chancellor Olaf Scholz faces intense pressure from members of his ruling coalition to step up deliveries of heavy weapons such as tanks and fighter jets to help Ukraine fight Russian troops. After initiating an historic reversal in Germany’s previously frugal defense policy in the early stages of the war, Scholz has since appeared hesitant to go beyond initial supplies.

Triple Alliance

Patience played a significant role in Germany’s decision to join and shape the Triple Alliance. German leadership, particularly under Bismarck, approached alliance-building with careful, deliberate diplomacy, allowing the nature and stakes of the decision to dictate the pace rather than succumbing to external pressures or hasty proposals.

Historical records show that German diplomats were wary of rushing into agreements, especially when approached by Britain about joining the alliance. The German government interpreted Britain’s urgency as a sign of British weakness and saw no reason to accelerate their own decision-making process. Instead, they used the opportunity to negotiate from a position of strength, raising their own terms and ensuring that any agreement would serve Germany’s long-term strategic interests.

Additionally, the process of forming and maintaining the Triple Alliance itself was marked by careful negotiation and patience. Germany prioritized frontier security and the stability of its alliances with Austria-Hungary and Italy, weighing the benefits and risks over time rather than making impulsive decisions based on immediate diplomatic overtures . German diplomats often delayed or slowed negotiations, insisting on clarity and thoroughness before committing to any binding agreements.

In summary, Germany’s approach to joining the Triple Alliance exemplified the national logic that the timing and nature of major decisions should be determined by strategic considerations and patience, not by the urgency of external actors or short-term pressures.

Germany puts hold on North Stream 2

For weeks the German government was reluctant to commit to including stopping North Stream 2 as a key element in sanctiones against Russia should it invade Ukraine.

BERLIN, Feb 22 (Reuters) – Germany on Tuesday halted the Nord Stream 2 Baltic Sea gas pipeline project, designed to double the flow of Russian gas direct to Germany, after Russia formally recognised two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine.

Europe’s most divisive energy project, worth $11 billion, was finished in September, but has stood idle pending certification by Germany and the European Union.

The pipeline had been set to ease the pressure on European consumers facing record energy prices amid a wider post-pandemic cost of living crisis, and on governments that have already forked out billions to try to cushion the impact on consumers.

Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact

The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact exemplifies several core German decision-making strategies, particularly the emphasis on strategic patience, pragmatic calculation, and allowing the nature of the decision-not external pressures-to dictate timing and terms.

Deliberate Negotiation and Timing:
The pact was the result of extended negotiations between Germany and the Soviet Union, following the breakdown of talks between the Soviets, Britain, and France . German leaders did not rush into an agreement but instead waited for the optimal moment-after other diplomatic options had failed-to secure a deal that would best serve their interests. This patience allowed Germany to negotiate from a position of strength and maximize its strategic advantage.

Pragmatic, Interest-Driven Approach:
Despite deep ideological differences, Germany prioritized practical considerations over ideology, focusing on immediate military and territorial objectives . The pact included secret protocols dividing Eastern Europe into spheres of influence, demonstrating a willingness to set aside personal or political animosities in favor of concrete, performance-based outcomes .

Control Over Decision Pace:
Germany resisted external pressures-such as the urgency from Britain and France to form an anti-German alliance-and instead set the tempo of negotiations to align with its own strategic timetable. This approach reflects the German logic that the time allotted to a decision should be determined by its complexity and importance, not by outside urgency.

Patience in Execution and Adjustment:
After the pact was signed, Germany continued to renegotiate and adjust its terms, as seen in subsequent agreements modifying borders and managing resource exchanges with the Soviet Union . This ongoing, patient adjustment process ensured that decisions remained aligned with evolving strategic needs.

In summary, the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact demonstrates German decision-making strategies through measured, pragmatic negotiation; patience in timing and execution; and a consistent focus on achieving well-defined, interest-driven objectives, regardless of external pressure or ideological differences .

Berlin Conference (1884–1885)

The Berlin Conference (1884–1885). Context: Major European powers, including Germany, convened in Berlin to formalize territorial claims in Africa. The conference lasted several months, with extensive negotiations and careful consideration of complex interests before any decisions were finalized. The process was deliberate and patient, reflecting the German preference for thorough analysis rather than rushed conclusions.