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 Russia Eurasia Center

Commentary
Carnegie Politika
What Should We Take From Andrey Melnichenko’s Essay in the Economist?
Andrey Melnichenko’s essay offers no answer to the fundamental question of how, under any kind of negotiated settlement, Europe can protect itself from the Russian ressentiment that is inevitable in all scenarios except for an outright victory for Putin.
Leonid Bershidsky
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Parliamentary Elections in Occupied Ukraine Risk Backfiring for the Kremlin
Despite unhappiness on the ground, Moscow is determined to use both carrot and stick to ensure there is record support for United Russia in occupied Ukraine.
Konstantin Skorkin
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Moldova’s Ruling Party PAS Must Graduate From Crisis Management to State Governance
Whether PAS can refocus on the unfinished business of state-building may ultimately prove more consequential for Moldova’s European future than the pace of its accession negotiations.
Balázs Jarábik
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Lukashenko’s Concessions to Kyiv Reflect Russia’s Weakness
The recent damage inflicted by Ukrainian drones and missiles on Russia has made Belarus aware of its own vulnerabilities—and surprisingly amenable to Kyiv’s demands.
Artyom Shraibman
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Iran War Fallout Gifts Putin Diplomatic Victory at ASEAN Summit
Russia looks set to reap economic benefits from closer ties with Southeast Asian countries that are keen to find reliable energy suppliers and diversify trade ties.
Alexander Gabuev

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

What Should We Take From Andrey Melnichenko’s Essay in the Economist?

Andrey Melnichenko’s essay offers no answer to the fundamental question of how, under any kind of negotiated settlement, Europe can protect itself from the Russian ressentiment that is inevitable in all scenarios except for an outright victory for Putin.

Leonid Bershidsky

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Parliamentary Elections in Occupied Ukraine Risk Backfiring for the Kremlin

Despite unhappiness on the ground, Moscow is determined to use both carrot and stick to ensure there is record support for United Russia in occupied Ukraine.

Konstantin Skorkin

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Moldova’s Ruling Party PAS Must Graduate From Crisis Management to State Governance

Whether PAS can refocus on the unfinished business of state-building may ultimately prove more consequential for Moldova’s European future than the pace of its accession negotiations.

Balázs Jarábik

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Lukashenko’s Concessions to Kyiv Reflect Russia’s Weakness

The recent damage inflicted by Ukrainian drones and missiles on Russia has made Belarus aware of its own vulnerabilities—and surprisingly amenable to Kyiv’s demands.

Artyom Shraibman

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Iran War Fallout Gifts Putin Diplomatic Victory at ASEAN Summit

Russia looks set to reap economic benefits from closer ties with Southeast Asian countries that are keen to find reliable energy suppliers and diversify trade ties.

Alexander Gabuev