June 9, 2022 - 11:20am
In her first public appearance since leaving office, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel defended Berlin’s Russia policy during her 16-year tenure and expressed confidence in her successor, Olaf Scholz.
Judging by the newspaper headlines following her statements, there apparently was an expectation that she would apologise and take some responsibility for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, due to her policy of close economic and political cooperation with Moscow.
While in hindsight it is easy to condemn Ms. Merkel’s policy as a failure now, it is important to remember that just a few years ago she was hailed as both the leader of the West and the free world. This is in spite of the fact that her Russia policies were well-known, including opposition to a Ukrainian NATO membership, insistence on North Stream 2, and continuing to be an unreliable partner in matters of international security or financial commitments to NATO.
In fact, representatives of her government mocked then-President Donald Trump’s remarks at the 2018 UN General Assembly that “Germany will become totally dependent on Russian energy if it does not immediately change course.”
In many ways, Ms. Merkel’s refusal to condemn her own Ostpolitik is understandable if we recognise that she was following the same playbook the US has been using in their own East-Policy with regards to China. Using economic integration as a means to open up and liberalise autocratic systems has been a popular concept in Berlin and Washington, until the more confrontative style of the Trump administration.
The idea of stability through economic cooperation was a clear continuation of Willy Brandt’s “change through rapprochement” that began in the 1960s. The Russian invasion of Ukraine was, according to Ms. Merkel, “an objective breach of all international laws and of everything that allows us in Europe to live in peace”, but insisted that diplomacy isn’t wrong just because it hasn’t worked.” She also claimed, however, that “military deterrence is the only language he understands”, leaving open the question why Germany did not do more to establish precisely such a deterrence, including being a more reliable NATO member in terms of defence spending and keeping her armed forces at a high level of readiness.
Ultimately Angela Merkel is not that different from her contemporary critics, who were happy to use Russia as a geopolitical boogeyman for domestic purposes (like the Trump collusion allegations) or a reliable supplier of energy, without believing that Moscow could have an independent agenda of its own.
It should have been clear that Russia’s cultivation of ties with former European politicians was part of a more ambitious strategy that openly unfolded with the annexation of Crimea in 2014. One is left wondering if it might have been a lack of imagination and knee-jerk opposition to everything coming from Donald Trump that caused such blindness on part of the political class and the media in the West. But to this day, none of them — Merkel included — have even apologised.
Ralph Schoellhammer is assistant professor of International Relations at Webster University, Vienna.
Raphfel
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe thought of Mosques being built anywhere in England gives me the creeps, but the thought of them being built in the countryside makes me feel angry and very sad.
Yes indeed. Not far from my home is a very pretty, quintessentially English village, or rather it was quintessentially English. A few years ago some farm buildings on the edge of the village became a mosque, so it’s perhaps not surprising that the last census revealed the population of the village to be 25% Asian. Meanwhile, not far away, an old pub deep in the woods has become a Hindu “studies centre”.
But I do live in Slough – 25% white British at the last census – and not far from the London Borough of Hillingdon – 48% white – so perhaps this encroachment, dismaying though it is, is unsurprising.
Read the article: not in the countryside but in a town, like where churches are repaired, sometimes.
In my rural idyll elections have been cancelled by the Labour national government at the request of the local Conservatives.
Fewer than 17% of the UK population live in what can accurately be described as ” rural areas” or villages. Which ever way the inhabitants vote or whatever their opinions are, they will never have as much sway with our politicians as urbanites.
“the reason potholes are never fixed is a lack of funding and council incompetence, neither of which would be helped by a Reform victory”
More likely, as in America, the reason infrastructure is always starved for attention and funding is that tax money is siphoned off into social engineering instead of civil engineering. In that sense, a Reform victory might well begin to turn the tide.
Lovely Poppy thank you. It does seem that English villages offer the only escape from grim national decline. However our Hampshire village is showing signs of creeping and unsettling change… the two over-sized care workers who cram into a little car and drive to administer ‘care’ to the unlucky elderly – in and out in minutes… the reckless drivers from Amazon and Evri…village feuds about the imposition of affordable housing… a new monstrous modern house to spoil the view…houses sitting empty as ordinary families appear unable now to afford four bedroomed homes with large gardens…. But the daffodils are heavenly.
As a native and resident of the north of England, i’ve recently had the opportunity to spend some time in a Hampshire village (not far from Winchester) and the difference in the quality of life was a real eye-opener, gorgeous and welcoming village pub included.
I hope your village survives the travails of what some call “progress”.
Poppy Sowerby is also proving to be an eye-opener. Having mainly written about the latest fads and trends amongst the younger generations (some of which, at least, was interesting) she’s beginning to expand her horizons; ironically enough, by reference to her roots. This article hits quite a few nails on heads.
It really seems like the price of housing is the cause, directly or indirectly, of half of our problems in the West.
Also, what’s with all the empty houses and apartments? NYC, where I live, is full of them.
Thank you, Poppy, for an acute piece of observation and analysis.
Really good piece.
Rather enjoyed reading this.
But really, Poppy : “sandstone Cotswold villages” ! A subtle April Fool’s wind-up ?
Correct. Oolitic limestone in fact.
“the reason potholes are never fixed is a lack of funding and council incompetence”
It’s because road maintenance is a licensed activity. and it’s illegal for anyone unlicensed to do the work. The certification is convoluted including things like a quality management system and audits in addition to the things you’d expect like material specifications. You can’t, as a competent adult, just fill in a hole.
The need for certification obviously limits the number of potential suppliers, which then, naturally, both pushes the price up and limits supply, creating backlogs due to the lack of sufficient certified suppliers. And since certification is an upfront expense, it acts as a barrier to entry for new suppliers, particularly for small businesses that do not have administrative ‘slack’ to afford to do the paperwork. Certification will always benefit larger suppliers as a result.
Now filling in a hole will need to comply with some basic standards, so it’s not a job for cowboys. But I would have thought a much simpler and cheaper process would be possible. Material could be bought ‘off-the-shelf’ to standards. Initial specific training just for pothole repair and how to do a good job could be provided for free by the council to interested parties (would it need more than a day?). And a council overseer could be employed to view the works as they take place to ensure they are competently done and then council certified for liability issues. A simpler process would allow smaller, local firms to offer services (perhaps at a fixed price), increasing supply, reducing prices and speeding up the number of repairs.
The ‘industry’, however would lobby against any such rationality – not only the existing contractors who have spent money on admin and training, but also the body of auditors, and all the specification and standards writers, the trainers, and the consultants and advisors who handhold the business through the certification processes. It’s in the interest of these groups to extend the requirements, possibly including hiring practices or sustainability. Certification becomes expensive, time-consuming and full of fees for ‘professionals’ and a long way away from the basic need to just fill in a hole.
Insightful comment.
We should definitely do as you say.
There is also, though, a question priorities. Until all the potholes are fixed, all MultiKulti outreach efforts and other non-essential council expenditure ought to be terminated.
Have you considered the issue of potholes identifying as Bumps?
I live in a village. We want our parish lengthsman back.
Oddly, all this bureaucracy over filling in holes brings forth exactly the very cowboys to do the job that no householder would ever employ. The road near me has had its potholes filled three times in eight years, and now awaits another load of tarmac sloshed roughly in the same holes
There was a scandal recently over the insulation of homes by registered suppliers, much of whose work was not only shoddy, but significantly below standard. And most of the work had been authorized and passed by council inspectors. Many of these homes are now unsellable. So even government registered suppliers are untrustworthy – as were the building inspectors at Grenfell.
How do we go forward when we cannot even trust our own government?
Aye, but who pays for it? 14 billion just to clear the backlog.
Reform and some of the Cons (the ones not in charge for most of my lifetime) are the only political movements that don’t actively mistrust and work to destroy rootedness, security and identity.