Look at this one before analyzing German Russia policy. Putin address the German Parliament in 2001. As he ends the speech the MPs give him standing ovations. When Putin gave the speech he had just terror bombed a city in a way not seen since WWII.
First one can ask why a person who already qualify as a war criminal is invited to address the parliament? Then one can ask what kind of persons give a war criminal standing ovations?
The fact of the matter is that it was very well known what kind of person Putin was when he gave the speech and yet the MPs stood up and applauded. That's a very emotional response, to a person who had already committed crimes beyond the imaginable.
The German MPs who gave Putin standing ovations are probably well educated, as German politicians tend to be, they have families, they reason with logic. But all of a sudden they give standing ovations to a war criminal? Who does that? What made them do it?
I hate to say it but it's not the first time in German history when ordinary, educated and prominent people have applauded an obvious criminal, liar and thug. They didn't have to stand and applaud, that part is clearly emotional. And they were willing to disregard Putin's crimes.
So when we analyze German foreign policy I think we should look less at logic and more at emotions. Especially what kind of emotions make normal people cheer a person like Putin. He whispered a few lies in their ears and they immediately loved him, but they knew what he had done.
There is no way the MPs who gave Putin standing ovations could deny they knew about the terror and human rights crimes Putin had just unleashed in Chechnya. That Putin had persecuted a whole population. The MPs knew this, still they applauded.
Why the German MPs reacted so emotionally to Putin when they knew about his crimes is something that had great impact on national security. Maybe something for your conference to address @ischinger? How people become #Mitläufer is important to know.
In all honesty, if there is any consistency in German foreign policy it is that it has ended in brutal disasters. This might become the case this time too. Emotions should not rule a country.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Global protests against the war in Iraq in 2003 were some of the largest the world has ever seen.
When Russia is about to attack Ukraine, the "peace" movement is completely silent. This phenomenon has to be scrutinized. Photo from London. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_Februa…
The COVID pandemic is a reason not to have street protests but there is plenty of space in media and online. But also there the "peace" movement is completely silent.
Surprising comment from an experienced diplomat. If a country ever had an inconsistent foreign policy it's Germany. Empire, republic, dictatorships and a federation in just a century. Lost two world wars, revolutions, occupation. Very emotional and very unsuccessful I would say.
Sweden has had the same constitution (almost), foreign policy and dynasty for 200 years. That's stability and consistency.
What @GerardAraud does is that he cherry picks. If the world wars impact current German foreign policy they better be included when looking at the consistency and success too.
The devotion to Russia among European leftists and its impact on security have to be addressed in Europe. While the far-right, for good reasons, is ostracized the far-left has managed to cling to influence. Their devotion to Russia remains a problem.
First, a note to Americans. The European left is far more left than the American. Many European leftists had a serious devotion to the USSR during the Cold War, they really believed in it. Often the left also took orders from Moscow.
For those too young to remember: Watch The Baader Meinhof Komplex. The first part of the movie portraits the ideology fairly well. Almost none of the leftists took to terror though, that should be stressed. imdb.com/title/tt076543…
Why is Russian occupation always referred to only as "illegal annexation"? It was a war!
Russia invaded Crimea, occupied it and then annexed it. The so called referendum shouldn't even be mentioned. Anybody can print a papper with 99% written on it.
Not calling what Russia did in Crimea a war is like saying a rape is not a rape just because the girl didn't fight back when she had a gun to hear head.
What Ukraine did in Crimea was to avoid a bloodbath, nothing else. It wasn't like Ukraine somehow wanted to give Crimea away. I believe redline-reset in Washington was the one that advised Ukraine not to resist.
Objective journalism on Russia discussed in Sweden now due to an article based on the "poor little Russia is encircled" fairytale. The article aside I read the comments underneath. Shocking how many Swedes are outright pro-Russian and filled with hatred towards western democracy.
The loyalty to Moscow is robust among leftists in Sweden. It's like when Donald Trump said he could shoot somebody without losing votes. It seems to me it doesn't matter what Russia does, these people will still support it. It's really something for psychiatrists to sort out.
The thing with leftists supporting Russia is that it's not only crazy communists but rather ordinary types, like left leaning social democrats. They are capable of tolerate pretty much every crime Russia commit as long as Russia is hurting the West.
German FM @ABaerbock's response that "we will not help you defend your country because of our history" must be one of the dumbest things ever said. Germany's history already killed millions of Ukrainians, and now even more should die because of Germany's history.
@ABaerbock The selfishness and arrogance from the German governments side is brutal. How dare they block arms sales to Ukraine? How dare they encourage Russias war against Ukraine? Baerbock should be sent for a tour to the victims families and explain to them why their children died.
The German government has basically had "Make Russia Great Again" as the lead foreign policy objective the last 30 years.