Berlin – Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, a Green Party candidate who once aimed to succeed former Chancellor Angela Merkel, has articulated lofty ambitions upon assuming her office. Baerbock is the first woman to serve as Germany’s Foreign Minister, however her tenure has not been without controversy, particularly following Berlin’s staunch backing of Israel during its aggression on the Gaza Strip. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock have taken a firm stance that has stirred substantial debate.
Several months back, Baerbock first announced a “feminist foreign policy” focused on “gender equality and peace support.” She declared at United Nations meetings in February that “human rights are universal. A human life is a human life, no matter the origin, race, gender, sexual orientation, or belief.” Baerbock asserted that Germany would speak out in the council whenever human rights are violated, whether in the east, west, north, or south.
Despite the Israeli war on Gaza nearing a death toll of approximately 20,000 martyrs, thousands injured, and nearly two million displaced people, she has clearly refused to support a definitive ceasefire.
German political science expert Michael Bröning mentioned to Al Jazeera Net that German interests are increasingly being defined as ethical challenges. While defending one’s beliefs is not inherently problematic, prioritizing ethics comes at a steep cost. Berlin, he says, has distanced itself from several fundamental global consensus issues, with its distinctive approach to the Middle East conflict serving as a recent example. Bröning indicated Germany’s use of “Sonderweg,” a term that reflects a uniquely German approach diverging from the European path.
Since the start of the war on Gaza, Baerbock has actively voiced support for Israel. On October 23, within the European Foreign Ministers Council, she argued that a ceasefire is not feasible, justifying it by the necessity of “the war on terrorism” and citing Tel Aviv’s ongoing rocket strikes. While reiterating her stance in subsequent media statements, Germany stopped short of voting against a ceasefire at the United Nations General Assembly, choosing instead to abstain from voting.
Baerbock attempted a balancing act when she announced Germany would increase its humanitarian aid to Gaza. Notably, Berlin still suspends developmental aid intended for job creation, civil society support, and water sector management in Palestinian territories.
In light of whether Germany is incapable of reconciling its interests with its proclaimed values, Bröning remarked that while Baerbock proudly promotes what is called a feminist foreign policy, the gap between ethical discourse and reality becomes increasingly difficult to accept, especially for many in the global south.
Lydia Poeth, an officer with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation’s Middle East branch, wrote that while experts including feminists warn that the Israeli government is undermining international law, representatives of the supposed German feminist policy disappeared from sight. They must remember, she says, that the clear-cut principle of feminist foreign policy is to promote political rather than military solutions.
Poeth also notes that the guidelines of German feminist policy were not applied when Berlin revised its cooperation with the Palestinian civil society on suspicions of “terrorism links” and when Baerbock voted within the EU against a ceasefire in Gaza. Germany’s behavior at the United Nations created a state of “discontent” among those in the global south who had been enthusiastic about these guiding principles.
Western attitudes towards the thousands of casualties in Gaza began to shift, with France criticizing Israel’s targeting of civilians, and Spain, Belgium, and Ireland vocally opposing Israeli war leadership. The United Kingdom dialed back its support for Tel Aviv. Yet Germany remains the sole major European country to resist softening its stance on the Gaza war, currently acting as Israel’s largest Western backer, second only to the United States.
Despite traditional support for Israel, German foreign policy has managed to maintain a critical distance at times, offering substantial leeway. The last Foreign Minister to embody this approach was Sigmar Gabriel, who served from 2017 to 2018 for 14 months, meeting with organizations that strongly criticized Tel Aviv’s policies, prompting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to cancel a meeting with him. His successor, Heiko Maas, supported Israel in the 2021 war on Gaza, followed by the current Minister Baerbock.
According to Markus Beckedahl, head of the Security and Foreign Affairs section at Table.Media, in conversation with Al Jazeera Net, there hasn’t been a major shift in foreign policy between Angela Merkel’s administration and Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s; however, Baerbock distinguishes herself from her predecessors by addressing the dire human rights situation during her visits to several Arab and Islamic countries. Regarding Israel, the German government’s policy overall sees Tel Aviv as a high-interest matter, shared across all parties within the country. Germany saw statements by the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas during his visit to Berlin—equating Israeli massacres to 50 Holocausts—as not bolstering the Palestinian position in Germany.
Within a month, Germany hosted two critics of Israel, causing embarrassment and prompting Chancellor Scholz to reiterate his support for Tel Aviv. The first visitor was Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who accused Israel of acting “like a terrorist state,” and the second was Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who labeled the situation in Gaza “genocide.”
Baerbock’s stance cannot be divorced from that of Scholz, who strangely stated at the end of October that he “does not at all doubt that the Israeli military in all it does, considers the rules stemming from international law,” by his judgment. Neither he nor his government has issued any critical stance of Israeli policies in Gaza, except for Baerbock’s recent statement that it’s in Israel’s interests to provide food to Gazans so that “hunger does not fuel terrorism,” as she put it.
