A meeting of top political officials is scheduled for Thursday in Berlin. The traffic light alliance wants to defuse a conflict that is not good for Germany’s reputation in the world: Representatives of Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD), Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Greens) and Finance Minister Christian Lindner (FDP) are to draft the national security strategy agreed in the coalition agreement consolidate – that this then goes through the cabinet as planned before the Munich Security Conference on the third weekend in February is considered possible in all three houses. But it cannot be ruled out that it could take longer, they say.
The Federal Foreign Office wanted to submit the coalition’s most important basic paper, which it had prepared under its leadership, to the departmental vote before Christmas in order to make the deadline. According to reports, the Chancellery and Ministry of Finance have asked for more time and postponed the further process, how mirror and World had first reported shortly before the turn of the year.
How detailed should the document be? Larger than that of the United States?
Both the chancellor and his foreign minister have announced themselves at the annual high mass of security policy in Munich – it would be helpful to be able to show a joint paper, but above all a unified position. Because allies, above all the USA, are now wondering what the chancellor’s turning point means in concrete terms, not least in dealing with China. But there is still a need for discussion, too many open points, according to the government. However, some of the formalities hide conflicts in the political substance.
For some, the Federal Foreign Office’s draft is too long-winded. You could end up with around 60 pages – but it shouldn’t be much more. The US security strategy is only 48 pages. In coalition circles, it is said that the goal is not to hold a foreign policy policy seminar, but to provide a brief description of how the world has changed and what role Germany is playing in it. The document should not go into so much detail that there is no room for creativity.
Baerbock, on the other hand, values the term “integrated security” and the fact that the security strategy must be binding for the entire government. Creative space can also be a word that can be used to circumvent unpleasant fundamental decisions, for example in the relationship with Beijing. The intention of the Federal Foreign Office is to clarify conflicting goals in the government in a binding manner and to learn from the mistakes of the past.
One example is energy supply, where Germany has long made itself dependent on Russia and has even sold its gas storage facilities to the Russian state-owned company Gazprom. Chancellor Angela Merkel’s (CDU) long-standing security advisor, Christoph Heusgen, had it recently Handelsblatt described as a mistake that economic interests were put above security concerns.
From the point of view of Baerbock’s people, the debate about the participation of the Chinese company Huawei in the infrastructure for the fast 5G mobile network falls into the same category. Or the entry of the Cosco group into a container terminal in the port of Hamburg, which Chancellor Scholz had pushed through against resistance from the departments of all three coalition partners.
From Baerbock’s point of view, the integrated concept of security requires that such security-related questions, which do not fall within the competence of the Federal Foreign Office or the Ministry of Defense, are at least clarified in principle in the strategy and are not the subject of ad hoc decisions in which security policy arguments are used then be skipped again.
Your ministry seems to be falling behind somewhat as a result of the national security strategy: there are differences on a number of points between Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD) and the Greens.
(Photo: IMAGO/Political Moments)
Baerbock has also made it clear that she believes that it makes sense for the federal government to be responsible for defending against cyber attacks, including the necessary amendment to the Basic Law, as well as for expanding competencies in disaster control. This enrages the SPD-led Ministry of the Interior and the federal states. Prime Ministers from the Union and the SPD complained publicly about a lack of involvement; the federal states should now be informed about the status of the work in mid-January.
The Union proposes a German Security Council. The coalition is against it
Structurally, the Defense Ministry, also led by the SPD, has fallen behind. Until now, it had been responsible for the White Paper, in which the German government’s defense and security policy lines were outlined. The chapter on security policy from the Federal Foreign Office was “softened” there in the last draft in relation to Russia – the Greens now want to avoid that in their analysis of China. Conversely, Minister Christine Lambrecht wants to set NATO’s two percent target for defense spending and simplify exports from European armaments projects – which is met with resistance from the Greens.
According to reports, it is also disputed which structures should be created for internal government coordination in security policy crises – whether the chancellor’s office should play a larger role. The Union had proposed creating a National Security Council, including a National Security Advisor, and establishing it at the Chancellery.
The fact that nothing has leaked out yet could help in the search for a compromise
In coalition circles, it is said that such a concept would go well with a presidential system like that in the USA, but not with a parliamentary one like the German one, where several coalition partners had a say. A security council would be in the interests of the chancellery, but not necessarily in the interests of its coalition partners. But better processes are needed.
It is also said that the security strategy is too important for formula compromises under time pressure, that it is not only drawn up for one year. In addition, you still have to coordinate with partners and allies. After the draft for a downstream China strategy, which was also drawn up by the Federal Foreign Office, became public, the existing text for the security strategy was declared “confidential”, the second of four security levels, and parts of it have not yet been leaked. That might make it easier to find compromises.