The Joschka Fischer School of Politics

If there is a modern day saint able to walk on water it has got to be Joschka Fischer, Germany's foreign minister.

This former terrorist supporter is Germany's media darling and the country's most popular politician.

What's rather astonishing in the face of his high popularity: he's a person void of almost any political substance. If you are in need of a telling example - here is one, a transcript of an interview Fischer gave to Australian tv station ABC on February 7, 2005:

German Foreign Minister looks to rebuild ties with Australia

TONY JONES: As you know, East Timor gained its independence after international intervention. A referendum followed. The people of East Timor were able to say what their will was. Now, after Iraq's first elections, we're starting to get a picture of the will of the Iraqi people. Given the high turnout of voters in Iraq, are you rethinking your opposition to the war to get rid of the dictator Saddam Hussein?

JOSCHKA FISCHER: Our position was that it was not wise to wage this war. But when it happened, it was also quite clear that it cannot end with the defeat of the coalition. Europe - not only Germany - Europe has not only strategic interests in the region, in the Middle East, but we are direct neighbours. So if there would be a negative outcome for the coalition - we are not part of the coalition - we would be hurt directly. Whether we were against or pro war, this was a case of the past, but now, we have any interest. Since the very beginning of the end of the war, we work with our American friends. Unfortunately, one year was lost until the Security Council resolution was produced, and based on the efforts of Lakhdar Brahimi, the special representative of the United Nations, we worked out a Security Council resolution which led now to elections. It was very courageous of many voters to go to the ballots, and now we have to wait for the outcome. We must see. As far as I see, the Shi'ites will have a great victory, but we have to wait until we know the definite outcome. It was a step forward. Hopefully, this will reduce the violence and hopefully this can produce democratic stability. We will contribute to that.

Analysis: Fischer doesn't address the question asked. But wait...

TONY JONES: Let's talk, if we can, about some of the questions of principle that were involved there, though. In his recent State of the Union address, President Bush said his ultimate goal was to end tyranny in the world. Now, do you accept that as a legitimate guiding principle of foreign policy?

JOSCHKA FISCHER: Looking to the history of my continent of Europe, we had two totalitarian challenges. The first one was the challenge of the Nazis in my country, which led to almost a complete destruction of my country, not only in a physical sense but morally; and the second one was Bolshevism and the Stalinist threat. At the end, Europe overcame all these challenges, and today Europe is a continent moving forward to the integration. We had the enlargement, May 1 last year, with 10 more member states. We crossed the Iron Curtain, the former Iron Curtain. Europe today is a continent of peace. There's a tremendous challenge. Tyranny is a chapter of the past, and we had a lot of tyranny in Europe. Looking forward to the coming challenges in the globalised world, I think that we should move forward with such a transitional approach. We never had, after 9/11, dispute about the need to change the status quo in the Middle East; the dispute was about which tools should be used, and is it wise to use the tools which were used then by the United States and the coalition against Iraq? But definitely, we work very hard in Iran, in the Middle East, Israel and Palestinian conflict, in other countries. We invented, together with our American friends, the concept of the broader Middle East for a transition. We believe in that, yes, definitely, because we live in one world, and in one world, I think it might be a short-term perspective to suppress people, but in the middle-term perspective, I don't believe that this is an option for the future.

Analysis: I'm lost in an ocean of words. Europe somehow managed to end tyranny, but it isn't clear how, except: "Europe overcame all these challenges". And I like the "challenge of the Nazis in my country". The Nazis "challenged" Germany? Poor Germans... But I'm sure Fischer will now get into details...

TONY JONES: I know you are talking about it as if it were a thing of the past, but the war in Iraq was incredibly controversial in Europe. Do you accept that it was a war to end tyranny?

JOSCHKA FISCHER: We must work on that, that the outcome will be an end of tyranny and not an escalation of the problems. We have any interest and therefore - I had negative predictions, but I'm in a contradictionary situation, because I must work very hard for a positive outcome. It's a dispute about the past, the reasons of the war. I mean, we must work very hard that we really can move forward with the transformation of this region, because this will define our security in the 21st century.

Analysis: Hmm... Was it a war to end tyranny, Mr. Fischer? Mr. Fischer? Joschka!!?

TONY JONES: I mean, I put these questions of principle to you because, as a green, in spite of being a green, in fact, you are not a pacifist.

JOSCHKA FISCHER: I'm not a pacifist. I mean, my government, the Chancellor, myself, we led our country twice to war in the Balkans, in Kosovo, and in Afghanistan, and...

TONY JONES: In fact, in the case of Kosovo, you had to convince your own party - you had to face them down in order to send Germans to war for the first time since the Second World War. I'm asking what the difference in principle is between the war in Kosovo and the war in Iraq.

JOSCHKA FISCHER: Well, for me, war is the very last option. I cannot deny that sometimes there will be a situation where you must fight, but before, all other options, especially diplomatic options, must be exhausted. So this is a means of last resort for us, for our government. It was for us quite clear after 9/11, this terrible criminal attack on the people and the government of the United States, that there was a big road of evidence leading to Afghanistan and to al-Qai'da, and in Kosovo, all other options were exhausted, and it was quite clear that Milosevic will not agree to a peaceful solution. Everything was done before, everything - all negotiations came to a negative outcome, and there was no other option than to use military means in Kosovo, so this is the general position of our government.

TONY JONES: But you're indicating that that wasn't the position in Iraq, and that...

JOSCHKA FISCHER: Well, from our view, the diplomatic options were not exhausted at that time. But this is a discussion of the past. Today, today, we have any interest, both sides - "yes" and "no" position - that the outcome now will be a democratic stability in Iraq, because negative consequences would be terrible for all of us.

Analysis: The guy is amazing. No mention of the fact that Saddam had stalled all diplomatic efforts for years. No mention of the fact that we now know that Saddam's Iraq was a heaven for the "Oil for Food" embezzlement crowd, who would have done everything to boycott all "diplomatic solutions". And Mr. Fischer - why not mention the fact that the UN Security Council hadn't approved of the Kosovo war?

...

TONY JONES: You essentially appear to be saying that you have to deal with, in real politics, the consequences of bad US foreign policy.

JOSCHKA FISCHER: I would never say that - never. We had our disputes. But we are looking forward now, and I think - I was in Washington DC last week. I had a long talk with my new colleague Condoleezza Rice, and it's quite clear this is now an ongoing discussions between the Europeans and the American side, and I think very productive discussions.

My sympathy goes to Condi Rice for having "a long talk" with Mr. Fischer...

(Hat tip Ian)

Comments

[Phil]

'But this is a discussion of the past. Today, today, we have any interest, both sides - "yes" and "no" position - that the outcome now will be a democratic stability in Iraq, because negative consequences would be terrible for all of us.'

A very good statement in my opinion but the German government does not live up to it. Although we are training some security forces we could do a lot more.

As for giving no answers, Fisher is no better or worse than virtually every politician. It's really going on your nerves.

[Go me away!]

"which led now to elections"?
"contradictionary situation"?
"we have any interest"?

WTF?

[Phil]

@ go me away,

he spoke in English which is not perfect.

[kathianne]

Phil, I think his English is 'good enough.' I got it, think most will. Europe is tolerant and peaceful? Wow, can't wait until the next 'flair-up.' Seems they have a bit of a problem with Jews, Muslims, and labor.

[Schakal]

These are the supposedly "smart" european politicians...
What an interview! What a brilliant perspective!

Ray, do you realize that to publish such an exposing interview with our beloved Außenminister, regardless of it being factual, would be considered "Majestätsbeleidigung" in Germany? No sense of humor there. How about a float of Fischer as Pinocchio, with a dunce hat and a sign saying "I not convinced!"?

[scum of the univ]

Since the very beginning of the end of the war, we work with our American friends.

Did I miss some German contribution to the post-war process?

We invented, together with our American friends, the concept of the broader Middle East for a transition.

Another choice sentence. The fellow has slightly more gall that Al Gore, who never actually claimed to have invented the InterNet.

[Sock Puppet of Doom]

Why is this guy Foreign Minister again? I am pretty sure he is no a democrat. He appears to be a lightweight. All I can say is look at Sec. Rice and Look at Minister Fischer. I guess his qualifications are he is a real 1968er. Throwing fire bombs at the police and being a supporter of the RAF/Bader-Meinhoff Gang?. I suspect he is actually a communist as many Greens are actually Reds.

[Don Bennett]

Wow! I thought I was reading a John Kerry interview. Do all these knotheads think and talk the same way?

[George M]

@ Sock Puppet

"I guess his qualifications are he is a real 1968er. Throwing fire bombs at the police and being a supporter of the RAF/Bader-Meinhoff Gang?."

He's more than that! The old Romanian Secret Service had him working for the famous terrorist, Carlos the Jackal, in the mid 70s.

Supposedly he took money, donated by M.Ghadafi, and used the money to buy from the Romanians, the building plans of where the OPEC ministers were meeting. Karlos stormed this meeting and took the mid-east oil ministers hostage. 4 Austrian security guards were killed during this caper.

Does this make Joschka an accomplice to murder?

[martin]

funny ... you are so funny

[James]

@all

If Joshka Fischer were an American, could you image someone like him attempting to become prominent politician?

It just wouldn't happen! Beating up police, fraternising with terrorist, pathetic outbursts, etc, etc...

[matt]

mein got! hillarious.

[Sock Puppet of Doom]

We will trade you 2 Kennedys for a lame and blind dog with 3 legs.

[Amani]

After reading all I can say is "Yuck", I need a shower. After reading this, I would be scared to be a German. It seems he can only be hard on one country, the US, and only in his own country. Talking about talking out of both sides of your mouth. First, he makes is sound like Germany defeated Nazis and the USSR all by themselves. Then he turns around and praises the US. Does he relies what he is saying?

[Markus]

I think you misunderstand Fischer. He refers to the peace which has been in Europe since 1945. Before, year for year there was at least one war in Europe. But after WWII there was peace. The EU was a product of the wars in the past and the peace of the present. And this peace lead to wealth and even sympathy with each other (ok when there's a soccer match between England and Germany we have war againt).
Fischer thinks the Europeans and the whole world can see what power peace has, for him Europe shows that you can live in peace and wealth without power politics, without national interests or totalitarian ideologies. He's an idealist as well, but in an other way than Bush. He wants to transform the European model to the world.
But his problem is that he can't see that this European peace was only possible because Germany was military defeated by the Americans, Britains (and Sowjets). And he cant see that the European Union is a product of the American "friendly occupation" and military presence in Europe (against the Sowjets) as well, not just a product of a new European "never any war again - spirit".

But this is the new ideology of Europe, we saw to many wars, for us it's just clear that these wars didn't bring us forward, no they cost to many lifes. And Fischer thinks that everybody thinks that about war, although out there we have terrorists and dictators who are not interested in the European peace-model.
It's not Old Europe anymore like Rumsfeld said (in another context I know, I'm able to read), it's New Europe, the "no war, never again and nowhere"-Europe.

[Joe]

Simple Question:

I know there are many of you who pay close attention to what is being said by the spd as it relates to today’s situation in Iraq.

Could one of you please tell me just what principles the Germans are now following as it pertains to both supporting the NATO training mission to Iraq as well as actually putting troops in country if they in fact had to the troops to deploy. It would appear they are doing neither of these. I have to assume there is some foreign policy principle being applied.

Some where in all of the events since the election I have missed any discussion on this.

[gregor]

Fischer is a " Lindenstrasse " character. That is why he is popular.
A one time socialist/communist, the stone thrower of Frankfurt, now a Minister. Used to be fat and unhealthy, took to jogging etc.

He is a joke. Very popular, as a Foreign Minister has done nothing but look " betroffen" .

[Chest Rockwell]

"He refers to the peace which has been in Europe since 1945."

And the oppression of 200+ million people by the benign Soviets. They exported alot of their failed ideology elsewhere in the world (yes - along with guns, phil).

Additionally, wasn't it VDH who said that all of the world's "isms" come from Europe?

[James]

@Markus

I agree with some of your analysis, but isn't it strange that Fischer should claim his "ideological path" to be the most enlightened one?

Meaning, he believes that Europe has been on the right path since 1945, the EU as ist cornerstone (not necessarily Nato though). Since the 1960s he has been a radical leftist, a leading member of the Green party. The Green party only 5 years ago finally had sufficient seats to join a coalition government in Germany, to really effect policy from the parliamentarian point of view.

He allures to the fact that Germany has also been on the right path over this time period. That this "model" can be extended and recycled globally. This I find a great contradiction, because he and the Green party were never members of the German government during some of it's most difficult times since 1945: Realpolitik, 2 Berlin crisis, pershing missle distribution, Stasi infiltration, Baader-Meinhof, Münich, etc. For him to claim ownership of the wisdom of some great policy decisions of admirable German leaders since 1945 like Adenauer and Kohl is a mockery of history.

He is usurping German emotions towards "Frieden" whilst having never participated in that achievement. Contrarily, history shows that he worked to destroy the same institution that he now considers "heilig".

It is for this reason that I asked the question (above) if one could ever imagine a similar figure in American politics becoming Secretary of State. I state this would never be possible.

@Niko

Ted Kennedy never threw Molatov cocktails. In short, between the evil Kennedy and the evil Fischer, I would choose Kennedy.

[Joe]

James,

You are now talking about REALLY REALLY bad choices......

[Markus]

I think Fischer's point of view has changed and I think it's wrong to judge somebody only according to his background. Fischer is not a fundi like Trittin (secretary of environment), he's become a realo. And I really dont like the Greens, but Fischer is still the best among them, because he's one of the moderatest Greens. He's not the molotow-thrower anymore, now he's the man in the fine suit. Remember he was for the war in kosovo and persuaded his pacifistic party.

And his "idol" is not Adenauer or Kohl, but maybe the peace nobel price winner Willy Brandt with his "Neue Ostpolitik", which led to relaxation (Entspannung?) of the east-west-realtions (in Germany and the whole of Europe).

[Tyranno]

James posts:

If Joshka Fischer were an American, could you image someone like him attempting to become prominent politician?

It just wouldn't happen! Beating up police, fraternising with terrorist, pathetic outbursts, etc, etc...
~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Sure it could Jim, or at least in one party. Ever hear of Al Sharpton, or Tom Hayden.

Europe will look the other way for a Stalin (XXX millions dead), a Hussein (350,000 dead, so far,) a Castro (20,000 dead) or a Fischer . . . but puffs itself up in righteous moral indignation at the suggestion of a Pinochet (2,500 dead), Haider (0 dead), or a Le Pen (0 dead).

Tyranno

[James]

@Tyranno

"Sure it could Jim, or at least in one party. Ever hear of Al Sharpton, or Tom Hayden."

I've agreed with many of your posts, as well as Niko's in the past. But sorry, not this one.

Kennedy never sought to undermine the government and work with Stasi/PLO sponsorted terrorists. Nor does Al Sharpton ever pass for more than black angst to white sub-urban americans... Sharpton is not a viable candidate, full stop.

@Markus

Did Brand's approach give East Germans the vote? Kohl/Bush/Reagan achieved that...

Basically, what you're saying is that Fischer's changed with the times (or matured a little bit). I liken Fischer to someone like Castro. Castro wanted "free" elections when he was in the woods with Che Guevara in 1958 (KGB $ helped). But, when he came to power, he negated his earlier desires. Had Fischer's molatov cocktails (finaced by the Stasi) changed the government, he would not be so "agreeable" now. I really think that your position is very naive...

Also, notice how he's given up jogging?

[thad]

i have to jump in here and say that the US had a hand in making sure these fools get to run the DE these days. It was a bet that they couldnt get THAT nuts. I was a basebrat at the HQ in the 70's and it was pretty cool how nutty the Germans were what with their parades and protests and things of that nature. Compared to the Cong the dirty hippies were cute. It does pain me that they all took that shit so seriously -now they co-invent (please!) and all the other fluff ball crap they spew. Compared to the rest of the world like Iraq and Afghanistan, Germany is so rich and spoiled they can't handle it. Where are they going to put all that guilt without hiring these dickheads to take their minds to another plane. Not the guilt for nailing the Sovs and everybody else, but the guilt for making it look so simple to get their shit back together. The current politics of social acceptability over character is just celebrity worship in a land of plenty. But I blab.
The real deal is that when the Germans couldve really screwed things up they didnt and I can ignore their candyass pols because I know that just like most of the French you don't hear about they'll get the US to kick the shit out of anyone
that tries to cut into their racket.