Click
an area of the map for world news.

|

Germany's
Wartime Debate
Post-War Takes
on New Meaning in Germany
Eric
Jansson
World Press Review correspondent
Berlin
Nov. 26, 2001
 |
| Comrades
in Arms: German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (R) with
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Sept. 19, 2001 (Photo:
AFP). |
Around the globe, pundits are talking about how the world has changed since Sept.
11, 2001. And it has. U.S. troops are based in Central Asian
former Soviet republics, and are fighting in Afghanistan with Russia's
consent and active support. Pakistan is allied with the United
States against
the Taliban. British Prime Minister Tony Blair often appears
to be acting as an ambassador of sorts for U.S.
President George W. Bush. But all this could change once the
war on terrorism runs its circuitous course. What has changed
permanently since Sept. 11?
Well, to begin with, Germany has. The federal republic has entered
a new era as Europe's reticent great power. After a decade of post-reunification
quietude, its post-war era of minimal military meddling is at
an end.
The change did not come easily, and that it was made at all
is largely thanks to Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's dramatic
political helmsmanship. Shortly after Sept. 11, he pledged unconditional
political and military support for the Bush administration's
war on terror. He cited both Germany's commitment to the United
States and its national interest in combating terrorism, knowing
that for the first time since World War II the country could
be entering a war. Two months later, when the call came from
Washington requesting specific German assistancea deployment
of 3,900 troopsSchröder did not flinch. He took it to
the parliament in Berlin and won approval for the deployment
after a tense political struggle, in which he tied the issue
to a vote of confidence in his government and thus pushed his
agenda through in a show of strength.
Somewhere, though we do not know where yet, a large German force
will play a part in this warprobably in post-Taliban Afghanistan.
This is a lot for Germans to swallow, accustomed as they are
to smaller deployments and bloodless interventions
such as policing operations in former Yugoslavia.
Schröder's hawkish stance left the German press in uncomfortably
unfamiliar territory. Left-leaning journals, traditional supporters
of Schröder's Social Democratic party, grumbled that pacifists in the governing
coalition had been forced to back down, but could not help expressing
pride in the triumph of Schröder's will.
Meanwhile, Schröder's traditional critics in the conservative
press stretched awkwardly to fault the chancellor, who, despite
his socialist politics, has chosen a course of solidarity with
the United States just as steadfast as they would have charted
themselves.
Writing in Der Spiegel (liberal), commentator Rudolf
Augstein fretted about the extent of Germany's new military
commitment. Schröder, he reminded readers, had promised once
upon a time to keep Germany out of any military adventures. Schröder's
position has been this: cool strategy, no adventures. But the
United States' plans for its 'war on terrorism' are adventurous.
The chancellor has promised Washington unshrinking solidarity
without really knowing what Bush has actually planned,
he wrote on Sept. 19.
Augstein's war on terrorism never breaks out of
quotation marks. Yet he did not bring himself to oppose military
intervention completely. He merely expressed doubts that many
on Germany's elected left still quietly harbor: Germany
must rethink its relationship with the United States, so long
as President Bush sticks to his arrogant line: 'he who is not
with us is against us.' This time Schröder and his foreign
minister willingly rolled over.
Yet liberal German newspapers also praised the chancellor's
vision. The opinion page of Berlin's Berliner Zeitung
newspaperonce an organ of official socialism in the German
Democratic Republic, since converted into a more rambunctious
local paper with a national readershipis a valuable gauge
of centrist and left-wing opinion in Germany at any given time.
On Nov. 20, commentator Rainer Poertner wrote in Berliner
Zeitung that the government had shown everyone that
it will not back down, despite stubborn domestic political resistance
against plans for the German military to join the war on terror.
Poertner wrote that this would be a starting point, from whence
Germany may take on new diplomatic weight and greater expectations
from the international community. If Berlin takes a leading
role in the rebuilding of Afghanistan, Poertner argued, then
it brings NATO and the European Union into the rebuilding of
Afghanistan as well.
Acting as an agent of change for these power blocks, it
will be increasingly difficult for Germany to opt out of participation
in multinational peacekeeping forces, he predicted.
Not long ago, such talk of a lasting German military influence
in the world would have caused outrage not just on the left,
but also across much of the country's political spectrum. That
it appeared on the opinion pages of Berliner Zeitung
to so little criticism indicates that Germany may have rounded
a corner in its political history.
Conservative commentators, usually more at ease with military matters, also found themselves in an uncomfortable
position as they responded to Schröder's new hawkish stance.
Commentators jumped at the opportunity to point out the hypocrisy
of career pacifists who voted for Schröder's military commitment
rather than breaking his governing coalition of Social Democrats
and Greens apart. Those who try to be both for and against
such a motion are not in the [political] center, but rather
on the verge of becoming a laughingstock, wrote Stefan
Dietrich in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (conservative)
on Nov. 21.
What Dietrich did not mention was that career hawks voted unanimously
against the military commitment they would have liked to support,
rather than daring to show support for the government in its
moment of fragility. Had the parliament's right-wing parties
given their support, the vote in favor of sending German troops
to Afghanistan would have been nearly unanimous.
If those troops go in, it will be a memorable time for Germanyfor
the first time since World War II, the country will participate
in a real war. Only Germany's oldest generation
remembers what that means. Germany's last war left it an international
outcast on the brink of total destruction. After this one, the
term post-war may take on a wholly new meaning in
Germany.
|
|
|