German Elections: What to expect from German foreign policy?
Following the election of Donald Trump and the adoption of his bully-inspired diplomacy, the world has increasingly looked at Germany as the country who can uphold the post-war international order. As we approach election day, however, the absence of foreign policy issues on the debates and speeches of the candidates became evident. In that sense, the debate organized by the German broadcaster Deutsche Welle is a notable exception. With the presence of representatives from the six major parties running for seats in the German parliament, the debate covered issues such as North Korea, Donald Trump, Russia, and Brexit, also addressing the current situation in Turkey, NATO and the issue of migrants and refugees.
Overview
Despite the heated atmosphere of the debate, confrontations between the candidates were infrequent. Only the topics of sanctions against Russia and Brexit sparked provocations targeted mainly at the Christine Anderson, representative of the right-wing populist party AfD. As one would expect, she was the dissonant voice in those issues arguing for the lifting of the sanctions against Russia and praising Britain for its decision to leave the European Union. Anderson also maintained her party’s stance on refugees advocating for the closure of the German borders to refugees. The audience, that refrained from demonstrating through most of the event, jeered as Anderson said she does not feel safe to walk the streets alone anymore.
The representative of the Greens, Omid Nouripour, was also emphatic in some points of the debate, in particular during the discussions on the increase of Germany’s defense budget and Russia’s annexation of Crimea. He equated spending 2% of the GDP on the military, as stated on the NATO Treaty, to burning money, arguing the increase would not lead to a more secure Germany, calling for a reform of the German military and for a more effective spending of the current national security budget.
The topic was followed by a question on Donald Trump and the reliability of the US as an ally. Angela Merkel and Martin Schulz, main contenders for the chancellorship, have both manifested their reservations against Donald Trump. Merkel earlier this year, after her meetings with Trump during the NATO and G7 meeting and Schulz during the TV Debate with Merkel earlier this month. The representative of the SPD, Ralf Stegner, however, contradicted the leader of his party stating that Germany must talk to Trump. When questioned by presenter Tim Sebastian, Stegner evoked freedom of speech to justify his disagreement with Schulz. Like in the TV Debate, the SPD representative was in a delicate situation to criticize the foreign policy of the current government. Since 2013 the German Foreign Office has been headed by the member of the SPD, first Frank-Walter Steinmeier, now president of Germany, and currently by Sigmar Gabriel. Like Schulz, Stegner had a modest role in the debate and failed to justify the rupture with the current administration.
CDU
Member of the Foreign Affairs Committees of his party and of the German parliament, Andreas Nick, the representative of Merkel’s CDU, adopted a more conservative tone regarding issues like the migrant and refugee crisis. When questioned, Nick defended Merkel’s decision to welcome migrants and refugees, however, he denied his party would repeat such policy. Instead, Nick advocated for a legal migration framework that secures German borders and improves the livelihood in countries that are major sources of migrants.
The representative of the CDU argued Germany can play a bigger role in foreign affairs and defended non-military solutions to the current crisis with North Korea and the Ukraine. According to Nick, Germany should be constructive relations with Russia. Nick welcome the collaboration with Russia in Syria but criticized the regime of Vladimir Putin for supporting Bashar Al-Assad. According to the CDU representative, a similar approach should be taken with Turkey. Nick stressed the importance of maintaining an open dialogue with Erdogan, however, conditioned it to the respect for human rights and the preservation of the rule of law. His positions can be interpreted as evidence of the potential right-leaning positions of the new government if Merkel’s victory is confirmed on Sunday.
Latin America
After the debate, I had the chance to have a brief conversation with Andreas Nick (CDU) and Omid Nouripour (Greens) about Latin America and the future of its partnership with Germany and the EU. Both politicians demonstrated concern with the recent developments in the region.
Andreas Nick attributed the relatively distant relations between Germany and the region to pressing problems closer to home and the instability in the region. He demonstrated optimism, however, regarding the trade agreement negotiations between the EU and Mercosur and pointed to Argentina as a success case in the region and an example to be followed. His position seems to be shared by Chancellor Merkel and other European nations. While in a trip to South America to pass the presidency of the G20 to President Mauricio Macri, Merkel praised the new Argentine government for its achievements and acknowledged her sympathy to the measures put in place by President Macri.
Omid Nouripour, on the other hand, highlighted the importance of Brazil but, at the same time, criticizing heavily the administration of President Michel Temer. He demonstrated particular concern with the recent social and environmental policies enacted by Temer’s administration and with the political crisis engulfing the South American nation at the moment.
The considerations by the German politicians reflect perfectly the current image of Latin America since the beginning of the economic and political crises in the region. Once a prominent partner and active in multilateral forums, the participation of Latin America in major international issues was eclipsed by the internal problems many countries in the region currently face. The risk, however, is that a further retreat from international stage compromises initiatives that could contribute to the region’s economic recovery and to the establishment of political instability.