Lars Klingbeil discusses the failures that occurred in Eastern Europe, the position that Germany plays as a major power, and the struggle for influence. The speech that marked the turning point, in extracts.
 |
| [Lars Klingbeil, Co-leader of SDP] |
Antonio Gramsci, an Italian author and intellectual, is credited with providing a famous definition of the term "crisis." According to what he has said, in a time of crisis, the old has passed away but the new has not yet begun.
The world we live in today is beset by a myriad of crises, including war, climate change, pandemics, inflation, and social division. Each crisis presents a unique and significant obstacle for our society to overcome. However, the crises are currently happening together, are interrelated to one another, and are reinforcing one another.
The beginning of the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine on February 24, 2022 was a "turning point" for the established order of peace in Europe; the phrase "turning point" is appropriate for this momentous occasion. We are up against a significant challenge in terms of the design. The present disruptions are going to have an effect on our ability to cohabit as a society as well as the political agenda for the next 20 years; thus, we need to make sure that we draw the appropriate conclusions.
This conflict was started by Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia. He is to blame for the brutal murders that have taken place in Ukraine as well as their subsequent suffering. It is an assault on the independence of a European nation that he has launched. Even though we are not to blame for the war that Putin started, we need to ask ourselves what we could have done differently prior to the 24th of February. However, the most important thing for us to think about is how we can improve in the years to come.
Following the systematic extermination of Jews throughout Europe and the initiation of two world wars by the German Reich, we were readmitted to the family of governments that make up the international community. It is nothing short of a miracle that Germany, first as the Federal Republic and then as a unified country, has once again become a popular member of the world community. Because of our past, we are compelled to act with moderation. The process of our incorporation into European society became ingrained in our newly formed identity.
Following the conclusion of the Second International War, a bipolar world order was established, and we saw the emergence of blocs and rivalry among systems. Either the capitalist west or the communist east; either way. Decades have passed while we have been a part of this global system. In 1989, everything came to a head, and the West emerged victorious. Many people believed that it was just a matter of time until the whole globe was made up completely of democratic liberal states.
Samuel Huntington authored a book that discussed the progression of democracy. Even Francis Fukuyama has said that history has come to an end. We are aware today that the tale was never concluded. My conviction in the superiority of our nation's social paradigm of a democratic and free society is unwavering. But there is no guarantee that people in other parts of the globe perceive things the same way we do simply because we do.
For a very long time, the West has had an unsafe feeling. A conflict between governments in Europe appeared inconceivable. For many decades, the notion that boundaries are immovable and that state sovereignty is absolute, as enshrined in many treaties and international laws, became the foundation of our peace system. We have established a level of ease for ourselves in this world. We were certain that even if everything jolted in one direction or another, everything would eventually return to its proper position. Because we were certain that our political system and the order based on rules would eventually win out.
We neglected to comprehend that some things had grown differently over such a lengthy period of time. We ought to have interpreted the signals coming from Russia differently, at the very least by the time they illegitimately annexed Crimea. The level of authoritarianism in Russia continued to rise until it reached the point where it is today: a dictatorship. China is another country that sees the world quite differently than we do. The reality is that many nations in the Global South are dissatisfied with the liberal democracies' inability to deliver on their lofty ideals.
To this point, the major actors on the global stage have been successful in securing political power around the globe via a combination of coercion and loyalty. On the other hand, the way in which the world is organized will change in the future. In the future, it will no longer be structured in distinct poles, but rather in centers that exert authority in a new manner. This change will occur sooner rather than later. Beliefs and interests, and not allegiance, coercion, or tyranny, are now the deciding factors in attribution. These dynamic centers of power are alluring; as a result, they establish ties, dependence, and cooperative relationships. It is in your best interest to become one of them.
Because of this new international order, nations that have enormous economic and political potential but do not yet constitute a powerful center no longer have to be members of a bloc in order to realize their potential. This presents a number of significant benefits. They have the ability to decide with whom and on what themes they will collaborate.
When it comes to extending its sphere of influence, China is taking a highly deliberate approach and relying heavily on its economic might to win over other governments to its cause. Even Russia has spent years building ties to nations on the rise in order to strengthen its own position in the international community. There has been a rise in the number of alternatives to the Western model of economic growth. Russia and China have been courting democratic governments like South Africa, India, and Brazil for a number of years now, giving these countries a voice at the international level via initiatives such as the BRICS initiative. They recognized the importance of these nations' interests, and they accorded the governments of those countries the utmost respect. That helped to build trust.
We are presently seeing the fallout from the refusal of many governments to follow our course of imposing sanctions on Russia. The results of the voting in the General Assembly of the United Nations demonstrate that support for our programs is lacking among almost half of the people of the globe. That ought to provoke some thought in us. Even if this shouldn't change the depth or seriousness of our judgments, it should have an effect on the way we do business in other parts of the globe.
For our part, it has to be a question of establishing binding authority, forging new political coalitions, finalizing cooperation agreements, and providing open organizations such as the climate club. It requires institutions that are inclusive rather than exclusive in nature. These are the kind of strategic relationships that need to be developed and grown. In particular for the next several months in terms of the availability of food supplies.
Famines will break out in numerous nations throughout Asia, Latin America, and Africa as a direct consequence of Putin's military efforts. We need to make stronger overtures to the nations that are located in the Global South and provide them with opportunities for collaboration. We need to be on the lookout for new cooperation opportunities, for instance in the fields of medicine, science, hydrogen, and the environment.
Our objective in Europe should be to make it the world's first climate-neutral continent by developing new technologies and setting new standards in this area while also ensuring that the transition is carried out in a manner that is fair to all segments of society. We aim to demonstrate that preserving the environment and achieving economic success are not mutually exclusive goals. If we are successful, other nations will model their policies after ours and take the same approach.
When it comes to expanding its sphere of influence, China is adopting a very methodical approach and placing a significant amount of emphasis on the role that its economic strength will play in convincing other countries to support its agenda. Even Russia has spent a significant amount of time and effort over the last several decades cultivating relationships with developing countries in order to bolster its standing in the international community. There has been a recent uptick in the variety of economic expansion strategies that are not based on the Western model. For a number of years now, Russia and China have been actively wooing democratic governments such as those of South Africa, India, and Brazil. This has enabled these nations to have a voice at the international level via efforts such as the BRICS initiative. They were aware of the significance of the interests of these nations, and as a result, they paid the governments of those countries the highest respect. That contributed to the development of trust.
The fact that many nations have chosen not to adhere to our plan and impose sanctions on Russia is now having repercussions, which we are now seeing. The outcomes of the votes cast in the General Assembly of the United Nations reveal that support for our initiatives is weak among over half of the people living around the world. That ought to provoke some reflection and contemplation in us. Even if this shouldn't alter the gravity or breadth of our judgements, it should nevertheless have an impact on how we do business in other regions of the world.
Establishing binding authority, forming new political alliances, concluding cooperation agreements, and offering open institutions such as the climate club are all things that need to be done on our end. It demands institutions that, rather than being exclusive in character, prioritize welcoming everyone. These are the kinds of strategic connections that need to be cultivated and nurtured over time. Particularly for the next few months in terms of the availability of food supplies, the situation is expected to remain the same.
As a direct result of Putin's military actions, famines will break out in a great number of countries throughout Asia, Latin America, and Africa. We need to make bolder overtures to the countries that are situated in the Global South and give them with possibilities for cooperation. Also, we need to provide them with options for collaboration. We need to be on the lookout for new chances for collaboration, such as in the realms of medical, science, hydrogen, and the environment, among other possible areas.
Our goal should be to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent in the world by creating new technologies and establishing new standards in this area. At the same time, we should work to ensure that the transition will be carried out in a manner that is equitable to all aspects of European society. We want to show that conserving the environment and attaining economic success do not have to be competing aims; rather, they may coexist and be achieved together. If what we are doing works, other countries will pattern their policies and approaches after ours and try to replicate our results.
It is obvious that we also need to collaborate with nations that do not share our ideals and even oppose the social order that we have established. There is never a clear answer to the issue of how extensive our collaboration is or when our beliefs and ideals could be compromised as a result of this cooperation. We must keep fighting against injustice because collaboration is impossible without having a stance on the issue. It is imperative that in no future context will change through reconciliation be equated with change via commerce.
It is imperative that we never again give ourselves permission to become so reliant on the energy strategy of another nation, as was the situation with Russia. Therefore, Europe has to increase its level of strategic autonomy. The production of essential items and the development of essential infrastructure need to take place in this part of Europe. In terms of China, this implies, among other things, that we will lessen our dependence on China in the areas of health and technology. This does not imply that we have to terminate our commercial relationships with nations such as China, as some people are demanding; nevertheless, it does imply that we are strategic thinkers and that we are robust.
There will be a period of a few years during which there is a great deal of ambiguity and doubt about the future order of the globe. In the years ahead, there will be fierce rivalry for many types of connections, including dependency, ties, and cooperative endeavors. No one nation can successfully navigate the problems that come with living in a globalized society. As a result, it requires powerful centers that cooperate in a single direction. It is still of the utmost importance that we, as members of the Western world, stand united: a powerful Europe in the center, but standing shoulder to shoulder with the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, and others. The fact that we are the most appealing location ought to be our claim to fame.
A lot relies on us. It is imperative that Germany assert its position as a major nation. Germany has just taken on a new function within the international coordinate system, breaking its silence of over 80 years. Over the course of the last several decades, our nation has garnered a significant amount of trust. However, there is a certain amount of expectation that comes along with this. The events of the previous several weeks have shown that Germany is moving closer and closer to the spotlight. It is imperative that we live up to their expectations.
Being a leader does not need you to project an air of bravado or wide-leggedness. It is my sincere hope that, just as they do in domestic politics, cultures of astute leadership will eventually triumph in international politics as well. This, by the way, also encompasses the concept of a feminist approach to international relations. Leadership requires knowing your place in the organization and not trying to hide behind other people. Never act arrogantly; rather, behave in a way that is deliberate, confident, and consistent. A leadership style that emphasizes collaboration is a wise choice for leaders.
It is imperative that our goals constantly be crystal obvious to everyone. We formulate our foreign policy with the goal of ensuring people's ability to live their lives in safety, harmony, and prosperity. The Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden, often refers to "Foreign Policy for the Middle Class." This is the method that should be taken. An involvement in foreign policy is never a means to a goal in and of itself; rather, it always has an effect on how we live together on the ground.
We are now seeing the terrible toll that an insecure international order, conflict, and interrupted supply lines have had on human life. In the end, foreign wars also have a significant impact on both the cohesiveness of our community and the functioning of our democracy. Engaging in foreign policy is exactly for this reason considered to be so vital. The transition to Germany's new position as a major power will need difficult choices on both the political and economic fronts. Both the organizational structure and the budget need to be renegotiated.
Over the course of the last several weeks, Chancellor Olaf Scholz and the federal government of Germany have been forced to reconsider and adjust some fundamental tenets of German foreign policy. We express our unwavering support for Ukraine. We sell armaments, including heavy artillery among other types. We are implementing severe penalties that will have an effect on Russia for many years to come. In addition, we are exerting significant amounts of political pressure with our allies in the United States and Europe. It is appropriate that we are proceeding in this manner. This is relevant to our newly assumed responsibilities as well.
Over the last several years, each of us has followed the conventional approach to security policy, which is to disregard both national defense and alliance defense. At the Munich Security Conference, which took place in the middle of February, more than 2,000 security professionals were present. Very few people were anticipating that Putin would launch an invasion on Ukraine. A few days later, Putin began his assault on the opposition. The fact that none of us noticed it is something that disturbs me.
Therefore, we need to consider different possibilities and make plans accordingly. If we hear from Poland or the Baltic States that they are terrified of becoming the next targets of Russia's aggression, then we have no choice but to take this seriously. Our interactions with our Eastern and Central European counterparts were marred by errors on our side. Therefore, it is essential that we deepen our conversation with them and that we all work together to drive Europe forward.
Olaf Scholz has made it quite plain on several occasions that we want to defend every square inch of NATO territory. His decision to increase the number of German soldiers stationed on NATO's eastern border and to increase the level of security provided to our Eastern European allies is one that deserves praise, and I appreciate his decision. However, in order to fulfill its mission, the Bundeswehr desperately needs to acquire superior equipment.
It is to our advantage that we have started the special fund for the Bundeswehr worth one hundred billion euros. This makes it possible for us to address capacity gaps and return the emphasis back on the national and alliance defense. In the past, it was almost possible to get the sense that some people believed that the lesser the number of soldiers in the Bundeswehr, the lower the likelihood that there would be a war. In reality, the reverse is true. It is not the act of discussing wars that causes them; rather, it is turning one's back on the realities of life.
To me, having a peace policy involves acknowledging the legitimacy of using armed force as a political instrument. As a side note, the Charter of the United Nations actually has a provision for this very thing. It is never the first option, but one must not lose sight of the fact that it is still a means. This is happening in Ukraine right now, and we are seeing it.
Some may be concerned now. The head of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) discusses leadership, the Bundeswehr, and the use of armed force. I can hazard a guess as to how some discussions are going right now. On the other hand, I contend that we are not idealistic. Willy Brandt and Helmut Schmidt were already well aware of the fact that the foundation of an effective peace strategy is also a strong military. During that historical period, the budget for the military represented more than 3 percent of our total economic power.
The helping hand that we extend ought to be powerful. Both Brandt and Schmidt have come to the realization that in order to fight for human rights and peace, one must first find the power inside themselves. We ought not to cut the length of the discussions. I feel a sense of pride when I think of Willy Brandt's Ostpolitik, which earned him the Nobel Peace Prize. This served as the foundation for reunification, the overcoming of disparities in political systems, and the democratization of several nations that had previously been part of the Eastern bloc.
The turning moment needs breaking free from certainties in order to go forward. Nevertheless, this does not imply that we are tossing out all that was done well. Diplomacy, accords, international disarmament measures, international law, development policy, multilateralism, and equitable international financial policy are the most effective methods of conflict resolution and, more importantly, conflict prevention, and they will continue to be those ways. They are an integral component of an all-encompassing security strategy.
The European Union is the social democratic party's top priority when it comes to international and security affairs. Germany, as a major world power, has an obligation to vigorously support a sovereign Europe. If Europe is powerful, then Germany will be powerful as well. We have seen what is possible when something is politically demanded and is pushed ahead by looking at the history of the European Union (EU). Schengen, the adoption of the euro, the landmark treaties of Maastricht and Lisbon, and the recent recovery from the coronavirus are all examples of choices with far-reaching implications that have improved our quality of life in Europe.
Olaf Scholz just made the announcement that discussions for North Macedonia and Albania's membership in the European Union would commence in the near future. In addition, he and the other leaders of government that accompanied him on his tour to Kyiv brought an essential message with them: you, Ukraine, are a part of Europe. You stand up for the ideals of Europe. Because of you, Europe is in a better position. In addition, the Republic of Moldova needs to have candidate status. These identifying marks are of the utmost significance.
The tipping point marks the beginning of an epoch-defining shift. The system that maintains peace and security in Europe is undergoing reorganization at the moment. The fact that governments are moving in the direction of the European Union and expressing a desire to join us demonstrates how desirable we already are as a central location.
Despite this, there is a political duty that comes along with the appeal of the position. This also covers the policy about expansion. As a geopolitical player, Europe has to be given greater consideration and importance. The European Union (EU) has previously shown that it is capable of acting geopolitically and strategically since the end of the Cold War. It was a political objective to provide the nations that had been a part of the Eastern Bloc with an expedited path to membership in the EU.
Now is the time for the EU to exert political pressure and move on with the next round of membership talks. This in no way constitutes a discount or "Fast Track" for the applicants for membership; there is no such thing. The requirements established in Copenhagen must be met; but, we cannot allow the accession procedures to get bogged down in the bureaucracy of Brussels; rather, we must aggressively pursue them as a geopolitical objective.
When we discuss expansion, it is inevitable that we will also broach the subject of domestic policy changes. The EU will only become receptive if this course of action is taken. Even with new members, the European Union needs to maintain its capacity for speedy action. Therefore, we need to do away with the requirement that decisions must be made by a unanimous vote, whether it be in international relations or in financial and economic policy. This makes the European Union more democratic, more quick-witted, and more capable of acting quickly. Nevertheless, there can be no give-and-take when it comes to democracy and the rule of law. Because of this, we need a new system that will allow us to successfully defend the Copenhagen criteria even after acceptance.
Over the course of the last several years, many visionary plans for Europe have been debated, only to be thwarted at every turn by bureaucratic red tape and to be abandoned altogether in the end. For instance, the time is ripe to finally push for the implementation of a military and security strategy on the European continent. It is incomprehensible that we do not eventually regulate this matter collectively at the European level, given that there are 27 nations that each operate their own procurement system, have their own arms businesses, and conduct separate negotiations with these corporations.
In the end, we should be working toward the aim of successfully pooling resources in order to construct a robust European pillar inside NATO. In the not too distant future, member nations of NATO located in Europe should be able to defend European territory together. This is not a strategy that is directed against the transatlantic alliance; rather, it is a policy that is designed to bolster the effectiveness of the alliance.
It is also about building Europe inside and investing in social cohesion, in addition to the foreign and security policies that are being pursued. People are presently having a difficult time making ends meet throughout Europe as a result of the increasing costs. The conflict also threatens to disrupt the social harmony in our nation. This is an element of Putin's overall plan. He is conducting a war against the democratic nations of Europe, and his goal is to break them up and splinter them apart.
During this time of crisis, it is imperative that we maintain the cohesion of our society. Only in recent times have we been able to demonstrate this with the assistance of the Corona rebuilding fund and the SURE program, which serves as a protective umbrella against unemployment in Europe. This provided security over the whole of Europe. Putting down solid roots for this advancement is now the next order of business. This also signifies that when we revise the Stability and Growth Pact, we will provide freedom to invest in future concerns like as digital transformation and ecological transformation.
The concept of transformation is the future's most important focus area. It not only has ecological and economic ramifications, but now, more than ever, it also has security policy implications due to the conflict. We have already established some lofty objectives in the coalition agreement, including achieving climate neutrality by the year 2045, significantly increasing the use of renewable energy sources, creating a hydrogen economy, and encouraging the development of breakthrough technologies. As a consequence of the moment when time began to shift, everything has taken on a new sense of immediacy. We aren't interested in doing this in competition with the industry; rather, we want to move it forward in tandem with it.
Now is the time for us to make significant headway with our investments in alternative and alternative energy sources. This will need a large amount of work over the course of a few years, but it is essential to our success in the long run. By doing so, we provide the foundation for a strong labor market and higher salaries throughout Europe. Europe has the ability to influence global standards via the promotion of environmentally friendly technology. These purchases are investments in our autonomy, and hence, purchases in our safety as well.
The old has passed away, but the new has not arrived quite yet. But I have faith in the extraordinary force that Europe has. I have faith in the ability of social democratic ideals to pave the way to a life that is rich in liberty, security, and community. And I have faith in the transformative potential of our democratic system, in the ability of politics to flourish in the face of adversity and to build a brighter future.
Excerpts of Lars Klingbeil's speech on the turning point at the Tiergarten Conference 2022, held on June 21, 2022 in Berlin through IPG.