Question:

Mr Wadephul, the Federal Chancellor is now also being called Foreign Chancellor. Do we still need a Foreign Minister at all?

Johann Wadephul:

If I look at the trouble spots around the world, then yes. But, joking apart, we complement each other rather well. It’s good for Germany that we have a Federal Chancellor who also clearly defines his international role. And, in many areas, I’m fulfilling a role that’s expected of us as Germany, such as in the efforts at the moment to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. We’re liaising very closely on this, and the Chancellor values my opinion. I sense a great deal of satisfaction among our international partners that we’re speaking with one voice and are therefore reliable.

Question:

The CSU is also treading on your patch. Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt has tightened border controls, and Poland is now doing the same. Is the Federal Government tearing up the system of open borders in Europe?

Johann Wadephul:

No, not at all. We need these border controls for a transitional period until we have reorganised the migration system. The aim is to improve controls at the external borders of the European Union and to work together in Europe to prevent illegal migration. We have to be honest with ourselves here: the regulations to date have not worked properly. Humanity is important to us, but we cannot simply wave illegal migrants through to Germany. Our cities and municipalities are simply no longer able to cope.

Question:

The Federal Government wants to call a halt to the federal admission programme for Afghanistan, which was intended to provide protection for particularly vulnerable Afghans. The Berlin Administrative Court has now ruled that existing approvals must be honoured. Will the approximately 2400 Afghans who are still waiting for their visas after receiving initial approval now get their papers?

Johann Wadephul:

While the coalition agreement stipulates that we won’t continue this programme, it also states that we will honour past approvals. This decision will be subject to a review. We will, of course, implement things that are legally binding; I have emphasised this several times.

Question:

To facilitate deportations, Mr Dobrindt wants to negotiate directly with the radical Islamic Taliban – instead of letting Qatar mediate, as has been the case to date. That would legitimise this regime, which is currently only recognised by Russia. Doesn’t that pose a problem?

Johann Wadephul:

That wouldn’t be tantamount to recognising the Taliban regime. We’re not at that point at the moment. I would, however, advise taking a sober view here as well, because there have already been a number of talks with the Taliban at the technical level since we withdrew from Kabul a few years ago. Whether or not we have someone acting as a go-between is a purely practical question, not a political one, and certainly not a legal one. The Federal Government needs to be in dialogue with many governments and regimes whose opinions and actions we do not approve of. Nevertheless, our interests sometimes require us to maintain some form of contact. Doing anything else would be to deny reality. That’s also diplomacy by the way.

Question:

Russia is continuing its attacks on Ukraine with increasing severity. Do you think that the war will continue in 2026?

Johann Wadephul:

Despite countless diplomatic efforts, Putin continues to show no serious willingness to negotiate. His goal remains the violent destruction of Ukraine as a sovereign state. Not only has he not budged an inch from this goal, but he’s terrorising the civilian population each and every night with hundreds of drones and bombs. I strongly urge those in Germany who still espouse a very naive view of the Russian regime to understand this. After all, more than 1200 days of war have shown that Putin will not come to the negotiating table without pressure. We must continue to turn up this pressure. But I’m certain that we have more staying power than Putin.

Question:

The adoption of the 18th EU sanctions package against Russia has just failed, however.

Johann Wadephul:

Negotiations on this are ongoing. I presume that it will be possible to adopt the package in the near future. I appeal to those countries that are currently still hesitating owing to individual interests to consider the bigger picture and pave the way for this agreement now. I have also held talks with various counterparts on this issue in recent days.

Question:

US President Donald Trump promised to end the war within 48 hours of taking office. That deadline has long since passed – does he have the power to end the war?

Johann Wadephul:

We will only be able to solve many of the current problems if we in Europe and the US sing from the same song sheet. This applies to the Iranian nuclear programme as well as to facilitating negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine must be able to conduct these negotiations from a position of strength. The fact that the US has resumed arms deliveries to Ukraine, which had been suspended, is an important step.

Question:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. Under what circumstances would you lend your support to this?

Johann Wadephul:

Our task is to work together with the US and our international partners to find solutions to end the Gaza conflict, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the threat posed by Iran. That’s on the agenda now. We can talk about possible honours later.

Question:

That brings us to the Middle East. During your first visit to Israel in May, the Israeli Government assured you that the situation in Gaza would soon improve. Have you seen any progress?

Johann Wadephul:

We mustn’t forget that Hamas is responsible for this acute situation with its terrible attacks on 7 October 2023, and the fact that it has, to this day, not released the hostages. Nevertheless, we’re deeply concerned about the devastating humanitarian situation after more than two and a half years of fighting, which is something that I’ve communicated to Israel on a number of occasions. The Israeli cabinet’s recent decision to allow significantly more humanitarian assistance into the Gaza Strip is a sign of hope. This decision is largely thanks to pressure and negotiations on the part of the Europeans, including High Representative Kaja Kallas. At the same time, it’s important that a sustainable solution is finally found and that the hostages are released. That’s why it’s so important that the talks between Israel and Hamas in Doha lead to a ceasefire at long last.

Question:

You have warned against forced solidarity with Israel. What do you mean by that? And how seriously do you take the criticism you have received from within the CDU for this?

Johann Wadephul:

I wouldn’t use that term again. What I wanted to express, and still want to express, is the fact that Germany has a clear obligation to protect the existence and security of the State of Israel. At the same time, as a close friend of Israel, the Federal Government also has a duty to criticise developments that risk isolating Israel on the international stage. I have done this with regard to the suffering in Gaza, and I will continue to do this. The current situation is not such that it’s possible to refrain from criticism. As I said, I hope that this will change in the near future.

Question:

Do you consider Israel’s actions in Gaza to be covered by international law?

Johann Wadephul:

That can only be assessed once all the facts are on the table. There is, at any rate, an obligation under international law to ensure that people in the region are provided with sufficient supplies. We have repeatedly called on Israel to remedy this situation and to examine whether the measures preventing the delivery of essential supplies are genuinely based on Israel’s security needs. Israel has now committed itself to significantly increasing humanitarian assistance. We will judge the government by its actions here.

Question:

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has assumed responsibility for the distribution of aid supplies, and there has been regular turmoil during distribution. Was switching from the UN to a private organisation, pushed for by Israel, a good idea?

Johann Wadephul:

I’m not opposed to exploring additional supply routes alongside traditional aid organisations. However, traditional international aid organisations, such as the World Food Programme, must also have access to the Gaza Strip at all times. The most important thing now is that urgently needed aid reaches the people in need at long last – this is clearly not possible to a sufficient extent if the delivery of aid is restricted to organisations such as the GHF.

Question:

Does that include the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)?

Johann Wadephul:

UNRWA plays an important role in the region as a whole. But it has also come in for criticism, for example for being too close to Hamas. That’s why we agreed in the coalition agreement that we would call for reforms from the organisation.

Question:

Israel is currently constructing a camp in southern Gaza for 600,000 people. Is the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza imminent?

Johann Wadephul:

Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar has clearly and publicly stated that this isn’t the goal of the Israeli Government. We remain committed to the goal of a negotiated two-state solution. We firmly believe that this is the only way out of this conflict that will lead to lasting peace.

Question:

To what extent does Germany, through its arms exports to Israel, share responsibility for attacks that also target many civilians?

Johann Wadephul:

The fact that we supply Israel with military equipment is part of our responsibility towards the Jewish state. It goes without saying that decisions must be weighed carefully. This is done in the Federal Security Council, whose deliberations take place behind closed doors.

Question:

An arrest warrant against Netanyahu has been issued by the International Criminal Court. Would he be arrested if he visited Germany?

Johann Wadephul:

The Federal Chancellor himself has said that he intends to visit Israel for the time being and that no further visits at this level are planned.

Question:

The Federal Government accuses Russia of violating international law owing to its attack on Ukraine. Why are you less clear about Israel’s attack on Iran?

Johann Wadephul:

Wiping the State of Israel off the map is Iran’s declared state ideology. When one country seeks to destroy another, it is in the wrong. Secondly, Iran is pursuing a nuclear enrichment programme that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has clearly stated has no civilian justification anymore. Moreover, there’s broad international consensus that Iran shouldn’t obtain nuclear weapons. So it’s Iran that has crossed red lines. And it’s Iran that’s failed to bring about a peaceful, contractual solution.

Question:

What’s the way out of this situation?

Johann Wadephul:

We need to get back to the negotiating table as quickly as possible. I’m waiting for the Iranian Foreign Minister to finally state that he’s ready to talk about a peaceful settlement. Everything is in place, and we could achieve a result relatively quickly. My phone is on loud, and Mr Araghchi only needs to call.

Question:

Have the attacks by Israel and the US destroyed Iran’s nuclear facilities to such an extent that the likelihood of an Iranian nuclear bomb has decreased? Or does Iran now feel particularly provoked?

Johann Wadephul:

The German Government doesn’t have sufficient information on this matter. But one thing is certain, which is that a lasting solution to this conflict can only be achieved through an agreement.

Question:

A few days ago, a Bundeswehr aircraft flying as part of the EU mission in the Red Sea was attacked by a laser from a Chinese warship. What’s behind this, and what does it mean for German-Chinese relations?

Johann Wadephul:

I’m more than perturbed by this incident. Such interference with our aircraft, like any other unprovoked endangerment of our units, is unacceptable. We have summoned the Chinese Ambassador and made this unambiguously clear to him. China has some explaining to do here. We’re prepared to deal with China as an equal partner and to seek to cooperate at all times. But we will clearly reject any rule-breaking conduct by China and anything that is directed against our rules-based order.

Question:

You have cautioned China against encroaching on Taiwan. At the same time, Germany is committed to the One-China policy, meaning that Taiwan isn’t independent. What would Germany and the EU do if China annexed the island?

Johann Wadephul:

We have made it clear to China that the status quo can only be changed through negotiations, not through force. This would seriously impact not only bilateral relations with China, but also economic relations between Europe and almost the entire Asian market. The consequences, including for the Chinese economy, would be far-reaching. No one can have any interest in that, not even Beijing.

Question:

What are the chances for the EU-China summit, which was actually scheduled to take place in July?

Johann Wadephul:

I presume that it will take place. We’re trying to do everything we can to help. It’s in our mutual interest to reach agreement on contentious issues such as subsidies for electric vehicles and market access as the economic situation in both markets is not rosy.

Question:

Returning to Europe, in Hungary, Maja T. from Jena is on trial even though her extradition was declared inadmissible by the Federal Constitutional Court. Is Germany trying to repatriate her?

Johann Wadephul:

The extradition took place at a time when the Constitutional Court’s decision had not yet been issued. We’re in talks with the Hungarian Government to, first of all, achieve improvements in Maja T.’s detention conditions. We’re continuing our efforts intensively and will raise this issue again in Hungary next week. However, Hungary has also reaffirmed its interest in prosecuting the case itself. To be perfectly clear: Maja T. faces the most serious allegations. She would therefore also face criminal proceedings in Germany.

Interview: Daniela Vates andEva Quadbeck