Question:

Ms Baerbock, as Germany’s first female Foreign Minister, you wanted to put your own stamp on diplomacy. What words would you choose to describe your diplomatic style?

Annalena Baerbock:

Clear, emphatic, pragmatic.

Question:

The head of the WTO described the style of the West by quoting an African head of government: “When we talk to China, we get an airport. When we talk to you, we get a lecture.” Between the lines, we’re being accused of trying to lecture others. Can you understand this criticism?

Annalena Baerbock:

The quote opened with the words: “I like your Western values, but...”. In this context I completely agree. After all, it is not enough to talk about values in abstract terms. We also need to invest in economic development. However, for me, foreign policy is more than just talking to governments about people. I believe we need where we can to talk to the people themselves. When we do this, it emerges that people all over the world basically want the same thing. They want their children to be able to grow up in peace, security and in some degree of prosperity. Doing what we can to guarantee these central human rights has nothing to do with a global North apparently lecturing others. This is something universal. Ironically, people in the Middle East are currently accusing us of not taking sufficient notice of the suffering of the Palestinians. They are questioning whether we are paying enough attention to humanity.

Question:

The al-Shifa hospital, where Israeli soldiers have now taken control, stands as a symbol of the suffering in Gaza. They showed pictures allegedly depicting Hamas’ tunnels under the clinic. Do you believe the Israeli attack on the hospital was justified?

Annalena Baerbock:

In every society, hospitals are extremely sensitive places and that is why international law accords them special protection. Yet, international law also knows that such places can be abused for military purposes, if, like in Hamas’ case, they are used to store weapons or fire missiles. On such occasions, you have to weigh up the military threat emanating from these places which are meant to be protected and the dangers civilians face if these places lose their protected status. The job of weighing this up is something I would wish on no-one in the world. After all, there is no satisfactory answer to this unbelievable dilemma. We can only do all we can to alleviate suffering. That was also the focus of my last talks in Riyadh, Ramallah and Tel Aviv. Taking a concrete example, the evacuation of premature babies.

Question:

Given the material that the Israelis presented, does this mean for you that a new level was reached in the question as to whether or not it was legitimate for the military to take control of this hospital?

Annalena Baerbock:

You cannot judge situations like this when you are thousands of kilometres away.

Question:

There was a UN resolution on the war in Gaza that criticised the humanitarian situation there but does not recognise Israeli suffering and failed to call the Hamas’ attacks of 7 October by their name. Germany only abstained in the vote and did not vote against. How does that square up with the claim that Israel’s security is part of Germany’s raison d’état?

Annalena Baerbock:

My interlocutors in Israel have told me time and again how important it is that we do not just have the current situation on our radar but also the future of Israel’s security. I wonder if all the critics, particularly those here in Germany, have actually read the resolution. Voting against would have been saying no to things we need such as the release of hostages or improvements in the humanitarian situation. So bearing this in mind, we abstained at the United Nations just as the Americans did incidentally at the most recent vote in the Security Council.

Question:

The Israelis wanted Germany to vote against the resolution.

Annalena Baerbock:

Hmm... to my mind the debate that unfolded in Germany was very much abstracted from the actual concerns of the Israelis on the ground who had of course presented their position to us in the run-up. When it comes to weighing up such things, I always ask myself what the alternative is? If Germany had not worked with countries like Canada to improve the original text, a resolution would have been passed spreading untruths about Israel.

Question:

You are describing considerations that are both diplomatic and pragmatic. However, do such considerations not fall short of the raison d’état idea, one supposed to express a special relationship?

Annalena Baerbock:

Particularly because Israel’s security is part of our raison d’état, it is not enough to put simplistic affirmations of solidarity out there. What we need to do is guarantee Israel’s security in the longer term. That is what we are doing unceasingly. Hamas has not just committed barbaric crimes against civilians but has also reawakened the trauma of the Shoah in Israeli society and attacked the normalisation processes between Israel and several of its Arab neighbours. And part of this bitter reality is that with every week of more civilian suffering in Gaza, these normalisation processes are more and more at risk. All this is part of what Hamas wants to destroy with its unbounded brutality. And that is exactly what we need to prevent if we are to remain true to Germany’s raison d’état. Precisely because our country stands shoulder to shoulder with Israel and enjoys the trust of Arab countries, we need to serve as a bridge-builder to prevent a conflagration taking hold in the region.

Question:

Do you have the impression that Germany is increasingly alone in the world with its position on Israel?

Annalena Baerbock:

By no means alone but what really worries me is that on the international stage and also in Germany we are no longer focusing on people but on doctrines. Either Israel’s right to self-defence or the humanitarian suffering in Gaza. Both are however part and parcel of the reality. Israel will never be able to live in security if terrorism is not overcome. And by the same token, Israel can only enjoy security if the Palestinians also have prospects for the future. That is why I talk in Ramallah about Hamas’ bestial crimes, about the Israeli women and children taken hostage. And in Israel, I talk about my concern about the Palestinian children who sit apathetically beside their dead parents receiving no help. In particular when the spotlights aren’t on, there are many people in the region with similar views. No matter how difficult the path, we need to build on this and start to think about a political horizon based on the two-state solution.

Question:

Can I read you a comment by one of our readers? “We are able to waste no time calling Xi a dictator but are unable to vote against this completely one-sided resolution”. How would you respond?

Annalena Baerbock:

For me, there is no contradiction between standing by Israel and doing all we can to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinians. Not beating about the bush is not an end in itself but a means to an end.

Question:

So what end do you have in mind when you call Xi Jinping a dictator and what good does that do Germany?

Annalena Baerbock:

The background to my statement was Russia’s war of aggression that does not just affect Ukraine but has wider geopolitical implications: authoritarian actors are posing a challenge to democracies around the world. That is why in the interview on American television that you refer to, I made very clear that it is no coincidence that China’s leadership does not condemn Russia’s war of aggression but that in the struggle between autocracies and democracies pursues a goal similar to that of the Russian leadership.

Question:

In many countries, we are hearing: when Russia destroys hospitals, the West condemns it as a war crime. When Israel does the same, the reaction is muted. How do you respond to this accusation of double standards?

Annalena Baerbock:

That it is wrong. Because you cannot compare the two situations. On 24 February 2022, Russia invaded a country that was posing no threat. It attacks hospitals, schools, electricity plants in Ukraine. There are no terrorists hiding here – there are children living there, going to school. The situation in Gaza is completely different. There, Hamas is abusing 2.2 million Palestinians for its terrorist purposes. They drove the Palestinian Authority out of Gaza during the 2007 coup by throwing Fatah members off high-rise buildings to their death. Hamas is also killing Palestinians who resist terrorism. And they have brutally attacked Israel time and again – most recently in inhumane fashion on 7 October. And they continue to do so with relentless missile fire. Israel is defending itself against this threat by fighting this terrorist organisation. A terrorist organisation that purposely hides behind children, families and civilians, in hospitals and apartment blocks.

Question:

The war in Gaza and the war in Ukraine are very different, yet it is feared that one impacts the other. Is assistance for Ukraine dwindling?

Annalena Baerbock:

No. Not just we but many actors in the world have realised that we have to do all we can particularly now so that Putin’s imperial delusions cannot prevail. It would be the death knell for international relations if a permanent member of the Security Council was able to destroy peaceful coexistence because the spotlight was on another crisis. That is why we have again increased our assistance for Ukraine.

Question:

Can Putin not win or is he not allowed to win?

Annalena Baerbock:

Putin must not be able to win.

Question:

Ukraine is sensing the waning interest. Less weapons deliveries are arriving. People are worried that the window of opportunity when this war can be won is closing.

Annalena Baerbock:

These are brutal times. Yes, Ukraine continues to need maximum support to defend itself. Not just since 7 October but for more than 650 days now.

Question:

We have Taurus cruise missiles we could send.

Annalena Baerbock:

As has been said many times, supplying these highly complex systems is not something trivial. That is why we delivered what we could: more Patriots and Iris-T. But it is abundantly clear that given the entrenched situation Ukraine needs more support in particular to liberate areas in the south and the east which are cut off by a huge belt of Russian mines.

Question:

The terrorist attack against Israel and the war in Gaza lays a lot bare. The topic is one that divides societies, families, political parties. Was Greta Thunberg a disappointment?

Annalena Baerbock:

Parts of the climate movement such as in Germany headed by Luisa Neubauer clearly condemn Hamas terrorism. Others, like Greta Thunberg, are doing exactly the opposite. By doing so, they are legitimising the barbaric actions of a terrorist organisation. For me, that is not just the maximum possible damage they can do to the climate movement. For me, such a stance is irresponsible.

Question:

Ms Baerbock, this week no Minister can escape without being asked a question about the Federal Constitutional Court judgement. Does the 60 billion euro gap in the budget have the potential to implode the coalition?

Annalena Baerbock:

We have become robust over the last two years so I am not all that worried about the Government but about whether all bearing political responsibility are clear about just how dramatic the situation is. The question as to whether one of the strongest economies and democracies can continue to support its economy and hold society together at this dramatic time for our world does of course have geopolitical implications. Here all democratic parties should really stand together.

Question:

With a further action against the Economic Stabilisation Fund, the CDU could also do a double whammy and overturn the 2023/24 budget. What happens if the Government is not able to present a budget?

Annalena Baerbock:

We all know that people reveal their true colours in times of crisis. When in opposition during the euro crisis, we Greens faced a similar question: fundamental opposition or responsibility for the country. We opted to shoulder responsibility. We helped the CDU/SPD Government to save the euro, something which wouldn’t have been possible without our support in the Bundestag.

Question:

You have a party conference coming up. What if a significant number of people in your party decide: enough is enough.

Annalena Baerbock:

Then it wouldn’t be the Greens party conference. We don’t shirk responsibility when times are hard. We build policies rooted in responsibility. So that we can make things better.

Interview: Alice Bota and Tina Hildebrandt

www.zeit.de