Rarely has a “great power” lost so much in such a short time as Russia has: decoupled from large parts of the world economy, economically and socially in decline, militarily disgraced and politically despised by the international community for its brutal war. The “old west” stands almost as a mirror image, and is more united than it has been for decades.
Putin’s attempt to determine the fortunes of the 21st century with the ideas of the 19th century and the means of the 20th century has already failed comprehensively. In the UN General Assembly, 141 states condemned Russia’s war; only North Korea, Belarus, Eritrea and Syria sided with him. Sure: Moscow will not be a “pariah” of world politics in the long term, because it is far more than North Korea. Its abundance of raw materials and the armaments industry remain attractive from the point of view of many developing and emerging countries.
China currently has its back
For Beijing, relations with Moscow and Putin are even of key national interest – not least because the war is forcing the US, at least temporarily, to shift its focus away from the Indo-Pacific to Europe. The Middle Kingdom has its back free, so to speak, and can concentrate fully on its maritime interests in the region.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
China will probably not militarily support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but will do everything possible to avoid being hit by US or EU sanctions. Beijing fears nothing more than further strains on its own economic development. On the other hand, one thing is clear: Moscow is becoming increasingly dependent on Beijing – it is obvious who is the cook and who is the waiter. After this war, Putin’s “empire” will only be a shadow of itself.
The Russian President is too smart not to see that. But that will only make him angrier and even more unpredictable. That is why we are not heading for a quick or even lasting peace. On the contrary: US President Joe Biden’s visit to Europe is likely to have primarily served to swear all allies to a common course should Russia enter a new phase of confrontation.
The number of self-appointed war strategists is increasing
Because NATO would have to react to the use of non-conventional weapons or the attack on Ukrainian supply convoys on Polish territory. As much as the transatlantic alliance is rightly trying not to become embroiled in direct war with Russia, failing to respond to such escalation levels would be a dangerous invitation for Moscow to go further.
Against this background, it is good that “cool heads” are making decisions in the political and military command centers of the EU and NATO. In public, on the other hand, the number of self-proclaimed war strategists is increasing at about the same rate as the number of amateur virologists during the pandemic.
Apparently we have forgotten what catastrophic consequences a nuclear exchange of blows with Russia would have for Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic States and also Germany. There would be no winners, but there would be more losers than in any other scenario.
But even without a possible further increase in drama, we are facing a longer phase of volatility and instability. As long as Putin leads Russia and presumably even after that, a new “Cold War” is imminent. And in the age of cyber attacks, hybrid warfare and fake news, it is likely to be far more dangerous than the “old”, relatively predictable “Cold War”. At that time, the hot wars were fought outside of Europe. That’s different today.
Germany needs a mental change
Whatever the outcome of the war in Ukraine, there will be no going back to what was “normal”. This raises the question: how do we want to deal with this phase of instability, uncertainty and dysfunction in the international order? Especially in conflict-averse Germany, we also need a mental change so that the political change that has been initiated receives lasting social support. That’s easier said than done. We were just arguing about the “correct” naming of the sexes.
Now we see ourselves catapulted overnight into the world of merciless conflict of interest. The abstract obligation to provide assistance in Article 5 of the NATO treaty has hardly been spelled out: “I am willing to risk my life for your freedom.” In post-heroic times, this sentence seems strange and frightening. How do we turn this into courage, commitment and optimism that we, as a community of democracies, will ultimately be stronger than our authoritarian opponents?
Right across the political camps, it is currently being said that Germany must become more economically independent of authoritarian states. Who would disagree? But how does that work in a country whose prosperity is largely based on this very dependency? When we are used to working relatively short hours by international comparison, and when we take a relatively large amount of vacation and free time and, last but not least, make extremely high demands on the social and ecological performance of our state?
Mentally, we are just at the beginning of the impositions
We can do it by taking the much-cited term “time change” seriously. The federal government seems to be ready for this: all three parties are now doing the exact opposite of what they promised during the election campaign and what they agreed in the coalition agreement: the SPD is increasing the defense budget, the Greens are desperately looking for hydrocarbon-based energy sources, and the FDP is making the most of the Disregarding the debt brake is precisely a reason of state. And all three are doing it right.
Mentally, however, we are just at the beginning of the impositions and a new and much more uncomfortable “normality”. Germany must now mature into a well-fortified democracy and thus also set an example for Europe, because we are being watched right now.
The rest of the European Union knows that we can take in refugees, distribute them and integrate them into the labor market! Now we have to show a different side of ourselves: What is Western democracy worth to us when it is threatened? The answer to this question is more important for freedom and security in Europe than a military budget, no matter how large.
The author: Sigmar Gabriel is a publicist and member of the supervisory board at Deutsche Bank and Siemens Energy. He was chairman of the SPD from 2009 to 2017 and vice chancellor from 2013 to 2018.
More: Scholz warns against Russian imperialism