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 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Commentary
Strategic Europe
The Uncomfortable Truth About EU Enlargement
Before the next wave of EU enlargement takes place, the union needs to grapple with thorny questions of how power is distributed among its members.
Emil Sondaj Hansen, Ditte Brasso Sørensen
Commentary
Emissary
What to Watch When Trump and Xi Meet in Washington
The real test may come after the leaders leave the room.
+1
Sheena Chestnut Greitens, Oriana Skylar Mastro, Yukon Huang, …
Commentary
Emissary
The Impacts of the Houthis’ Advance Could Extend Well Beyond Saudi Arabia
The Horn of Africa countries are among those facing a new security calculus.
Andrew Leber, Lesley Anne Warner
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Will the Far Right Change Europe’s Russia Policy?
The European far right might fail to steer EU policy in the direction Russia wants, but they will create enough chaos inside Europe to benefit the Kremlin.
Dimitar Bechev
Commentary
The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of Time
The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.
Marc Pierini

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Ukraine Poland Zelensky Tusk Enlargement EU

Commentary

Strategic Europe

The Uncomfortable Truth About EU Enlargement

Before the next wave of EU enlargement takes place, the union needs to grapple with thorny questions of how power is distributed among its members.

Emil Sondaj Hansen, Ditte Brasso Sørensen

Commentary

Emissary

What to Watch When Trump and Xi Meet in Washington

The real test may come after the leaders leave the room.

- +1
Sheena Chestnut Greitens, Oriana Skylar Mastro, Yukon Huang, …

Commentary

Emissary

The Impacts of the Houthis’ Advance Could Extend Well Beyond Saudi Arabia

The Horn of Africa countries are among those facing a new security calculus.

Andrew Leber, Lesley Anne Warner

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Will the Far Right Change Europe’s Russia Policy?

The European far right might fail to steer EU policy in the direction Russia wants, but they will create enough chaos inside Europe to benefit the Kremlin.

Dimitar Bechev

Greenland United States Denmark Agreement Nuuk

Commentary

The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of Time

The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.

Marc Pierini