Page 3 of 3
GERMANY, THE RE-ENGINEERED ALLY PART 3: Hail to the chief, or else
timid admission that more is not possible under prevailing conditions. Time
will tell what it is going to be.
'The Germans have to learn to die'
What has not yet been picked up in the wider campaign of re-educating Germans
is Rafael Seligmann's recent pronouncement that "the Germans have to learn to
die" in the "war of civilizations". Though a prominent novelist and journalist,
and richly endowed with public honors, he obviously had lost his
sangfroid. The purpose of the whole effort is, of course, about killing and
dying, but the cooler heads among journalists and politicians know now - from
the backlash of their earlier offensiveness - that the average German needs to
be much more terrorized, beleaguered and anxious to be confronted with this
truth.
In the meanwhile, the dissatisfaction with the German mice refusing to roar
found different venues of expression. A lead writer of Der Spiegel, Hendryk
Broder, also showered with prestigious awards, took last year's failure of the
Germans to rally in the streets, when they should have demonstrated their
support for Israel and protested against the Hezbollah "war of aggression", as
proof of the ineradicable German anti-semitism. And this is connecting well
with the historical myths that have come to dominate the public discourse,
particularly those which hold the German lower classes culpable for the German
misfortunes of the last 100 years, the latest one being their reluctance to man
the barricades for the defense of the West.
Trying to leverage the German consensus on anti-semitism has become all the
rage since a majority of Germans turned against American (and Israeli)
policies. The quasi-genetic disposition of Germans to "genocidal anti-semitism"
has become the first and last resort for explaining their recalcitrant
pacifism.
Nevertheless, though the stridency of the consensual reporting and commenting
in the German media seems to have somewhat leveled off with regard to the wider
Middle East, there is another front line in the war of civilizations where
hostility and venom remains the only currency of media opinion - namely,
Russia. So much so, in fact, that the large minority of the political class
which considers normal relations with Russia possible and desirable has lost
all influence on the public discourse.
The rediscovery of the Russian enemy - also dating from around 2002/2003 - and
the demonization of Putin's Russia might have originated in the search for
countermeasures to the crash of the American public image. But it has now
reached a depth that only a large majority of the political class - unafraid,
at that, of a media campaign against it - could recondition the public
discourse. This is highly improbable - for domestic as well as for American
reasons.
A new cold war with Russia is something the Russians fear far more than they
are apt to let on and this fear has acquired a real and influential
constituency. Though the West might err about the risks, a cold war's perceived
benefits are simply too substantial to reconsider its wisdom. It is, of course,
driven by the expectation that the Russians can be forced to return to the
state of affairs that US Ambassador to the United Nations Zalmay Khalilzad
dubbed "adult supervision". It may end in war born out of desperation.
And war, the German war against the Soviet Union, has become central to the
myth making underlying so many of the efforts to reshape the German collective
psyche. Though by the 1980s, many German generals and senior officials had
forgiven the Soviets for defeating the Wehrmacht, the fashionable view now is
that the Soviet victory was illegitimate - because it was achieved by
"Stalinist methods" - and that Stalin and Hitler were equally responsible for
the war, and equally victimizers of the Soviet population. But since democratic
Germany repented its sins, and Russia didn't, Russia will remain in thrall to
its totalitarian heritage, and will still have to pay for the war it finally
and justly lost in 1991.
Undergirding this caricature of history with applications for the present are
endless series on public TV about the Soviet barbarian ineptness in fighting
the war, the suffering of German women at the hands of Red rapists, about the
strafing and torpedoing of refugees and refugee ships, the driving-out of
Germans, and the Soviet anti-semitic refusal to recognize the special place of
the 6 million Jews among the 20 million civilian victims of the German crusade
against Jewish Bolshevism.
In fact, in connecting the debate among the Israeli right and the ideological
continuity in those "history" series, one might come to the conclusion that the
German crime is the one of the Holocaust of "innocent" Jews - innocent in the
sense of non-communist. It is, therefore, completely unsurprising that the cry
of "anti-semitism" that meets any opposition to Israel's policies and its
propagandists, leaves the Jewish non- or anti-Zionist left as it has always
been, fair game.
Unavoidably, these tales to shape the public conscience will eventually have
effect. But for now they seem to have failed their mission. The polls still
show a substantial majority of Germans regarding Russia as non-threatening and
basically benign. Though not for lack of trying.
Last year's climax of the efforts to take down Putin in a public relations
sense - with hopes, obviously, of getting the German public to scent blood -
was an interview in the run-up to the G-8 Petersburg meeting.
It was led by Maybrit Illner, a popular TV political talk show host known as
one of the three "Compassionates" (as the Furies were eulogized in classical
times) of public television. Since these events are always heavily scripted and
choreographed with the involvement of the political appointees heading public
TV, there was nothing accidental or unforseen in its conduct. Illner waged this
interview like a prosecutor interrogating a defendant. Her "You don't want us
to believe", "you talk too long", her pulling faces and interrupting Putin,
demonstrated that her parents were quite amiss in teaching her manners.
This was not a question of evading subservience or not challenging Putin, but
she behaved in a fashion more appropriate for the old American shock-talk TV
Jerry Springer Show than for a serious political interview. Though Putin
neither lost his smile nor his sangfroid, it was unavoidable that the Kremlin
drew conclusions about the future of German-Russian relations as well as about
its ability to get a fair hearing for its point of view.
This interview was even more remarkable for its contrast with an interview of
President Bush by Sabine Christiansen (the second of the three Compassionates).
Her demeanor suggested a coyly suppressed obsequiousness and her challenge (re
Guantanamo) dissolved in the shared relief about the upswing in US-German
relations and the wisdom of Chancellor Merkel. It was not "hail fellow, well
met" but the demonstration of measured awe before the burdens of the
president's office, of the willingness to have the world explained for the
yokels at home, and of a slight willingness to succumb to the manly charms of
power.
Both interviews are emblematic for the hormonal change of German policies and
their public debate. It does not matter in the longer run whether the German
population will vicariously partake in its thrills or not. What counts is that
the German political class is gorged with the will to follow its temptations,
losing in the process prudence and reason. The American political elites are
already failing; the German ones are following suit.
Axel Brot is the pen name for a German defense analyst and former
intelligence officer.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
