Since the Hamas terrorist attack on October 7, the federal government has struggled to emphasize Israel’s right to defense, but also to point out the plight of the Palestinians. Will the tightrope act succeed?
“As friends, we say to the Israeli government: Let us help,” said Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on her most recent trip. “In this brutal war of terror, help your country and your government not get lost in it.”
For almost six months, Baerbock has been struggling to take the smallest steps, speaking to everyone involved in the region, always in close coordination – at home with the Chancellor, abroad with allies, especially with the American Foreign Minister. A balancing act between clear, often critical language behind closed doors and restraint in front of the cameras.
The worry of hitting the wrong note is always with you. And so, since October 7th, it has been standard practice in all speeches and press conferences to first emphasize that Israel has the right, nay, the duty, to defend its citizens, and then also to point out that Israel must do everything to alleviate the humanitarian misery of the Palestinians.
Hardly any understanding internationally
Baerbock attaches great importance to always addressing the needs of both sides. She hopes that Germany will remain credible as a mediator for both sides. But this is becoming increasingly difficult as the situation in Gaza becomes more catastrophic.
Internationally, there is hardly any understanding left as to why Germany and the USA continue to stand unwaveringly by Israel. This weakens their negotiating position – in the Arab world, in the global south. The accusation: Germany applies double standards. Wherever high standards of international law are applied, people are too lenient towards Israel.
The tone of German politics towards the Israeli government has become significantly tougher in recent weeks. When Chancellor Olaf Scholz appeared in front of the press alongside the Israeli head of government on March 17, he said to Benjamin Netanyahu with regard to the planned ground offensive in Rafah: “No matter how important the goal may be, it can be so terribly high justify the costs, or are there other ways to achieve this goal?” Scholz appealed that one could not stand by while Palestinians were exposed to the risk of starvation.
The Foreign Minister usually becomes even clearer – one can probably assume, in close consultation with the Chancellor: “I can only repeat myself at this point. The people in Rafah, they cannot disappear into thin air. They are in the south of the Gaza Strip “We left, at the request of the Israeli army, to protect their lives. Therefore, there is a responsibility to protect these people.” Baerbock has repeatedly described the humanitarian situation in Gaza as hell.
Speak plainly behind closed doors
They are almost pleading appeals, made over and over again to a government that appears unimpressed by them. The federal government’s efforts to convey that it wants to contribute something to resolving the conflict appear to be in vain.
On Monday of this week, at the government press conference, a journalist asked why the federal government was sticking to appeals and ruling out consequences so far. The answer from government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit: “I think it’s a bit weak when you say, oh, you’re just making appeals. That’s how diplomacy usually works, that we appeal that we work with our closest friends – and Israel is one of them Germany’s closest friends – speak out clearly.”
It is also appropriate for friends to speak plainly behind closed doors, says Hebestreit. “And so we do, and at the same time Israel can rely on us to stand by its side.”
When it comes to pointing out that the USA is threatened with consequences – i.e. why Germany isn’t – Hebestreit points to German history. The basis of the relationship between Germany and Israel is something very independent. “And you should never forget that in all the considerations you make.”
Middle East expert: Very little influence
From the perspective of Middle East expert Guido Steinberg, the federal government has very little influence. The demand that the federal government should put more pressure on Israel ignores the political realities.
“Germany has no means of exerting pressure,” he tells the ARD capital studio. “We have friends and allies in Israel, but no people taking orders. Pressure would not bring about a change in behavior and would instead only damage the relationship.”
The USA’s abstention from the latest UN resolution shows how annoyed the Biden administration is with how little the Israelis are responding to the wishes of the Americans. “If even Joe Biden isn’t even remotely penetrating with his warnings, neither can Annalena Baerbock.”
The German position is valued by Israel, but Germany is not taken seriously as a security policy actor, said Steinberg. “The Israelis are much more aware than many in Germany of the discrepancy between the demands and reality of German policy. On the one hand, Germany declares Israel’s security to be a reason of state, but on the other hand, we can only send a frigate into the Red Sea.”
The Union welcomes the mediation
The fact that the federal government continues to try to mediate in the conflict also meets with the approval of the largest opposition party. “This kind of policy, speaking to everyone, speaking to all sides, including the Arab world, but also the Israeli government, is, in my opinion, appreciated by all sides. And that’s a good thing,” said Jürgen Hardt, foreign policy officer Spokesman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, in Deutschlandfunk.
But the fact that Baerbock clearly states that there should not be a major offensive on Rafah goes too far for him in this clarity. Germany should be very careful with such clear demands, said Hardt. At least as long as there is no answer as to what Israel’s security would look like if Hamas continued to exist.
Baerbock’s answer: She advocates a two-state solution – even if she admits that it is still a long, difficult road. At the moment she has focused on demanding and putting the Palestinian Authority’s reform process at the forefront. Probably also in the hope that the Israeli government will move if there are undeniable reforms.
So what to do? Talk, talk, talk. As the government spokesman said: This is how diplomacy usually works, “that we appeal, that we speak out clearly.”