• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Cornelius Adebahr",
    "Angela Merkel"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Eastern Europe",
    "Western Europe",
    "Germany",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Economy",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Europe

Germany’s Constitution Demands an Active International Stance

Germany will continue its international commitment, from EU enlargement to the Western Balkans to violent conflicts in the world more broadly.

Link Copied
By Cornelius Adebahr and Angela Merkel
Published on Aug 23, 2014
Program mobile hero image

Program

Europe

The Europe Program in Washington explores the political and security developments within Europe, transatlantic relations, and Europe’s global role. Working in coordination with Carnegie Europe in Brussels, the program brings together U.S. and European policymakers and experts on strategic issues facing Europe.

Learn More

Source: Video Podcast of the Chancellor

Cornelius Adebahr: Madam Chancellor, most people think of the wars of the past when they hear about the “Balkans”. However, when you’ll meet those countries' heads of government next week you’ll discuss issues like economic development, rule of law and regional cooperation. How do you explain to the citizens that this region is no longer a powder keg, but that it is worthwhile for Germany to get involved there?

Chancellor Merkel: I will perhaps explain a little how this commitment came about, why we decided to organize such a conference with all the countries of the Western Balkans – with the prime ministers, the Economic and Foreign Ministers: This month, we are commemorating the hundredth anniversary of the beginning of World War I. So we were wondering, what can we do except look back? How can we shape the future? And then the federal government had the idea to invite all these states to show that, today, countries in the region are no longer working against each other. True, there are still a number of conflicts, but in essence it is about togetherness. And it is my firm conviction that this has only been possible because all these countries have a “European perspective”, as it is called. That means that they all have the chance to join the European Union. This is a goal they are pursuing together, and on this basis there is more of a common base than was previously possible. So while of course those terrible hostilities are still in our memory, this event also shows we have proceeded, that we are over it – and that’s a good sign.

When we talk about this goal: Since the entry into the EU of Slovenia in 2004, it took nine years until Croatia joined last year. There are six more countries that want to join. If they all accede in the same rhythm, we will both no longer live to see their “European perspective” fulfilled. Even though it is difficult to name a specific date – what is a realistic time horizon for their accession, one that gives people in the region real hope while, at the same time, does not overwhelm the citizens in the EU?

We have promised the “European perspective” to all countries from the region and we stick to this promise. The time between the entrance of Slovenia and Croatia into the EU does not have to be the yardstick for the accession of other countries. Rather it is in the hands and in the power of those countries, when and how they can join. We already have a differentiation between them, so to speak: We have started accession negotiations with Serbia and Montenegro; Albania and Macedonia have candidate status; and Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo are working towards this status. This means that everyone is called upon to create the conditions for accession to the European Union – through structural reforms, reforms of the rule of law, anti-corruption measures, transparent structures. All this is like a race, and the faster the countries proceed, the faster they can also join.

The EU strictly monitors candidate countries in their compliance of EU standards, the rule of law, and administrative work. In hardly does that with its own members. This leads some to accuse it of double standards, and it brings real problems in some old and new Member States. Do you see a role for the EU to also control those who are already in the club?

Well, if you look at the accession procedures that other Member States have gone through, including now also Croatia, then you will see that those criteria have been respected. And for both Bulgaria and Romania, reports on the rule of law and on progress in democratization and the fight against corruption are still being made today. So it is not true that we’re measuring with double standards. However, we have also learned that all that can be solved in the accession process makes membership of course so much easier. And that’s why countries should not see those standards as a barrier, but as an incentive to successfully work for their own citizens. Because the latter are often very frustrated about the lack of rule of law, about courts which may not yet be well working, and about corruption in their own country.

After nearly ten years of war in the former Yugoslavia, political and social reconstruction is still going on. That says something about the perseverance needed for conflict resolution in general. What are the lessons of the experiences of the Western Balkans that Germany and the EU should consider for other regions of the world?

Yes, we see that we indeed need stamina for this. We still have troops in Kosovo. We have a police mission of the European Union there too. One cannot leave those countries alone too early. Even when there is progress, it is sometimes very slow. When I think of Bosnia and Herzegovina, then we have to make another push for a political process after the elections there taking place in the autumn. There is still much to do. And the second point is that it is important to integrate the region – here also others can still learn something. We are inviting the heads and members of government also to improve the cooperation among them. People in those countries want transport infrastructure, they want to travel easily from one country to the other. This in turn strengthens the commonality of these previously warring people and nations. This works only by encounters; change through rapprochement – that’s something we experienced during the Cold War in Europe. And that’s something we can transfer to all areas of the world.

In recent months, a debate has begun in Germany about our country’s international commitment. With this Western Balkans conference, you have proven that the Federal Republic fully supports the accession process; in Ukraine, the government is strongly engaged, and you yourself are now going to Kyiv. One might think that Germany is already doing enough. Why should we still do more?

The question of what we need to do always depends on the conflicts in the world. And we’re currently witnessing a number of conflicts erupt in our immediate neighborhood – see in Iraq, the Middle East, or Syria. This is, by the way, basically also a rebellion against orders that are in part very closely related to World War I. And we need to get involved also in terms of our own security. It is therefore not about meddling into other countries’ affairs, but we must ask ourselves, what is in Germany’s interest? Similarly, we must, of course, also ask: what is a humanitarian challenge of the first order? When Christians and Yezidis are expelled, then we are of course required to act based on our Basic Law. That the dignity of man is inviolable holds true not only for Germans but applies worldwide. I believe that since the end of the Cold War and since the German reunification, we already have completed a remarkable way. If you think of the early 90s when the question was whether we could engage with a surveillance ship in the Adriatic Sea in the context of the Western Balkans? Then we have troops in Afghanistan, still today, for our own safety in the fight against terrorism. Unfortunately, the threat of terrorism is still not banned, and therefore we will continue our commitment.

This interview was originally produced by the Federal Press Office.

About the Authors

Cornelius Adebahr

Former Nonresident Fellow, Carnegie Europe

Cornelius Adebahr was a nonresident fellow at Carnegie Europe. His research focuses on foreign and security policy, in particular regarding Iran and the Persian Gulf, on European and transatlantic affairs, and on citizens’ engagement.

Angela Merkel

Authors

Cornelius Adebahr
Former Nonresident Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Cornelius Adebahr
Angela Merkel
Political ReformEconomyForeign PolicyEastern EuropeWestern EuropeGermanyIran

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

  • Worker pushing machinery toward a car frame
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Europe’s New Industrial Policy Can Learn From U.S. Mistakes

    Although the IAA often differs from the IRA, European policymakers can still take note of the U.S. act’s shortcomings.

      Milo McBride

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Time to Merge the Commission and EEAS

    The EU is structurally incapable of reacting to today’s foreign policy crises. The union must fold the EEAS into the European Commission and create a security council better prepared to take action on the global stage.

      Stefan Lehne

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What the Russian Energy Sector Stands to Gain From War in the Middle East

    The future trajectory of the U.S.-Iran war remains uncertain, but its impact on global energy trade flows and ties will be far-reaching. Moscow is likely to become a key beneficiary of these changes; the crisis in the Gulf also strengthens Russia’s hand in its relationships with China and India, where advantages might prove more durable.

      • Sergey Vakulenko

      Sergey Vakulenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Beyond Oil: Hormuz Closure Puts Russia in the Lead in the Fertilizer Market

    The Kremlin expects to not only profit from rising fertilizer prices but also exact revenge for the collapse of the 2023 grain deal.

      Alexandra Prokopenko

  • Trump with arms out, surrounded by mics
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Problem With the Idea That Netanyahu Made Trump Attack Iran

    Going to war was the U.S. president’s decision, for which he alone is responsible.

      Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.