The security situation in the world is changing. Authoritarian regimes are trying to assert their interests by force, while emerging actors are claiming a leadership role for themselves. Under these circumstances, Germany must differentiate its security policy self-image both internally and externally.
“China and Russia are authoritarian powers that want to question and reshape the world order,” explains Dr. Nils Schmid, foreign policy spokesman for the SPD parliamentary group. However, the threat posed by these countries varies greatly. While Russia poses an immediate military threat, the challenges posed by China are more diverse. The state in East Asia is economically and technologically more successful than Russia. This makes relations more complex and explosive. In the long term, we are heading for a systemic conflict. Sara Nanni, security policy spokeswoman for the Alliance 90/The Greens parliamentary group, therefore called for the strategy of de-risking to be adopted. It is logical to find partner states in international organizations that share one’s own description of the problem.
However, in order to seek international allies, one must first become aware of one’s own role, both internally and externally.
Where does the Federal Republic stand?
Dr. Marcus Faber, head of the defense working group of the FDP parliamentary group, complains that Germany has closed its eyes to threatening situations for too long. While an attack by Russia was already firmly expected in Eastern Europe, this was ignored in Germany. The turn of the times, however, has sent a signal of change. Schmid sees the realization that Germany must take a position in the world’s security situation as part of the turning point. However, the new positioning should not be achieved by going it alone. Germany is firmly integrated into NATO and the European Union, he said. Despite Germany’s involvement in the aforementioned institutions, Nanni nevertheless believes that there are strategic differences between the Federal Republic and other nations such as the United States and France. It is therefore necessary to develop an understanding of one’s own.
Need to catch up on the inside
But the way the Federal Republic sees itself in terms of security policy is also changing internally. For decades, the topic of security has not been on the agenda of the Bundestag as frequently and on as many occasions as it has been in the last two years, explains Nanni. Defense must be thought of holistically. The war in Ukraine is proof of this. It is therefore all the more worrying that it has not been possible to mobilize funds for the protection of critical infrastructure and the development of cyber capabilities. Schmid goes on to say that there is also a lack of awareness among industry about the threat to infrastructure. Companies are deliberately using tricks to circumvent existing laws against the implementation of Chinese technology in this field. This should be stopped. “That’s where we need to intervene legislatively.” There is also a need for civil society to catch up, Faber complains. There is a need for a network that thinks about security in structural terms and disseminates this knowledge.
Jonas Brandstetter, editorial staff