Read on Twitter
There is a fascinating debate within the German Green party about nuclear weapons and defence spending, which could have substantial implications for Germany’s future foreign policy. A short thread explaining what’s going on and why I think it matters. /1
The Greens have strong pacifist roots and remain officially committed to a Europe free of nuclear weapons – which would mean removing the US nuclear bombs from Büchel. They also oppose raising the defence budget to the Nato target of 2% of GDP. https://www.gruene-bundestag.de/themen/sicherheitspolitik /2
But lately the Greens have adopted a more assertive foreign policy and now have the most muscular views on Russia and China of any German party (particularly given the new CDU leader Armin Laschet’s dovish past statements on Putin, Assad and Xi). https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/09/armin-laschet-merkels-pro-russia-china-friendly-successor/ /3
This week the director of the party’s think tank co-authored an extraordinary op-ed marking Biden’s inauguration. It called for Berlin to adopt closer security ties to the US, meet the 2% target and preserve the US nuclear presence in Germany: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/transatlantisch-traut-euch-wir-brauchen-eine-neue-uebereinkunft/26827522.html /4
This would be quite a revolutionary shift in the Greens’ identity and the proposals have infuriated some senior figures in the party, including Jürgen Trittin, the former foreign minister, and Agnieszka Brugger, its security spokesperson. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/verteidigung-schwer-irritiert-1.5182258 /5
Why does the row matter? Because polls suggest the Greens could be the junior partner in a CDU/CSU-led federal govt, which might give them control of the foreign ministry at a time when Germany’s broader foreign policy – and its identity on the world stage – are in flux. /6
In other words, this debate could be played out on a much bigger scale in future, particularly as the CDU itself is divided over how strongly Germany should take America’s side in the great-power rivalry with China, and what that would mean in terms of military commitments. /ENDS
PS My impression is that the op-ed does genuinely reflect an atlanticist strand of opinion in the Green party but these views won't be adopted by the leadership any time soon. Nuclear weapons particularly are much too risky an issue for party unity this close to an election.
BUT these arguments are likely to resurface time and again over the next few years, particularly if the Bundestag election in September results in a black-green federal government with a strong Green component.
