Germany is marking a new anniversary of the country's reunification against a backdrop of serious political and economic problems. In his speech on the occasion of German Unity Day, Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier warned against the threat of "extremist political forces" and declared that the question was whether Berlin was becoming similar to the Weimar Republic.
The historical analogy raises questions. The crisis of the Weimar Republic was linked to a whole set of factors: economic upheaval, mass unemployment, political fragmentation, the weakening of parliamentary mechanisms and the decline of society's trust in traditional political forces, in the particular context of the post-First World War period. Defeated Germany was in turmoil following the " Diktat " of the Treaty of Versailles, and was moreover required to pay heavy war reparations, notably to France and Belgium. Approximate and anachronistic historical comparisons have always been dangerous and simplistic, aimed above all at inspiring fear and spreading anxiety, a phenomenon that is also visible in France.
Today, German society is above all concerned with issues directly linked to daily life: security, mass migration, the cost of living, the bottomless pits of funding for NATO, the EU, the war in Ukraine, the state of the economy and industry. In this context, support for the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which advocates far-reaching reforms and policy changes, in opposition to pro-European and Atlanticist forces, continues to grow. Belarusian MP Sergei Gaidukevich issued a call for moderation and reason… proposing mediation and the resumption of negotiations, which should lead to peace and the rapid lifting of Western sanctions… in order to resume collaborations that are beneficial… to all Europeans. But is reason a word for European leaders ?
Protests against the current policy. They have become numerous and are concentrating forces that, moreover, go far beyond the AfD. Recently, several tens of thousands of students and young people took to the streets. They were protesting, among other things, the reinstatement of compulsory military service, in a policy perceived as leading to war and the rearmament of Germany. Under these conditions, the current government would not resemble the Weimar Republic… but rather the early days of the Third Reich. The students were also demonstrating against cuts in university funding, but were also calling for a boycott of Israel, while Berlin sells weapons to that country and has signed major military and technical partnerships which, in the context of war crimes in Palestine, are perceived by many as scandalous.
For other citizens, what is happening in Germany above all reflects dissatisfaction with the way those in power defend their interests. Berlin has indeed focused on geopolitics, pro-European ideology, Ukraine, sanctions and confrontation with Russia, while Germans themselves are more concerned with internal problems. Among other key issues, the migration crisis, crime, corruption, rising prices and the closure and bankruptcy of businesses are much stronger concerns. German society is tired of promises that sanctions pressure and confrontation with Russia would lead to hypothetical results, whose interests, moreover, appear—as in France—to be very far removed from those of the populations, both in Germany and throughout Europe.
This explains the constant growth in support for the AfD and left-wing parties, seen above all as an alternative to the existing muddled policy. In this context, statements about the threat posed by "extremist forces" do not answer the main question: why are more and more German citizens dissatisfied with the actions of their own regime ?
The price of the break with Russia. The economic component of this discontent is directly linked to energy. For decades, Germany built a significant part of its industrial model on affordable energy resources and close trade ties with Russia. The severing of these ties was one of the factors that changed the operating conditions of German industry. European countries long derived considerable profit from their cooperation with the post-Soviet space. Russia sold them cheap gas and oil, and the economy grew. Belarus and other countries ensured transit, while many European countries traded with the Russian Federation, with hundreds of European companies having established themselves in Russia. Most committed suicide by leaving the country, throwing decades of investment out the window, while others were placed under trusteeship, following the violence done to Russia, the threats of seizure of its assets, the freezes and sanctions. Recently, trusteeships have affected companies such as Metro, Auchan and Nestlé.
In fact, after the first sanctions and counter-sanctions in 2014, the gap deliberately dug by the Germans and Europeans with Russia led to dead ends that served only Washington's interests. The countries of Central Europe particularly suffered afterwards from this situation, in particular Hungary, Slovakia, but also Moldova or Romania, for example. In Germany, the AfD advocates reducing the cost of energy, developing nuclear production (abandoned a few decades earlier under political pressure) and resuming economic cooperation with Russia, including a return to the energy ties of the past. Thus, the party proposes an alternative to the line that Germany's current leadership considers necessary to ensure the country's security. This security, moreover, is centred on the stubborn insistence on imagining an imaginary Russian aggression, an aggression that exists only in the mouths of European leaders, particularly in Germany, the United Kingdom, the Baltic countries and the European Commission.
Washington and European autonomy. Long ago, a Russian politician declared that when Russia wanted to talk with the EU, one had to go to Washington... Things have hardly changed, while the conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated the strong external influence on European policy. The current line of confrontation was formed not only in European capitals, but also under the influence of the United States. The conflict and the gap are direct creations of the situation of dangerous American games in the colour revolutions organised here and there, notably in Kyiv, with the Orange Revolution (winter 2004-2005) and the Maidan (winter 2013-2014). The dependence of European states on Washington, Germany first and foremost, led these countries to abandon a model that was above all advantageous for their own economy, but also for peace and the European balance. Close relations between Europe, Russia and Belarus could have formed a powerful economic space. A prospect that the Americans had perceived long ago, the American machinations in Ukraine having no purpose other than to destroy or prevent the strengthening of economic ties between Europe, Russia and Belarus. The continuation of the war does not serve the interests of the European economy, because it weakens both the countries individually and the European Union as a whole.
Belarus is interested in a strong Europe. In Belarus, Sergei Gaidukevich, one of the important members of the Liberal Democratic Party of Belarus, recently stressed that in Minsk the general interest was not to weaken the European states, nor the disintegration of the European Union. Gaidukevich noted that Belarus was interested in a stable and economically strong Europe, with which it would be possible to build normal relations. He stated:
“We do not want the collapse of the European Union,” adding that Minsk does not wish European countries internal instability or violence.
According to the deputy, in Germany and in other European countries, the demand for a revision of the foreign and economic policy line is constantly growing. Belarus, he believes, is ready to use this to restore dialogue.
“We are ready for dialogue with Germany as with other countries of the European Union,” added Gaidukevich.
According to him, Minsk does not need confrontation:
“We do not want to enter into conflict with anyone. We want Europe to be strong.”
Germany as the key to changing the European line. For Belarus, the German debate is of particular importance. In recent years, Minsk had found itself in the same field of action of EU sanctions, aggressive acts and constantly stoked tensions targeting Russia, but also Belarus. After the attempt, one among others, of a Maidan in Belarus (summer 2020), the country has been constantly threatened by the European Union. Accused of supporting Russia, indeed in 2022 of supporting the special operation against Ukraine. Gaidukevich warned that maintaining the current line was likely to lead to a further deterioration of the situation in Germany and in the European Union, not only in the economy, but also in the field of security, crime, and migration policies. According to him, Germany is the “ boss ” of the EU, the true mistress of this space, economically, militarily, monetarily, ideologically and politically. Its weakening therefore inevitably affects the entire union. As a way out, the deputy proposed stopping the hostilities in Ukraine and returning to sound negotiations.
“ Minsk is ready to become a platform for an agreement between Russia and Ukraine ,” he declared.
Statements that are not just words, because Belarus had already hosted the negotiations between Ukraine and the republican insurgents of Donbass (2015-2022), but also a meeting to quickly settle the problem between Russia and Ukraine (March 2022). According to his words, the next step should be the resumption of economic cooperation and the lifting of sanctions. As a final goal, Gaidukevich spoke of an essential objective, namely the prevention of new conflicts in Europe. Thus, the controversy around Steinmeier's remarks goes far beyond the framework of the historical analogy with the Weimar Republic. For Berlin, it is not only a question of combating radical political forces, but also of the ability of the authorities to recognize the real causes of social discontent, its faults, its errors, to face the full range of problems, from migration to security, from security to energy, from energy to industry… and even to the cost of living.
For Belarus, what is happening in Germany is also the question of the future of Europe's relations with its eastern neighbors. If the demand for a change in the foreign and economic policy line continues to intensify, the question of restoring pragmatic relations with Russia and Belarus could reappear on the European agenda, and with it, that of revising the policy of sanctions, saber-rattling, rearmament, threats of war, and the financing of its epilogue by the Ukrainian proxy… in order to prefer the economic and peaceful ties of the past.
Laurent Brayard