Stop the cowardly IDF terrorism
Sloopy IDF snoopy (terrorist ) the Hamas hostage catchedby pleas: Let me see my famaly I will never bee a IDF Terrorist
The time rude
New text
The fact that Erdogan currently has little interest in marking disagreement with Pope Francis in view of the Jerusalem issue can also be seen in the fact that his displeasure over the Armenian genocide seems to have been completely pushed into the background
Guest author Thorsten Benner is director of the Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi) in Berlin.
former chancellor Helmut Schmidt called the rhetoric of Israel's Security as a German reason of state in 2010 was an "emotionally understandable but foolish view that could have very serious consequences". The last few months after the turning point of the Hamas terrorists' massacres against Israeli civilians prove Schmidt right and illustrate the irrationality of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a speech to the Knesset in 2008 Not because, as Schmidt feared, German soldiers would have gone to war to defend Israel. But because talk of reasons of state clouds the view: the view from the outside of the often quite differentiated German Israel policy and sometimes also that of many German decision-makers for the correct communication and positioning.
All of this causes avoidable damage to domestic and foreign policy – and ultimately does not help Israel either. The visit of Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock to Israel and the speech by Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the Munich Security Conference this week offer the opportunity to initiate a communicative departure from the reason of state formula.
Two events of the last few months illustrate the external perceptions distorted by the rhetoric of reasons of state. At the end of October 2023, Israel’s
Ambassador Ron Prosor the
federal government after abstaining in the UN General Assembly from a Gaza resolution in which Germany had negotiated improvements in Israel's interest, he sharply criticized the German government: "The reason of state means actively standing by Israel's side, especially in difficult times." The German position is "morally wrong and history will judge it." At the beginning of January this year, the misguided initiative
Strike Germany the call by cultural workers for a boycott against Germany on the grounds that no other state has "made the unconditional support of Israel a 'reason of state' - and a prerequisite for participation in public and cultural life".
State reason sounds as if all further questions were unnecessary
But the problem goes even deeper. The massacres Hamas rightly shocked German decision-makers to the core. They question the founding promise of Israel, which was supported by Germany after the Shoah: never again to allow the mass slaughter of Jews. In this situation, it is obvious to resort to Merkel's reason of state formula. After all, Merkel herself had said: "And if that is the case, these must not remain empty words in the hour of trial." Merkel never elaborated on her formula in the 16 years of her chancellorship. It was about something "fundamental, non-negotiable", lets them know today.
"What now?" – The daily morning overview
By registering you accept the privacy policy for your information.
That sounds like something that promises clarity, certainty and orientation. Probably precisely in this hope for clarity, certainty and orientation Merkel's successor Olaf Scholz (PDF) in his speech to the Bundestag five days after the massacre: "At this moment there is only one place for Germany: the place at Israel's side. That is what we mean when we say: Israel's security is German state policy." That sounds like absolute clarity. As if all further questions were unnecessary.
But as clear as Hamas's responsibility and Israel's right to self-defense are, a number of open questions have arisen since October 7, which are also being discussed controversially in the Israeli public: What is the smartest way to exercise the right to self-defense? What are realistic goals? Is Israel falling into the terrorist trap if it sets itself the goal of completely eliminating Hamas? Does Prime Minister Netanyahu prioritize maintaining his own power over the survival of the Israeli hostages? Are radical settlers in the West Bank exploiting the situation to commit acts of violence against Palestinians? How can civilians in
Gaza
protect in the war against a terrorist group that systematically uses civilians as human shields? Is there a danger that Israel will respond to Hamas' war crimes with war crimes of its own?
4 days ago
How can one best protect civilians in Gaza in the war against a terrorist group...
The question itself is bigoted and deliberately misguided. 77% of all Palestinians (January survey) support Hamas. A journalist should know this before turning against Israel.
J
4 days ago
That needed to be said a long time ago! Thank you. But the blank check was not only a big mistake because it portrayed Germany in a false light, but because it encouraged the (Israeli) government policy to the right of the AfD to continue. The federal government should clearly attach conditions to our support: proportionality, humanity, international law, of course a two-state solution, ... What we expect from Russia also applies to Israel. We cannot justify new suffering with our historical guilt.
w
4 days ago
2024 and Israel’s security is no longer a matter of state in ZEIT.
But of course, the AfD is the problem.
m
3 days ago
Why is criticism of Israel not allowed in Germany?
If it does happen, the anti-Semitism club is immediately swung and any discussion is nipped in the bud.
We are not in permanent debt to Israel, as the narrative constantly feeds to us.
P
3 days ago
It was also part of the "reason of state" to indirectly finance Hamas. Whether the anti-Semites who are currently storming our country are also getting support from the anti-Semitic Global South or from the left-wing cultural scene is not something we need to worry about. It is sad that so many civilians are dying in the Gaza Strip, but that is due to Hamas' "meatshield" tactics. The remaining hostages are probably still in Rafah, where else would they be? I am not a friend of Netanyahu either, but he will be gone after the war. Israel will still be there and when the Palestinians eventually realize that it was not particularly intelligent to vote for Hamas, they too will have a future.
s
3 days ago
There is a difference between reasons of state and loyalty. But still: Hamas is like cancer - if you leave some of it alone, it quickly grows again and becomes deadly.
K
4 days ago
That's funny. Bitterly nasty. A comment like that in the ZON? At first, all reader comments that even vaguely pointed in that direction were deleted. And politically, the position expressed was so clear, and the blanket condemnation of other opinions so noticeable, that I refrained from commenting.
I have always criticized "raison d'état" per se. It is unclear what it is supposed to be or what meaning it has. But above all I thought the approach was terrifically stupid, namely in the sense that we learn nothing from history. Yes, of course, Germany has a special relationship because of its past. Some things might prove to be obligatory because of guilt. But everything and almost inevitably? That is a betrayal of the Enlightenment. That is even equivalent to an attitude that we stand by the Catholic Church at the beginning of the Reformation. Or even - and I hope that no subordinate ZON employee deletes this - to a will to follow the "Führer".
You have to differentiate! You also have to be prepared to learn from history in such a way that history can change things. Israel is not simply an escape option for Jews today, but a nation that you have to be able to criticize even after the actions of its partly nationalist-right-wing-religious government!
zc
3 days ago
A balanced and justified contribution.
All the questions raised are not normally allowed to be asked in a comment forum.
It is good that the federal government is more diverse than some words suggest.
Merz is visiting Netanyahu as the "future" Chancellor. This is a legitimate way to make oneself known to the world.
But I find it disturbing when a lawyer talks about having to "destroy" people militarily, even if it is Hamas.
At a time when other states are arguing against excessive self-defense.
It is naive because you are "breeding" terrorist offspring when you inhumanely and indiscriminately drive millions of people from one encircled situation to the next, do not give them the bare necessities of life, and accept that tens of thousands of them will die.
On a day when there is no humanitarian escape and supply corridor in Rafah, such ingratiating statements are inappropriate and irresponsible.
When I see the Israeli families who have been fearing for their kidnapped relatives for five months and are fighting to ensure that they are given priority, and when I see Netanyahu and his coalition partners handling things differently, I don't get the impression that it's about protecting the Israelis. It's hard to imagine how surviving hostages can ever recover mentally and physically. I wish that for them and hope that more hostages survive.
A secure Israel cannot be achieved in this way.
navigation path
4 weeks for
16.02 2 https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2024-02/deutschland-nahostkonflikt-israel-staatsraeson-sicherheit
imprint
responsible person
Benhard Farkach, Saarbrücken, Molsch
ZIP code: 66113
Rheinstr. 14
