Despite its economic strength Germany remains a sideshow on the international stage. Germany’s active attempts to conduct diplomacy have been underwhelming and meaningful results are rarely delivered. The main parameters are set by the US. China and Russia set the second-tier, while the EU deals with internal conundrums and lack of vision. The year 2020 will likely be a continuation of Germany’s self-imposed identity crisis. Nonetheless, Germany will attempt to participate in solving issues that will keep the international community on its toes again so it is worth taking a look at the biggest challenges facing Germany politically in the coming year.

Germany’s European Problems

There is the EU for one. Germany continues to hold on to the idea that a united and strong Europe is necessary to counterbalance other world powers. Furthermore, Germany will have another chance in 2020 to set the direction on behalf of Brussels, as they will take over the EU presidency in the second half of the year. Germany’s presidency could mark the end of the seven-year EU budget and other essential and pioneering decisions, such as working out the relationship with the UK post-Brexit. It remains an issue, however, that mainly Germany’s left is not only reluctant but continues to oppose acceptance of the leadership role Germany has de facto had in the EU. The presidency will mark a litmus test that shows whether or not Germany can commit itself to guiding Europe forward.

Germany And NATO

Then there is NATO and the question about the alliance’s stability. Germany has continued to emphasize NATO’s relevance and, by doing so, responded to the destructive remark made by French President Emmanuel Macron, who described the alliance as “brain dead.” US President Trump went further, even questioning NATO’s crucial Article 5 which promises collective defense if any member is attacked. However, in order for Germany to become one of NATO’s true political leaders, it must also finally reach the two percent target in defense spending. This would provide allies with reassurance regarding Germany’s commitment in these uncertain times. However, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition partner, the SPD, is strictly against increasing the defense budget, which makes an increase inconceivable until the next general elections in 2021.

Speaking of NATO, since the annexation of Crimea by Russia and the outbreak of war in eastern Ukraine in 2014, Germany has been working to prevent a further escalation and to keep the EU united. The Minsk agreement between Moscow and Kyiv has still not been implemented despite the recent Normandy format meeting in Paris. However, the initiation of peace talks and a temporary ceasefire are a welcoming occurrence. Nonetheless, Germany has decreased not only its pressure on Russia but also its tone, which can be seen by the transformation of Foreign Minister Heiko Maas’ approach towards Putin. Maas began his tenure by continuously and clearly calling out Russia. By now, however, he is almost wholly avoiding any confrontation. The notion that Berlin is becoming too dependent on Russia, via North Stream 2, for instance, carries certain connotations in this context.

Germany And Iran

However, Russia is not the only international scene that deserves Germany’s attention as Iran also remains a hot topic. Europe’s chief interlocutors of France, Germany, and the UK are still trying to save the nuclear agreement with Iran that the USA withdrew from. In order to counteract US sanctions against anyone doing business with Iran, the three countries have founded an independent payment processing institution with Iran. However, it seems unlikely that companies in any business relationship with the United States will resist the pressure of US sanctions and trade with Iran. Germany’s—and indeed the European’s efforts—to counteract US sanctions on Iran are thus meaningless. Most importantly, however, they seem misguided since Tehran continues to be the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism, has been destabilizing the region for decades. In their quest for peace, Germany must not forget who their allies are and that realpolitik was once invented in Germany.

Germany And The US

Then there are the increased tensions between Germany and the US. After at least a temporary end to “Pax America” has begun, Germany must reposition itself and become more self-sufficient on the international stage due to the Americans’ semi-retreat. However, Germany’s economic prosperity relies on conducting business with the US. This relationship that has benefited both nations since the end of World War II has been shaken up due to President Trump’s trade war threats. Germany’s foreign office (“Auswärtiges Amt”) also launched initiatives in arms control. However, without the US, this appears to be yet another example of Germany’s symbolic diplomacy. Germany’s reliance on multilateralism and France’s support cannot change this. Germany needs to realize that there will be a time after Trump and whether it is Iran, the economy, or disarmament policies, Berlin would do well not to burn too many bridges with Washington.

Germany And China

Just as much as Germany needs the US, it depends on China as its international and economic partner. The fact that China is a totalitarian state that secures its power with oppression and advanced digital technology while continuing to challenge the US for global hegemony seems acceptable for Berlin. Nonetheless, disputes remain, particularly in the South China Sea. China’s territorial claims are violating international law, and the international community has reacted by deploying warships in the region.

As an export nation, Germany—among the ten countries with the highest economic traffic in the area—should be interested in continuous freedom of sea routes. However, Germany is not participating. In fact, an attempt by Foreign Minister Maas to even deploy marine personnel onto allied ships was rejected by Chancellor Merkel herself. Furthermore, even a new and serious attempt is unlikely to ever achieve the required majority in the Bundestag, as the SPD, just as with the defense spending, continues to live in a world where conflicts are debated but never solved.

One should not expect a German paradigm shift away from diplomatic gestures towards realpolitik in 2020. The main actors in Germany, Merkel, as well as her coalition partners, are merely opposing the concept of the latter instead of backing it up with real policy. However, not all is lost, and there have been signs that Germany’s approach could change in 2021, under new leadership. The Western world would undoubtedly appreciate it.

L'articolo Germany’s Foreign Policy Dilemmas in 2020 proviene da InsideOver.

What began as regional protests have escalated and now developed into a national rebellion in more than a hundred cities, conducted by Iranians, who, in fear for their futures, seek the end of the current government. In several smaller cities, the security forces have lost control over the protests creating a sense of volatility reminiscing of 1979 when Iranians overthrew the Shah.

Iran’s President Rouhani attempted to appease the protesters and urged them not to be carried away by violence, saying “protesting is the legitimate right of citizens, but vandalism is not.” Supreme Revolutionary Leader Ali Khamenei responded by calling the protesters criminals who will be dealt with accordingly. And indeed, Iran has taken measures to counteract the protest. The Internet has been almost completely cut off and the Revolutionary Guard has begun to fire at protesters, with at least 65 people killed so far.

The nationwide revolt was triggered by a sudden price increase for gasoline announced in the middle of the night to last Friday. A step that is particularly affecting the poor among the 80 million Iranians who have been suffering from an augmentation of inflation and unemployment for years. However, it is not only the poor that have taken their rage to the streets.

Of the 80 million people, 60 per cent are under the age of 30, many of them educated. These people are highly cognizant about their prospects or lack thereof under the current circumstances and continue to direct their frustration towards the regime also.

US sanctions, which had been reimposed after President Trump’s withdrawal from a dichotomic nuclear agreement, have completely paralyzed the country’s economy. While European’s have been reluctant to punish the Mullahs for relaunching its nuclear program, Washington has continued to play hardball since – and rightfully so.

Most importantly and despite all the false blame on the US, the Iranian regime has brought the current circumstances on itself with its unassailable actions, such as the continuous sponsoring of terrorism. To blame Trump for exiting an agreement his predecessor conducted is being naïve at best or downright ignorant at worst. Most importantly, the withdrawal has worked out impeccably well for the US and it would be unwise to return to the negotiation table right now.

The looming threat of a nuclear Iran, able to strike against its enemies remains the counter-argument of course. But let us be honest: it has been an Iranian paper tiger from the start. Why? Because the only absolute certainty in the whole saga is this: under no circumstances would the US allow Iran to ever obtain nuclear weapons. Its safety and the safety of its main allies in the region (i.e. Saudi-Arabia and Israel) depends on it. Thus, a pre-emptive strike is always more conceivable than the Mullahs becoming a nuclear power.

However, Washington’s current tactic does not involve military actions. All the US has been attempting, is to further increase tensions between protesters and the government. It is why Secretary of State Pompeo has threatened Iran with further sanctions for its crackdown on protesters while urging the people on Twitter to send the US government photos, videos, and other evidence. Pompeo is not doing this out of the goodness of his heart, but because it is a Machiavellian move that might deliver the US an occurrence it has long wanted: regime change.

By insinuating to the protesters that the US has their back, he not only legitimizes their actions but provides them with further reason to continue these. The US’ agenda is henceforth to help facilitate an Iranian version of the Arab Spring of 2011, an overthrow of the regime by its people. And as the latest reports indicate, it is no longer inconceivable.

It is the strategy President Obama needed to apply during his tenure. Instead, he faded the opportunity and appeased the Mullahs with a, for the region, and particularly the allies, detrimental nuclear deal.

And while the current administration’s foreign policy track record has been anything but stellar (e.g. no process in the Israel-Palestine conflict and no disarmed North Korea), Iran could turn out to become an unlikely signature win without having fired one single shot or the continuation of senseless appeasement.

L'articolo The Right of Revolution: Why the US is the Winner of the Iranian Protests proviene da InsideOver.

Germany’s Foreign Minister Maas and his colleagues from Paris and London as well as EU Foreign Policy Chief Federica Mogherini stated they were ‘extremely concerned’ about Iran’s repeated violations of the nuclear agreement. The EU would now consider ‘mechanisms’ in order to settle the ongoing dispute, which could eventually lead to the reintroduction of UN sanctions.

On Thursday, Iran officially resumed uranium enrichment at the Fordo nuclear facility. On Sunday, the country said it had increased uranium enrichment to five per cent. Based on the agreement, however, the maximum allowed is 3.67 per cent.

The nuclear agreement of 2015 is designed to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons and subjects its nuclear program to international control. In return, international and national sanctions against the country were lifted, including sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council.

However, Iran has gradually withdrawn from the international nuclear deal since May. Teheran argues it was a response to the US’s exit from the agreement last year and the reintroduction and tightening of US economic sanctions.

The recent steps taken by Tehran represented a ‘regrettable acceleration’ of the Iranian withdrawal from the obligations of the agreement of 2015, according to the joint statement of the foreign ministers of Germany, France, Great Britain and Mogherinis. The Iranian leadership must immediately undo all violations of the nuclear agreement.

At the same time, they reaffirmed their ‘determination to continue all efforts to maintain the agreement’ – but also warn that they are considering ‘all dispute resolution mechanisms, including the dispute settlement mechanism.’

By mentioning the mechanisms, Maas is referring to the possible start of the dispute settlement procedure under Article 36 of the Atomic Energy Agreement. If the procedure led to no satisfactory outcome, EU sanctions against Iran would ultimately be reintroduced.

Meanwhile, the dispute settlement mechanism provides for a multi-stage procedure with numerous deadlines. It may be activated if one party believes that provisions of the agreement are being violated by the other. It would likely be a long process, probably over several months. Without an agreement with Iran, however, it could ultimately lead to the reintroduction of UN sanctions.

Iran has, for some time, been demonstratively violating the key requirements of the agreement. The government in Tehran justifies the steps by the US’ decision to reimpose sanctions, which forced Iran back into economic isolation, it argues.

The Europeans, however, do not accept this argument and point out that the US’ action must not hinder the remaining parties to abide by the agreement and thereby seek to ensure that EU companies can maintain business relations with Iran.

Whether or not this renewed approach can appease, Iran remains to be seen. So far, Teheran has repeatedly displayed its willingness to hold the EU ‘hostage’ over its nuclear program. A sudden paradigm shift, based on the latest statements of ‘extreme concerns’ cannot end Iran’s violations, but buys the time to gain even more significant leverage in the long run.

L'articolo Germany, France and the UK Urge Iran to Cease Nuclear Violations proviene da InsideOver.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani delivered a speech at the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday. In the week leading up to the gathering of world leaders, there was discussion about a possible meeting between Rouhani and United States President Donald Trump. Before the conference began, however, both sides downplayed the idea.

“Nothing’s ever off the table completely, but I have no intention of meeting with Iran, and that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. I’m a flexible person,” Trump said on Sunday. His remarks came only two days after he imposed new sanctions on Iran’s central bank and sovereign wealth fund in addition to sending more American troops to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Previously, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated Trump would be willing to meet with his Iranian counterpart with no preconditions and several members of his administration — and even Trump himself – corroborated that position before Trump accused it of being “fake news.” 

During a Fox News interview, Rouhani said before meeting, there must be concessions on the American’s side. 

“Why would we bump into one another?” he said. “If we seek to pursue higher goals to benefit both countries, both people, it must be planned, and talks must be based on those plans. But prior to that, we must create mutual trust, and the trust is something that Mr. Trump took away from this framework. We had an agreement. Mr. Trump exited without a valid justification, and illegally, from an international agreement.”

Rouhani went on to accuse the US of spreading terrorism across the region, using Syria as an example. This idea carried over into his speech at the UN Wednesday. 

“Ladies and gentlemen, the Middle East is burning in the flames of war, bloodshed, aggression, occupation and religious and sectarian fanaticism and extremism,” Rouhani declared. Then Rouhani introduced a new initiative he called the security coalition of HOPE, an acronym standing for the Hormuz Peace Endeavor. The basis for the plan is to leverage the Strait of Hormuz as a political tool to force cooperation among the region. A large portion of the Persian Gulf stretches alongside Iranian coastline, making it a key player in the issues surrounding the strait. Rouhani did not expand upon how HOPE would operate, but emphasized that peace in the Middle East could only be made through Middle Eastern states cooperating, not by foreign powers such as the US occupying countries.

“The security of our region shall be provided when American troops pull out,” he said. “Security shall not be supplied with American weapons and intervention.”

In addition to calling for a US withdrawal from the region, Rouhani also stated Saudi Arabia must end its aggression in Yemen. Iran has also been involved in the civil war by supporting Houthi rebels, which claimed responsibility for the Sept. 14 on Saudi oil facilities. Yemen, together with Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, terrorism in the Middle East has gone unabated since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in 2001.

Rouhani warned that a “single blunder” could “fuel a big fire” in the Middle East in regards to military activity. Many feared that blunder happened during the drone attack, but much to the surprise of Saudi Arabia, Washington leaders refused to commit to a retaliatory strike on Iran. The US initially blamed Tehran and on Monday, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany all joined Washington in pointing the finger at Rouhani’s government, which continues to deny involvement. 

Those same countries continued their plan to meet with Rouhani regarding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly referred to as the Iranian nuclear deal. Talks with American negotiators have been stalled for some time during which Iran has gradually begun exceeding the limits imposed under the framework of the agreement. European leaders have met with Iranian representatives on several previous occasions to try and bring Tehran back to compliance, but the major barrier has been the disastrous economic effects caused by American sanctions. European signatories to the accord created INSTEX, a bartering exchange system in an attempt to curtail some those effects, but it has thus far been unsuccessful according to Federica Mogherini, European Union foreign policy chief. 

“As you know, the agreement has two pillars — the nuclear commitment and the economic side that is linked to the sanctions lifting. On both elements, there is full determination to try and preserve the agreement,” Mogerhini said following a meeting with Rouhani. 

Ultimately, even if EU powers are able to create a workable arrangement with Rouhani that helps its economy, discussions with the US must resume at some point. For that to happen, Rouhani said Washington must cave on sanctions. 

“We once negotiated under sanctions. We will not do so again. Halt the sanctions and return to your commitments so the dialogue may reopen,” he said told the General Assembly. “Our patience has a limit.” 

The General Assembly was the perfect opportunity for Trump to have a change of heart on Iran. He reportedly had been previously considering a $15 billion stimulus package before the attack in Saudi Arabia, so the willingness was at least once there to resume negotiations. Rouhani’s insistence that Washington remove sanctions before meeting is unrealistic, especially in light of the newest round on Sept. 20. However, it is possible that European leaders who have shown a continued desire to meet with Tehran could convince their American counterpart to do the same. 

L'articolo Rouhani Announces HOPE Coalition But Avoids The US proviene da InsideOver.