[…]

Question:

How do you get along with Friedrich Merz?

Annalena Baerbock:

Fine.

Question:

You are reported to have tried to convince him to release the debt brake because of the war in Ukraine. Why weren’t you able to do that?

Annalena Baerbock:

Immediately after the Russian full-scale invasion, we as the German Government, in very constructive talks with the CDU/CSU – and for this I am very grateful – mobilised billions to strengthen our security and peace in Europe. Yet that is not enough in the face of Putin’s brutality and his destabilisation attempts throughout Europe. The question is: How can we safeguard peace for our children? So that we don’t one day have to concede: We saved the debt brake but sacrificed peace in Europe.

Question:

Instead, Merz is hounding the coalition and pressing for a further tightening of asylum policy. Does that annoy you?

Annalena Baerbock:

You don’t tackle terrorism in panic mode. In such a heated situation, where our democracy is under pressure from inside and outside, we need to differentiate rather than generalise. Proposals that sound tough but cannot be implemented because they violate the Basic Law or European law may be suitable for populist headlines, but they won’t make our country any safer. On the contrary: they play into the hands of extremists – both Islamists and right-wing extremists – because they cause rifts in our society.

Question:

What exactly do you mean by that?

Annalena Baerbock:

The dividing line in the fight against extremism doesn’t run between those who were born here and those who have moved here, but between those who fully embrace our Basic Law and those who don’t. I don’t understand the point of proposals which sweepingly target all Syrians and don’t differentiate between an Islamist murderer and a family who has fled Syria Syria to escape IS. A liberal society must have the strength to say quite clearly on the one hand that serious offenders who oppose our liberal society have forfeited their right to protection. And equally clearly that children who have attended school here for years and their parents, who work here, whether in the care sector or in industry, belong to Germany.

Question:

Against this backdrop, is a coalition between the CDU/CSU and the Greens an option for the future?

Annalena Baerbock:

The CDU/CSU currently seems to me to be somewhat divided on the issue of migration, torn between responsibility for the country and fundamental opposition.

Question:

But something needs to change in the area of asylum, or do you deny that?

Annalena Baerbock:

Not at all. Some municipalities are truly stretched to the limit. That is precisely why the Interior Minister and I launched the reform of the European asylum system, CEAS for short, following tough negotiations in Brussels. Which, incidentally, the CDU/CSU failed to achieve over many years. We now have to work at full throttle to implement this. That means: Registration and border procedures directly at the external borders of the EU. A fairer distribution mechanism within Europe in order to reduce the burden also on German municipalities. Swift repatriation to other EU Member States and countries of origin. And the benefit cuts called for by the CDU/CSU as well as longer detention and specific measures on internal borders are also already possible not least through the CEAS reform. Now we have to implement and enforce all of these.

Question:

Do you support the plans of the Union to turn away refugees registered in other countries at the border?

Annalena Baerbock:

As is so often the case with debates mainly conducted through sound bites, it helps to take an objective view. Do they mean the consistent application of the options offered by the CEAS? Changes in legislation? Or actually a 3000-km long border fence at the heart of Europe? The CDU/CSU wasn’t able to say on Tuesday. Although the Chancellor has already emphasised that we will of course comply with international treaties, European law and the Basic Law. It would be irresponsible if Germany of all countries were to tear up the difficult CEAS compromise on more order, registration, repatriation.

Question:

One week ago, serious offenders were deported to Afghanistan again for the first time in a long time. What role did you as Foreign Minister play in the departure of this flight?

Annalena Baerbock:

You will understand that the German Government treats the details of this security issue, which required sensitive consideration, confidentially.

Question:

Doesn’t the tightening of asylum legislation fly in the face of the central concerns of the Greens such as openness and humanity?

Annalena Baerbock:

Humanity and order go hand in hand. We need rapid and orderly procedures to ensure that those who need protection most actually receive it.

Question:

If you want to continue to deport people to Afghanistan, you will presumably have to negotiate with the Taliban. Will you do that?

Annalena Baerbock:

No, that’s not necessary. And we don’t intend to do so. The point is to do what is right and act wisely, sometimes via detours.

Question:

At the same time, it is hypocritical to let partner countries sort out the deportation issue because you yourselves don’t want to get your hands dirty.

Annalena Baerbock:

I’m the last person to shy away from speaking plainly or to avoid difficult players. That is why we have our technical channels in Doha. But we can’t allow ourselves to be fooled by radical Islamists. No democracy in the world has recognised the Taliban. Why should we curry favour with the Taliban, who are basically imprisoning women within their own four walls, when there are other alternatives?

Question:

The alleged perpetrator of the Solingen attack comes from Syria. Do you also support the deportation of serious offenders back to that country?

Annalena Baerbock:

As I have already said, serious offenders forfeit their protection, regardless of where they come from. And as I have also already said, a state founded on the rule of law must take account of the situation in the country concerned. Deportations to Syria are therefore by no means trivial. Particularly since there is Syria and there is Syria. If we were to strengthen the position of the murderer Bashar al-Assad and thereby also his allies Iran and Russia, we would have really miscalculated from a security policy perspective. Whereas in other areas that are not controlled by Assad ...

Question:

You mean north-east Syria under Kurdish control?

Annalena Baerbock:

For example. We have already cooperated with the authorities there, for instance in the repatriation of German children and their mothers who had joined IS. However, there is fighting also in that region, Turkish military attacks among others.

Question:

But you agree with the CDU that in Syria there are regions safe enough to deport people to?

Annalena Baerbock:

The balance of power and therefore the security situation in Syria is highly complex. Anyone who comes out with blanket statements only shows how little they know about foreign policy. The United Nations doesn’t regard either the two regions mentioned or the north-west, controlled by the Islamists of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or Azaz, where the transitional Syrian government is based, as secure. Not to mention numerous other players such as IS and the disastrous humanitarian situation. Throughout the country, violent clashes with civilian casualties break out on a regular basis.

Question:

Would it be in Germany’s interests to reopen an embassy in Damascus?

Annalena Baerbock:

The greater the differences with a government or a regime, the more important it is to obtain a first-hand impression on the ground. That is why we have not left Russia. That is why I have not closed the Embassy in Tehran. And that is why we are trying to establish a presence in North Korea again. But we shouldn’t leave ourselves open to coercion or be so naive to think that dictators will be willing to compromise. The countries of the Arab League can tell a tale about that with regard to Assad.

Question:

You have been in office for almost three years now. You have elaborated a National Security Strategy and a Strategy on Climate Foreign Policy as well as guidelines for feminist foreign policy, and have undertaken almost 200 trips abroad. What have you achieved in diplomatic terms apart from lots of paperwork, air miles and good photographs?

Annalena Baerbock:

Is that a serious question? Do you really want me to spend the rest of the interview listing everything we have achieved – from the evacuations from the Sudan and visa digitisation, through the realignment of our security policy, the rescue of orphans from Gaza, the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace talks, to the shuttle diplomacy in the Middle East, the climate loss and damage fund and support for Ukraine? Particularly since foreign policy is multifaceted – the greatest success is sometimes the crisis that has been circumvented, that doesn’t make the headlines. Such as our Moldova platform, which prevented the collapse of the country.

Question:

But in the major crises, the diplomatic initiatives came from other players, in the Ukraine conflict for example, from Turkey, South Africa, Switzerland.

Annalena Baerbock:

Don’t try to compare apples and pears. In February 2022, Russia not only attacked Ukraine but also our European peaceful order. As the largest EU state, our most important task was and remains to create and maintain a global alliance to support Ukraine. And yes, I continue to work on that day and night. So that Ukraine isn’t erased from the map and there can at some point hopefully be peace.

Question:

On your travels you invest considerable resources in attractive pictures and social media activities. How important is it to you to stage your policymaking?

Annalena Baerbock:

Active communication is just as much a part of modern diplomacy as talks behind closed doors. If our humanitarian assistance in crisis zones not only reaches those who need it, but is also publicised on Instagram or X, this strengthens our international credibility. In a world in which democracies are being challenged by autocracies, we also find ourselves in a competition of global narratives. And incidentally, without social media we would no longer reach many young people here in Germany.

Question:

Our impression of your Israel diplomacy is that you have spent a lot of your time on the distribution of relief supplies but when it comes to the crucial negotiations on the release of the hostages, a ceasefire or a peace agreement, you are not present. Why not?

Annalena Baerbock:

It was no coincidence that many German-Israelis were among the first hostages to be released. Anyone familiar with the Middle East knows that progress here is measured in millimetres. And that you can only make progress with partners who trust you. That is exactly what my role is as Foreign Minister of a country which bears a special responsibility for Israel and its people: to find ways out of the crisis through persistent shuttle diplomacy together with the key Arab countries and the United States. And humanitarian assistance is no small thing given the immeasurable suffering in Gaza. The polio vaccination campaign, which was preceded by a huge amount of diplomacy, has the potential to protect hundreds and thousands of children in Gaza. That the assistance should reach the people is after all one of the key points in the negotiations on a ceasefire.

Question:

On the issue of arms supplies you have always maintained that you trust the Ukrainian President. Now, Volodymyr Zelensky is firing on Russian territory with Western weapons. The Chancellor says that the current attacks by Ukraine are covered by international law, at the same time Olaf Scholz has always warned of the dangers of escalation. Is he right?

Annalena Baerbock:

On Ukraine policy the Chancellor and I see eye to eye – albeit not on every single detail. We will continue to do everything in our power to bring about a lasting and just peace to Ukraine – as long as it takes.

Question:

But the question of whether we should supply long-range Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine isn’t just a detail.

Annalena Baerbock:

You could see it that way.

Question:

In a few weeks the election in the United States will take place. Have you met Richard Grenell, former US ambassador to Berlin and potentially the next US Secretary of State under Donald Trump?

Annalena Baerbock:

That’s by no means a foregone conclusion. Harris is impressively strong. But yes, Mr Grenell and I know each other.

Question:

You are in office for one more year. What do you want to achieve?

Annalena Baerbock:

Peace, of course. But that isn’t something I can achieve on my own.

[…]

Interview: Martin Knobbe and Christoph Schult

www.spiegel.de