Second after Schroeder?

Last week German daily newspaper Bild criticized Germany’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Frank-Walter Steinmeier for his speech before the students of the Ural Federal University in Yekaterinburg, Russia, last Monday. The publication defined the state official’s speech as “the most pro-Russian speech” ever delivered by a German minister of foreign affairs. “It is often not easy to filter out the correct signal from the large number of simultaneous signals,” Bild quotes Steinmeier as saying. “Let us look at Crimea. At the start, the talk was of ‘local self-defense forces’; later on, the ‘little green men’ appeared, and later still we heard that special forces had also been deployed. So what should we take literally? And what should we see as rhetoric? When should we be worried and when should we remain calm?”

According to the publication, the viewpoint presented from the historical angle showed the process of the annexation of the Crimea in a way that totally violates all the regulations of the international law. “Almost immediately, no one had any doubt that it was armed, large-scale attack on a sovereign state,” Bild writes. Speaking about the collapse of the Soviet Union, Steinmeier noted that many Russians see it as a catastrophe. On the whole the newspaper Bild assesses the speech of the minister of foreign affairs as an unheard-of misinterpretation of history which is useful only for Crimea and the friendship between the SPD and the leftists like Russia and see NATO as a major evil.

“THE PURPOSE OF RESPONSIBLE FOREIGN POLICY SHOULD BE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM, NOT TO APPLAUD ONE’S OWN AUDIENCE”

Gerhard GNAUCK, Die Welt reporter in Warsaw:

“Such words are often heard, especially expressed by the Social Democrats. I see three reasons for this. First, the Social Democrats don’t understand the essence of the Russian post-Soviet imperialism. Second, Steinmeier probably takes into account the fact that Russian elite doesn’t especially like criticism and is unable to live with it (which is a correct diagnosis in itself). Third, a part of the Social Democrats is in a deep crisis. The elections will take place in 2017, and the statements like ‘we are friends with Russia’ are quite popular in certain circles of the German society, especially in the left flank of the stage, and the post-Communist party The Left, which competes with the Social Democrats for the votes, is strong here.

“An influential representative of CDU, Merkel’s party in the EU Parliament, Elmar Brok acutely responded in Steinmeier’s words in the newspaper Bild. He called his words about the Russian language in Ukraine especially absurd, and on the whole underlined that the purpose of responsible foreign policy should be to solve the problem, not to applaud one’s own audience.’”

“THIS IS A VERBAL GYMNASTICS, TO PRESENT IN A MORE OR LESS ACCESSIBLE WAY AN ABSOLUTELY INADEQUATE STAND”

Volodymyr OHRYZKO, ex-minister of foreign affairs of Ukraine:

“This proves that Social Democrats have started to think about the coming elections and that they need to find a union with even more left parties which have become popular in Germany over recent time. I think that this is first and foremost a pass to the leftists in Germany, to secure shaping of a coalition at the future elections and keep the power in such a way. I think this is not Germany’s stand, because even the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs gave very dry information about Steinmeier’s visit to Russia, noting that the negotiations on certain questions have taken place.

“I think that this is Steinmeier’s personal stand. And this is a kind of a tradition of the German Social Democratic forces which has been present since remote past, and in recent years has been characterized with such an outstanding name as ex-chancellor Schroeder. Therefore there is nothing new about that.

“As for the difficulties with interpreting the Russian signals, this is an attempt Steinmeier took with a purpose to find some words in order to explain the stand of his party. They, from the viewpoint of the international law, are absolutely inadequate and don’t meet what is written in all textbooks on interstate relations. This is a way to make people like them, to avoid exacerbation, to avoid direct questions and direct responses. This is a verbal gymnastics, to present in a more or less accessible way an absolutely inadequate stand.”

“GERMANY SHOULD FOCUS ON CREATION OF CONDITIONS THAT WILL SECURE PRODUCTIVE DIALOG”

Susan STEWART, German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), Berlin:

“I have read both Steinmeier’s speech in Ekaterinburg and the article in the Bild newspaper criticizing it. I do not agree with most of the interpretations of the speech in the Bild article. In my opinion the speech was an attempt to show that Steinmeier understands that many developments of the past decades are viewed very differently in Russia and in Germany. His hope is to engage in a dialogue on these different perceptions. The main problem that I see is not in the speech, but in the fact that probably only very few people in Russia (and virtually none on the official level) are ready for such a dialogue. The willingness to criticize oneself and the actions of one’s country is much more present in the German context than in the Russian one. So right now I don’t see the possibility for a fruitful dialogue on most of the issues that Steinmeier raised. Nor do I see an opportunity for effective cooperation with Russia in Syria. More thought needs to be given on the German side to the question of which conditions need to be in place in order to have a productive dialogue. And there needs to be a greater willingness not to pursue dialogue for dialogue’s sake, but only if there are indications that the other side is genuinely interested in a dialogue which advances the relationship, not just one which serves as a platform for the mutual exchange of statements.”

“THIS IS A WAY TO CALM YOURSELF AND YOUR PASSIVENESS”

 Vasyl FILIPCHUK, president, International Center for Policy Studies, Kyiv:

“What Steinmeier said is a typically German, even European, position: ‘we don’t understand what is going on behind our eastern borders. We don’t understand the logic of the events and don’t understand why one thing is said, another thing is done, and some third thing is thought.’ In other words, he said to the Russians that they cannot be predicted.

“I have heard such things from many diplomats, both European and American ones. Probably, this is a way to calm yourself down, your passiveness, and lack of own stand, why they don’t want to increase the sanctions or implement a more rigid negotiation process. Everyone sees that the negotiations on the Minsk or Normandy format are in a dead end. And to get out of it, one needs to raise the stakes, offer more positive recipes of regulation, and if another side refuses, doesn’t agree, to face exacerbation and increase of punitive actions.

“But with the current situation in Germany and the EU, no one wants to take any acute steps, in one or other direction: either reinforcement, or weakening. So far they are waiting what will the end of the following elections be, what will be the situation in our country in autumn, which side will make mistakes which will be used further as an explanation why we haven’t reinforce the sanctions, whether we have preserved or cancelled them. In other words, we are playing the game of expectations, to understand later, who should be blamed for everything. Therefore everything Steinmeier said meets the logic of such a stand.

“As for the criticism of such position by the German publication, this is a logical part of the political German discussion. It means that not everyone likes it in Germany. I think in six months there will be no cardinal changes, and waiting endlessly doesn’t meet the strategic interests of any of the players. On the one hand, Germany, France, the US, China, Great Britain should increase the stakes, use the growth of pressure on the RF, and on the other hand – on the proposal to solve this conflict without military actions.

“In order, to develop a stand of a systemic solving of the conflict, you must have certain muscles, political courage and will, be a political leader of the level of Reagan, Kohl, and Churchill. There are no leaders like them in Europe, therefore it is quite logical from German or European point of view to wait and see what happens, because ‘we don’t understand what you are doing.’”

 “NOW EUROPE IS EITHER PRETENDING OR IT DOESN’T UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE RF”

 Oazu NANTOI, program director, Institute for Public Policy (Chisinau):

“First of all, we need to immediately get rid of the illusion concerning the Western countries. We shouldn’t idealize the European Union, and especially the European politicians. It is enough to mention that Vladimir Putin hired ex-chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. Second, you should recall how the West helplessly responded to the aggression of Russia against Georgia and how all the praised super services had not been able to predict such a flow of the events. Third, we should recall that in summer 2013 the tensions around the expected arrival of Viktor Yanukovych to Vilnius started to grow and no one cared about the signing of the Association Agreement with the EU, whose project was on the Internet since December 2011. The EU was created as an economic structure of democratic states, and it would be naive to expect that it would react in the way NATO resisted the Warsaw agreement in its time.

“Time has changed. Now Europe is either pretending or it doesn’t understand what is going on in the RF. There is the authoritarian regime which ruined the after-war system of international security, Russia as a member of the security council of the UN, blocked the reaction of the UN to such events like the annexation of Crimea which copied the precedent of 1938, when Hitler seized Sudetes. Therefore it is hard for me to judge what stands behind the position of Germany’s minister of foreign affairs.

“We had our negative expectations connected with the widespread opinion that Germany implemented the pressure on Moldova, so that it continued to concede concerning the anti-constitutional regime on the left bank of the Dnister, behind which Putin’s ‘ears’ can be seen.

“Ukraine and Moldova must be realists and not expect that some other people will do the homework for us. And only after doing our homework, one can expect some support from democratic states and look in a more convincing way when expressing one’s own stand. I mean the reforms that both we and you need.

“You should take into account the fact that Putin has efficiently carried out the policy ‘divide and rule’ on the European continent. A bright example of this is the crowd of ultra-right Europeans drawn to fascism organized in St. Petersburg. We all know what the news agency Sputnik and Russia Today Channel are, and these instruments of hybrid war are working in the European states as well.

“As for the critical publication of Bild, it is left for us to hope that the German politicians will be more attentive to the messages not only to Russia, but the Putin regime as well.”