No Strategy, Please, We’re German – The Eight Elements That Shaped German Strategic Culture | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

{
  "authors": [
    "Jan Techau"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

In The Media

Carnegie Europe

No Strategy, Please, We’re German – The Eight Elements That Shaped German Strategic Culture

While the German government's policies on foreign and security issues may seem inconsistent, a closer look at the country’s strategic culture may shed light on its role as a foreign policy player.

By Jan Techau

Published on May 1, 2011

Source: NATO Defense College

No Strategy, Please, We’re German – The Eight ElemAs Germany has entered its third post-unification decade, questions about where it stands as a foreign policy player and as a leader in Europe abound. German government policies on foreign and security issues seem to be inconsistent and hard to classify. Most observers seem to agree that the foreign policy posture of the country has changed since 1990. Some say it has only changed fairly recently. But into what it has changed to seems to be less clear. Studies and articles trying to assess the country’s courses are numerous. Almost all of them focus on German positions, actions and the motivations of the government’s leading personnel.

Another way, however, of assessing a country as a foreign policy player is to look at its strategic culture, i.e. the long-term “soft” factors shaping foreign policy, defense and strategic decisions. This article will attempt to define, if not “the” strategic culture as such, at least some of the decisive factors shaping this culture as it currently prevails in Germany. It will attempt to provide an additional tool for analysts and political practitioners to better understand the positions and the behaviour of a country with a very special past and a crucial role for the future of Europe.

About the Author

Jan Techau

Director, Europe Team, Eurasia Group

Techau is director with Eurasia Group's Europe team, covering Germany and European security from Berlin. Previously, he was director of Carnegie Europe.

Recent Work

Commentary
Can Europe Trust the United States Again?
- Nathalie Tocci, Jan Techau
Commentary
Pre-Reformation Europe and the Coming Schism
- Jan Techau

Foreign Policy Europe

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

Commentary
Diwan
Iran and the New Geopolitical Moment
A coalition of states is seeking to avert a U.S. attack, and Israel is in the forefront of their mind.
Michael Young
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Baku Proceeds With Caution as Ethnic Azeris Join Protests in Neighboring Iran
Baku may allow radical nationalists to publicly discuss “reunification” with Azeri Iranians, but the president and key officials prefer not to comment publicly on the protests in Iran.
Bashir Kitachaev
Commentary
Diwan
Iran’s Woes Aren’t Only Domestic
The country’s leadership is increasingly uneasy about multiple challenges from the Levant to the South Caucasus.
Armenak Tokmajyan
Article
The Tragedy of Middle Eastern Politics
The countries of the region have engaged in sustained competition that has tested their capacities and limitations, while resisting domination by rivals. Can a more stable order emerge from this maelstrom, and what would it require?
Hamza Meddeb, Mohamed Ali Adraoui
Paper
The United States and the Emerging Security Order in Eastern Syria
As Washington reduces its presence in the country, the success of its withdrawal and continued containment of the Islamic State will hinge on adopting an approach of flexible oversight built around three priorities, as well as balancing Turkish and Israeli red lines.
Kheder Khaddour, Issam Kayssi

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

Commentary

Diwan

Iran and the New Geopolitical Moment

A coalition of states is seeking to avert a U.S. attack, and Israel is in the forefront of their mind.

Michael Young

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Baku Proceeds With Caution as Ethnic Azeris Join Protests in Neighboring Iran

Baku may allow radical nationalists to publicly discuss “reunification” with Azeri Iranians, but the president and key officials prefer not to comment publicly on the protests in Iran.

Bashir Kitachaev

Commentary

Diwan

Iran’s Woes Aren’t Only Domestic

The country’s leadership is increasingly uneasy about multiple challenges from the Levant to the South Caucasus.

Armenak Tokmajyan

A municipal employee raises the US flag among those of other nations in Sharm el-Sheikh, as the Egyptian Red Sea resort town gets ready to receive international leaders, following a Gaza ceasefire agreement, on October 11, 2025.

Article

The Tragedy of Middle Eastern Politics

The countries of the region have engaged in sustained competition that has tested their capacities and limitations, while resisting domination by rivals. Can a more stable order emerge from this maelstrom, and what would it require?

Hamza Meddeb, Mohamed Ali Adraoui

Paper

The United States and the Emerging Security Order in Eastern Syria

As Washington reduces its presence in the country, the success of its withdrawal and continued containment of the Islamic State will hinge on adopting an approach of flexible oversight built around three priorities, as well as balancing Turkish and Israeli red lines.

Kheder Khaddour, Issam Kayssi