“Only later will the full extent of the killings and kidnappings be revealed. Israel hasn’t yet regained complete control over some areas.”

“After more than 6000 air raid alerts, people in Ukraine are exhausted. There are hardly any families that haven’t lost someone themselves or someone they know.”

“In his fifth term of office, Putin will do everything he can to safeguard the authoritarian regime well into the future. That includes above all confrontation with the so-called West.”

These words weren’t published in any newspaper.

These words come from you, the heads of our missions abroad. From interviews that you have given in your host countries, from speeches, from assessments you have shared with us at Head Office.

Sometimes while sitting at your desks – in Doha, Dhaka or Delhi. Sometimes with your laptop on your knees, reporting from a marathon session in Geneva, New York or Brussels. Sometimes from a bomb shelter. These are words that remain in our minds. Because they are an indication of how things we regarded as certainties have crumbled.

Certainties like:

Germany’s security is a foregone conclusion.

War is far away.

Europe has overcome nationalism.

Democracy will prevail in the long term.

These expressions of hope were palpable following German reunification. On the streets of Berlin, Dresden and Munich, but also beyond Germany’s borders. Hopes that at some point began to feel like certainties.

At no time were they all equally valid. And certainly, not everyone here believed in them.

But today it is clear that they have all proved to be illusions.

Today, Putin is waging the greatest war of aggression in Europe since 1945. He is arming his country on a massive scale and leading it deeper and deeper into totalitarianism.

Today, there are more autocracies than democracies in the world. For the first time since the early 2000s.

Today, the climate crisis is forcing millions of people around the world to leave their homes. Terrorist groups from the Sahel to the Middle East are undermining entire regions.

Today, autocrats are striving to seize power and influence. Disinformation and extremism are eating their way deep into our own democratic society.

And today, right now in these days, some of our partners are looking to Germany with concern and asking: What on earth is going on in your country? What do these election results mean?

When certainties are disappearing, some people yearn to take a step back in time. And to be honest, I can understand this longing for the apparent certainties of former times. I think it’s very human, particularly when confronted with a world that has become so out of joint.

But when demagogues try to make political capital from this yearning by pretending that isolation and nationalism will take us back to this supposedly perfect world of the past, it becomes dangerous.

For we cannot afford to be naive. Yes, the future is uncertain. It is open. But that also means that it lies in our hands. It is up to us to shape it and to not leave that task to others.

In concrete terms, this means for us that we have the power to determine where our country, our Europe will be in ten or twenty years’ time, in what kind of world our children will grow up. That is good news. And at the same time it means more responsibility.

And that is why the most important question for us is not: How do we find our way back to the past? The question is rather: How can we shape this uncertain, open future, this world?

How can we – and I believe this is more crucial than ever in these times, after the elections in our country – how, amid all the change that accompanies these crises, can we preserve the very things that protect us most? Our constitution, our united Europe, our international law.

What form does our foreign policy need to take in order to be able to stand up for our security in this world, for our interests, for our peace and freedom and for that of our partners?

For me, the answer from my first day in office, and all the more so since 24 February 2022, has been this: We cannot afford to shy away from our responsibility. We must stand up for our values and our interests. Otherwise we will hand over this space to those who wish to destroy those values and interests.

For this reason, we need to act confidently, strategically and in a spirit of partnership.

Confidently, because we bear responsibility as the largest European country. It's simply impossible for us to downplay our strengths.

Strategically, because these challenges are too great for us to shy away from, let alone to imagine that they will resolve themselves.

And in a spirit of partnership, because in Europe especially we have so many partners who not only share our values and our interests but who have also defended them, particularly in times when we Germans needed our partners.

And one thing is important to me: By confidence I don’t mean that kind of loud swagger that is all talk, but rather self-awareness. Awareness of one’s own strength. But also awareness of one’s own weaknesses.

Awareness of what our central values and what our crucial interests are.

An awareness, therefore, of our own compass and our own stance. In times when right and wrong, yes or no, black and white are not so clearly defined. A compass guiding us to stand up for our values and processes.

Self-awareness also means not overestimating ourselves – and that is why we need a spirit of partnership.

We cannot build peace by ourselves. We need partners for this task. That is why this self-awareness also requires us to take our partners seriously, to listen to them, particularly when they have a different perspective. Not just geographically, but also in terms of their values. And in so doing, not to unquestioningly swallow criticism, but nonetheless to accept and reflect on it. And even if we know who we are and where we stand, we can by no means assume that what we want is clear to everyone.

And that is why we need a strategic approach. Strategic with regard to our work, but also with regard to our communication.

We discussed this in depth here two years ago. For in these turbulent times, we cannot hide behind clichés. We need strategic clarity and strategic communication.

As one of the world’s largest democracies, we cannot and do not want to remain on the sidelines from a communication perspective, when on the field the question is which global narrative will prevail.

Yes, I’m often asked, as you probably are, too, especially in the two years since we have been pursuing this intensively, often with a critical undertone, why I as the Minister or we as the Federal Foreign Office expend so much energy on our communication or on social media. Those questions are often accompanied by the word “staging”. But the truth is that in the globalised, interconnected and fully digital world of the 21st century, active diplomacy involves active communication on all channels.

And if our humanitarian assistance is not only to get to where it needs to be but also to have an impact on the ground – by supplying people with food, but also in the sense of ensuring that terrorist propaganda does not gain a foothold, we also need to make what we do visible in our communication.

My experience in German classrooms at least is that we would not reach half or more of our young people if we were not active on social media.

I am saying this so directly because it is precisely this active communication, this dialogue that cannot be taken for granted. On the contrary, it’s very hard work. I think many of you have experienced this all too clearly in the past few years and particularly in the last nine months.

I therefore want to take this opportunity to say a heartfelt thank you, particularly to the colleagues in the Middle East. Putting up with criticism and standing up to it, also countering it, not allowing false claims to remain unchallenged and in this context, even in the face of these brutal allegations – most of which are fake news, we would call them “lies” – not resorting to placatory, aggressive or blanket statements but continually taking the time and making the effort to differentiate instead of generalising, has demanded a great deal of you.

Living with ambivalence, listening to people. Time and again placing the focus on humanity, in order to preserve what protects us: our position, enshrined in the Basic Law, the 75th anniversary of which we are celebrating this year. With its Article 1 – “Human dignity shall be inviolable” – and that translated into our, into your work, means, in the very moments when our emotions are running highest, keeping a cool head and reinforcing what Margot Friedländer has expressed so appropriately: There is no Jewish blood, there is no Muslim blood, there is no Christian blood, there is only human blood.

Guided by this understanding, we have emphasised time and again that ambiguity is not a weakness and that particularly in the Middle East we can indeed stand alongside Israel, alongside Israel’s security and its people with everything we have – and at the same time we can do everything to ensure that the unbearable suffering of the people in Gaza comes to an end.

Just a few days ago we witnessed once again at first hand how important that is. My talks in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and above all with the families of the hostages, the German families of the hostages, showed very clearly that we are at a crossroads. Now more than ever, we cannot afford to give up. Now more than ever, we cannot afford to put our heads in the sand. And now more than ever, German foreign policy is called for.

For why is it that some harsh words target us as Germans so directly? Because people have confidence in Germany, in German policy, in German foreign policy, confidence that it can navigate this ambivalence. It is the hope that when we are guided by humanity, we will not give up. And that was precisely the message from our interlocutors in Jordan, in Saudi Arabia, in the Palestinian territories, in Israel and especially from the families of the hostages in Jerusalem.

We must continue to shoulder this burden – to keep a cool head, even when our emotions are running high. Because we can only shape this uncertain world, our open future, if we can also provide explanations and be convincing. And to do this we need to be heard.

That is why we are continuing with our active communication. For our missions abroad we have had an evaluation conducted which showed that what is ostensibly just vitriol or a negative reaction is actually something else.

Our outstanding division that, among other things, works to refute fake news has made clear that we unfortunately live in a world where algorithms are used to spread bad news, but above all also hatred and hate speech more widely.

But that is not the whole truth. For what they also clearly demonstrated is that even embassies and missions abroad where three-quarters of responses to posts were negative comments subsequently had more followers and greater posting activity. Because many people are currently really in search of objectivity, facts and humanity.

Of course, I’m not telling anyone to log on to X or Instagram tomorrow and start arguing with people. But I want to keep encouraging you and to thank you for your communication and for your willingness to put up with controversy. I think we have shown that we are good at that. And since we had such a sport and football-dominated summer: in football they say that you only get tackled if you’re in possession of the ball.

One reason we are so good at it because we are ourselves prepared to expose ourselves to criticism. Because we know that self-reflection, self-criticism, conceding that not everything is black and white – that is a strength.

That is why we view what we are doing with regard to our colonial past as part of our security strategy. Because in recent years we have experienced on the African continent in particular how Russia is attempting to instrumentalise the wounds that Europe’s colonialism has left in Africa, that it is portraying itself as an anticolonial pioneer. We can disregard this as a grotesque form of disinformation. But unfortunately that doesn’t get us very far. We therefore need to ask ourselves why these clearly grotesque attempts by Russia and its narrative are so compelling.

They are compelling because the impression many people on the African continent have is in fact this: you Europeans have never properly addressed your colonial past.

So when we now return Benin bronzes to Nigeria, when we make progress in the area of reconciliation with Namibia in connection with the genocide against the Herero and Nama peoples, we are of course doing so because we believe it is right. Because it reflects our position and our values.

But we are also doing so because it is in our essential geostrategic interests to establish trust. More trust than people have in the Russian narrative.

Because self-reflection increases our self-awareness, and because we thereby strengthen our security and act strategically.

My second point is that although – or maybe precisely because trouble is flaring up every day, we cannot just respond on a day-to-day basis. In these moments especially, it is so important to look beyond current political debate and immediate crisis management.

This is what we have been doing, and we are doing so now. With the implementation of our National Security Strategy. With our China Strategy, our Strategy on Climate Foreign Policy and the guidelines for feminist foreign policy. They establish the framework for our activity.

We ought to ask ourselves whether we would still be where we are today with regard to support for Ukraine and our policy towards Russia if we didn’t have this National Security Strategy.

Today, when every penny spent on our Bundeswehr or on Ukraine is once again being called into question.

And today, when at the same time we hear how monitoring drones are being observed at night over centres of industry and Bundeswehr barracks, at the heart of Germany.

When we hear that suddenly GPS stops working in civilian aircraft flying over the Baltic Sea.

When political party membership details are being stolen.

That is precisely why I am also so grateful to the ministries represented here today that with our National Security Strategy we have established guidelines to prevent us from drifting off course.

Guidelines that are constantly exposed to attempts to erode them, from outside and from within. Which are repeatedly under attack in heated debates, after election results and in the run-up to the next Land parliamentary elections.

With our National Security Strategy we are demonstrating that, two and a half years after 24 February, we can only work to protect our democracies, to protect our peace in Europe, by adopting an integrated approach and by joining forces, internally and externally. That this is the reason why we must continue to provide persistent and reliable support for Ukraine in its fight to defend itself – and at the same time make our own country more resilient and capable of defending itself. By investing in our own strength and deterrence. From the European pillar within NATO to stable supply chains.

And yes, in view of the current threat, that also includes stationing remote weapons in Germany.

Yet of course these strategies do not provide an immediate answer to everything. We have to live with that, too. For obviously it constantly involves weighing up risks.

More rapid digital transformation on the one hand, protection of our critical infrastructure on the other, as in the case of 5G.

Massive business opportunities on the one hand, protection against disinformation and deepfakes on the other, as in the case of artificial intelligence.

But when our State Secretary Susanne Baumann sat down with the other ministries of the Federal Government last week to discuss the topic of connected vehicles, we can see just how valuable these strategies are. After all, in the past, everyone would have wondered what on earth the Federal Foreign Office has to do with transport policy. But today we know that when modern cars gather countless quantities of data, which is then forwarded and analysed, they’re both an opportunity for our German automotive industry and a major geopolitical issue. And therefore also part of our China Strategy.

And we know that Germany is able to manage the transformation in the climate crisis. But we also know that this isn’t just a question of our competitiveness as a country, but also of whether we’re able to get our global partners on board in the fight against the climate crisis. And this is why our climate foreign policy is closely linked to our Security Strategy. That’s why not only climate foreign policy plays a role in negotiations at a Climate Change Conference, attended by our State Secretary Jennifer Morgan, but also our China Strategy and our National Security Strategy.

And that’s what I mean by thinking strategically and keeping the big picture in mind.

And if we want to protect our security and our freedom in an uncertain world, then we cannot do that as Germany alone, but only with partners. Not alone as a ministry, but with the entire Federal Government, with the whole of society and, above all, not alone in expert debates, but with a joined-up approach.

And that’s my third point: in a spirit of partnership.

We should – self-confidently – not underestimate what we’ve achieved with our closest partners in the European Union and in the transatlantic alliance over the past two and a half years, especially at a time when there’s this tendency to talk things down.

Russia’s President not only attacked Ukraine but he wanted to destroy precisely these closest of partnerships. But the opposite has come to pass in this crisis.

In this crisis, the EU suddenly achieved something that I don’t think anyone, perhaps even we ourselves, would have thought possible.

Despite all the differences in the EU, we froze the assets of Russia’s central bank in Europe literally overnight. When we met at the Bundestag for a special session, other Members of the German Bundestag were sitting together with the other Europeans in Brussels late in the evening on the weekend of 27 and 28 February 2022. And they knew that if the sanctions weren’t in place by the time the banks opened on Monday morning, Russia would withdraw the funds immediately.

Since then, we have agreed to implement a further 14 sanctions packages against Putin.

In spite of various national economic interests, in spite of disunity on many other issues. Because we know, because the people in our country, because the vast majority throughout Europe know that this European Union is our life insurance policy. We must therefore constantly remind ourselves of what our Union stands for and what we can achieve together.

This shows what we can achieve if we want to. And we must keep on reminding ourselves of this.

And that’s why we must not lose our heads on account of those who would have us believe that the nation state can do anything better in Europe on its own. In the midst of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and therefore also against Europe, we’ve done everything in our power, especially as the Federal Government, after years of negotiations, to establish a Common European Asylum System (CEAS).

Because it was clear that the issue of migration in particular is being exploited also by the Russian side as part of its hybrid warfare. And we have, once again, found the strength in Europe for what didn’t work for over ten years. With a major compromise, and I say this personally, but with clear responsibility for implementing this system as the right way forward.

And the Federal Foreign Office also played an important role in this regard – with State Secretary Thomas Bagger, the European Directorate-General and our Legal Directorate-General. Here, too, you might once have said that this isn’t the primary task of the Federal Foreign Office, that this is actually domestic policy.

But we have seen that, if hybrid warfare no longer clearly distinguishes between internal and external, then we have the strength, together as democrats, to not allow ourselves to be divided here. And that’s why it’s so important to me that we don’t jeopardise this right now, especially as the Federal Republic of Germany.

After all, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has literally shown us for two and a half years what could happen if we don’t muster this strength each and every day as Europeans. The strength to stand together in times of crisis, to come up with new ideas, to not bury our heads in the sand. But, above all, to stand together in a spirit of partnership as democrats in order to preserve what protects us, namely our European basic order.

And this is why we brought together the EU Foreign Ministers and accession candidates here in Berlin last year in order to strengthen Europe’s foundations in these times of crisis. This wasn’t a question of theoretical discussions, but of hard, dry work.

Because we know that expanding the European Union to include the Western Balkans, Ukraine and Moldova is a geopolitical necessity. Because Europe cannot afford to have any grey zones in its neighbourhood.

And because we know that craftsmanship is what counts especially here. I can still remember how some people ridiculed us back in 2022, asking: “What’s this Moldova Support Platform in aid of? That’s just hot air and only distracts us from what actually matters.” But, looking back, we have to say that Putin’s plan to destabilise Ukraine’s neighbouring countries hasn’t worked in Moldova. We achieved this in a matter of weeks, working flat-out – right after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Moldova had inflation rates that we were barely able to imagine. It had to negotiate with Russia each day about whether it would get any energy at all. But Putin’s plan hasn’t worked. Moldova hasn’t collapsed or fallen apart, but we have achieved the opposite: together with Ukraine, Moldova is now an EU accession candidate.

And this process of enlargement can, of course, only work if we continue to be able to act, including with over 30 member states. That’s why, in addition to enlargement, we must make a success of reform efforts, even if nobody outside of diplomatic circles is really interested in this these days.

That’s why we’re continuing to work on this and why we’ve been doing just that for one and a half years. We’ve focused on how we can make decisions in foreign policy through qualified majority voting with our numerous EU partners.

That’s why we’ve revived the Weimar Triangle with France and Poland. And I’m looking forward to speaking to my counterpart Radek Sikorski and Stephane Séjourné at the Ambassadors Conference of our Polish colleagues shortly. Because we know that only when we forge ahead ourselves, as major European countries, and develop ideas will we be able to achieve the reforms that we need for a strong and sovereign EU that the world so urgently needs.

And I also say this with a view to the US.

We often read these days that the elections in November will “determine Europe’s fate”. And it goes without saying that this election could have drastic consequences. It’s absolutely clear that it will have an impact on our security. And, of course, it’s hugely important for our transatlantic relations.

But I find the notion that it will “determine Europe’s fate” a little hard to swallow. Because, in my view, this fails to acknowledge something fundamental. Regardless of the outcome of the elections, we in Europe have no choice but to strengthen our position.

Our fate doesn’t depend on voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Our fate depends on us.

It depends on how we shape transatlantic relations, on how we position Europe in the long term – self-confidently, strategically and in a spirit of partnership. And it depends on how we expand our partnerships and invest in them around the world. In Africa, Asia and Latin America. We alone shoulder responsibility for this.

We’re witnessing how countries that don’t agree with us on every issue are gaining influence. But we already know today that they will have a significant impact on the 21st century. When I was on a panel with India’s Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar at the Munich Security Conference in February, he was asked about his country’s relations with Russia. And he replied, not without a twinkle in his eye: “Do we have many options? Yes. Is that a problem? Why should that be a problem? If I’m smart enough to have several options, you should admire me for that.”

And we probably secretly do because, to be honest, it’s not the most comfortable position for us to be in. It’s a position that calls for greater interaction on our part. If we made it easy for ourselves, we’d say: “now make up your mind between Russia and the European Union” or “they still don’t get it”. But that won’t get us anywhere at all.

It’s an interaction that we have to actively get involved in ourselves. And yes, it’s challenging. But, and that’s another thing we’ve made clear with our National Security Strategy over the last two and a half years, we’re not shying away from this interaction. It’s part of what I described earlier, especially with regard to our communication. I believe that this offers so much more potential, and I’m convinced that if we tap into this, then we can offer something better.

And that’s why it’s good news that we, the Federal Government, are travelling to India in October to hold intergovernmental consultations there and that the Indians were our guests just recently.

And this is why we’ve made a point of inviting India’s Foreign Minister to this year’s Ambassadors Conference.

To give you a little cliffhanger, he’ll be holding discussions with us tomorrow.

Because we need strong partners if we want to make the future more just and secure.

And this includes partners who we may not have listened to closely enough in the past, who we may have hoped a little too naively would eventually share our point of view if we just asked them often enough – or even pretend that we are of one mind instead of reaching out to them clearly and honestly. Instead of saying in all honesty that one thing is possible, but another one isn’t. And then to see where we can benefit on both sides.

After all, the most important currency in diplomacy – you all know this, but I think we’re sensing this much more keenly right now – is not supposed favours, but trust in our country, in the Federal Republic of Germany. Especially when you look at the world from different angles.

And that’s also why you’re so active and why I’m on the road so much with many others here at Head Office. Because we’re not abandoning the playing field to others. And that’s precisely why we’re investing strategically in these partnerships.

Also with small partners and with a view to the Pacific island states, which are not only facing huge challenges due to the climate crisis, but also on account of their geopolitical situation. This is why we’ve opened an Embassy in Fiji.

And I’d like to say thank you, also to the governments that came before us. We enjoy trust in the region because we have not behaved in an actionist manner as the Federal Republic of Germany. Rather, I’ve heard voices from the small island states telling me that Germany finally has an Embassy here. You should have been here a long time ago, they say, because you’re the ones who have been supporting us for decades. You’re not coming to us now because you think you have to do something in view of the security situation in the Indo-Pacific, but because you were the ones who invested in climate protection and in humanitarian assistance on the ground before. And that’s why we trust you more than others when it comes to geopolitical issues.

And that’s why dovetailing strategies is so essential to my mind – climate foreign policy, the National Security Strategy, the China Strategy. And that’s why it was so important to me that we launched the loss and damage fund at the Climate Change Conference. I’d like to mention the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development as an example here, because I know my friend State Secretary Niels Annen is in this room and we have worked together a great deal to get this fund off the ground.

It is an indispensable instrument for these countries. And for us, looking back, it’s the most powerful weapon that has dispelled the narrative that we’re not interested in the concerns of small countries around the world. Because we listened beforehand and because we then made a better offer, in this case together with the United Arab Emirates, which joined us in making the first pledges for the fund.

And yes, that’s why, to my mind, our feminist foreign policy is also part of this range of strategies. Thank you very much for rolling it out, to the Embassies, and for implementing this strategic concept. And not only because, as we all know, women make up at least half of the world’s population, but also because the issue of women’s rights has opened doors for some people that would otherwise have remained shut – especially with regard to attitudes towards Russia and especially with regard to the BRICS countries.

Countries that are increasingly asserting themselves in the world, including in the United Nations.

And it worries me when I hear how some of these countries, but also others, for example the Namibian Foreign Minister in the Security Council recently, said a few weeks ago that the patience of African countries in the United Nations is running out. Because we have to remind ourselves that he’s right.

And we know that two completely different conclusions can be drawn from this. Some say that this shows that all of these international organisations are no longer needed. Human rights have never existed at the global level in this world anyway. Such rights were always for a special group.

But we and many others, especially African countries, have a completely different response. We say that this is precisely why we need to reform the United Nations, to preserve what protects all of us, namely international law and the Charter of the United Nations.

And that’s why we’ve said just as clearly in these times of crisis not that we’ve got a crisis now and that therefore we can’t concern ourselves with these reforms at the moment, but that the realities of the 21st century are, unfortunately, not reflected in all multilateral institutions. Our institutions, which we want to preserve because they protect us, were created when many of the world’s countries weren’t yet at the table, and in some cases didn’t even exist as countries within these borders.

That’s why we lobbied so hard for the African Union to have a seat at the G20.

That’s why we’ve been leading the negotiations together with Namibia for some time – my thanks go to the Permanent Representation in New York – for the UN Pact for the Future, which is to be adopted in New York at the General Assembly this month.

And it goes without saying that these are really difficult negotiations. Of course, we couldn’t achieve what we wanted on every single point. But that’s why this is more important than ever before.

And that’s precisely why we’re standing for election to the Security Council once again. That, too, was a matter of course in different times. Germany stands for election every few years, and we’re automatically elected every few years. But the world is a different place. We woke up in a different world on 24 February 2022, also as far as this topic is concerned. But that doesn’t mean that we should no longer do the right thing; it just means that we have to work twice as hard. Yes, we’re facing stiff challenges because precisely those who don’t want to strengthen the UN want, at the same time, to prevent our membership of the Security Council for the 2027/28 period. And that’s precisely why we’re now working twice as hard! Fortunately, there’s still time to engage in this effort over the next few years. We can discuss this further at the next Ambassadors Conference.

Ladies and gentlemen, it was important to me that we address this very big picture at the beginning of the Ambassadors Conference. After all, anyone can come up with simple answers by picking out their own issue and claiming that it’s actually all very simple. Before completely ignoring the fact that, unfortunately, one thing has a lot to do with another in this interconnected world.

We, you, seek each and every day to do the opposite, to think about others, about heads of missions abroad on a completely different continent. About people in completely different places and about us at Head Office, as well as about people in our country who see things differently.

Because we firmly believe that the future is not only open, but that we can shape it together, in a spirit of partnership, for the better.

The old certainties aren’t coming back. But we can continue to be optimistic, precisely because we’ve shown what we’re capable of in a crisis.

Because we stand on such firm foundations – our constitution, the Basic Law.

Because we have our life insurance policy, namely the EU and NATO.

And because we know – and this unites many countries in this world, many people in this world, in which the vast majority want but one thing, for their children to be able to live in security, dignity and freedom – that the autocrats and demagogues have precious little to offer in the long term.

Because, when we work together, we can make a better offer – as a country and as the Foreign Service: self-confidently, strategically and in a spirit of partnership.