Skip to main content
opinion

Joachim Gauck, the president of Germany, answered questions from Doug Saunders of the Globe and Mail and Nicolas Bérubé of La Presse this week as he prepared to visit Ottawa. It is a testy moment between the two countries: shortly after he arrived, German officials suggested that they might not approve the comprehensive Canada-EU free-trade deal, CETA, unless changes are made. There has also been dissonance over the response to Russia's incursion into Ukraine, and within NATO over the best response to the Islamic State's invasion of parts of Syria and Iraq.

Globe and Mail: You are visiting Canada at a moment of change, as the European Union concludes a major free-trade agreement with Canada and as our countries are deeply engaged in international financial bodies, in NATO and in other crucial decisions. How do you view the transatlantic relationship between Germany and Canada at the moment?

Canada is a key transatlantic partner for Germany. Our countries are bound by a close friendship, we share many fundamental beliefs and values, and we work together in a spirit of mutual trust in international institutions and alliances – the United Nations, the G7 and NATO. The importance of our friendship is especially evident in international crises, such as the ones we are currently witnessing in northern Iraq or in Ukraine.

Canada is a prospering, innovative and outward-looking country. And Germany can learn much from its experience with immigration and its successful integration policy. Furthermore, there is still quite considerable scope for more intensive economic and academic cooperation between our countries. That is why I am accompanied by a high-level business delegation. Not only Canada's large reserves of raw materials offer good opportunities for developing our trade. CETA, the comprehensive economic and trade agreement you mentioned, could lend our economic relations a new quality.

Earlier this year, you suggested that the time may be ripe for a greater role for Germany in resolving international conflicts, including a greater military role if necessary. In your opinion, what makes this point in time a good time for this? What do you say to German citizens who feel their country should maintain a non-assertive role in the world?

Germany has undergone a remarkable transformation since the abominable crimes it committed in the last century, since the establishment of the Federal Republic and, finally, the end of the division of Europe. Today, we have a functioning state governed by the rule of law and a stable democracy in which civil and human rights are respected and social justice is highly valued. In my speech to the Munich Security Conference, I said that this is a good Germany, the best we have ever had. All of this has contributed to the respect and great confidence which Germany now enjoys and which I experience time and again during my trips abroad. Our country is seen as a reliable partner and mediator. We should use our influence in a responsible manner. We should, for example, use both political and diplomatic means to help prevent conflicts in conjunction with our partners and, once a conflict has broken out, to resolve it as soon as possible and as peacefully as possible.

We Germans are currently having a very intensive debate on Germany's responsibility beyond its own borders and what exactly this entails, also with regard to current international crises. I am glad we are having this debate about how we see ourselves and our role in the world.

You were very active in the commemorations of the First World War this summer. According to a recent poll, only 19 per cent of Germans believe their country was "chiefly responsible" for WWI. The question of guilt in WWI is a complex one, of course, but do you see this as a fact that a new generation wants to put the "war years" behind, and not rehash the past?

I'm convinced that we must not forget what happened; indeed we have to remind ourselves time and again. Our mature understanding of democracy today is based on our abhorrence of certain chapters in our history and of what was possible. And I often find that young people are especially aware of this. Although we should not ritualise our remembrance too much, we should examine it again and again. For we need it in order to learn the right lessons from history.

You recently criticized Russia's invasion in eastern Ukraine by saying "History teaches us that territorial concessions often only increase the appetite of aggressors." Do you think Europe and the West in general have been too complacent regarding Russia's military involvement in Ukraine?

No, I don't think so. On the contrary, the European Union, Canada, the United States, the entire West – all of us are very much engaged in the Ukraine crisis and have been from the outset. The German government has been holding intensive talks with all sides for months in order to help de-escalate matters. At the same time, new sanctions have been necessary on repeated occasions because Russia was authorising or initiating further escalation. We must not forget that the current crisis was triggered by the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and of its territorial integrity. We condemn that and do not recognise the annexation of Crimea.

Recently, political figures around the world, from Hillary Clinton in the U.S. to Prime Minister David Cameron in the U.K., have been comparing Vladimir Putin's incursion into Ukraine with the Third Reich's invasion of the Sudetenland and Poland. Are these comparisons to your country's darkest historical moment distasteful or inappropriate? Is it reasonable to make such analogies?

Of course, the situation today is not the same as before the outbreak of the Second World War. The historical context was completely different. Nevertheless, this history bestows a special responsibility on us not only to resolve the conflicts in our neighbourhood peacefully but also to refuse to stand idly by – in other words, to give an unequivocal response, including, when necessary, appropriate sanctions.

You recently talked about a new anti-semitism in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. Can you elaborate about what it means, and what state and civil society can do about it?

In Germany, as elsewhere, aggressive anti-semitic sentiments were expressed during several demonstrations on the Israel-Palestine conflict this summer. Traditional anti-semitism in Germany and other European countries came together here with a new anti-semitism which is found in certain migrant communities. I find that very worrying indeed. However, the overwhelming majority of my fellow Germans have distanced themselves from this. Recently, the Muslim community organised a day of action against racism and extremism. And at a major rally in Berlin two weeks ago, I and Chancellor Merkel witnessed once more that anti-semitic comments in Germany don't go unchallenged. The public, the media and politicians are united in resolutely rejecting these shameful sentiments and condemning them in the strongest possible terms.

Follow related authors and topics

Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Interact with The Globe