[ad_1]
This was back in 1991, just as the Cold War was ending and the countries of Eastern and Central Europe were making the transition to democracy.
The foreign ministers of France, Germany and Poland met in the German city of Weimar, the birthplace of writers Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and Friedrich Schiller.
This is also where a constitution was promulgated in 1918, designed to give Germany a chance to establish democracy while dealing with the devastating consequences of World War I. The short existence of what was called the Weimar Republic was plagued by political instability. The rise of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi movement in 1933.
The three foreign ministers’ meeting in newly reunified Germany in 1991 was full of symbolism and was designed to forge a special relationship between Berlin, Paris, and Warsaw . If France and Germany were able to end centuries of hostility and war since 1945, why couldn’t that model be used to reconcile Poland and Germany?
This triangle, known as the Weimar Triangle, created a web of economic, political, social, and cultural relationships to build trust and foster cooperation across borders.
The regional federation has had its ups and downs since its founding. The lowest point was when Poland’s conservative Law and Justice (PiS) party was in power from 2015 to 2023. The party was anti-German and highly skeptical of the European Union. It also called for reparations for the damage Germany inflicted on Poland during World War II.
Russia’s second invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 highlighted the differences between Berlin, Paris, and Warsaw. Poland was right to say that Russia had already warned Western countries about Vladimir Putin’s imperialist ambitions when it invaded Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014. The interlocutors were not willing to heed such warnings. February 2022 changed everything, and it could change the dynamics of the Weimar Triangle.
The change occurred on March 15, when Prime Minister Olaf Scholz invited French President Emmanuel Macron and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk to Berlin.
The summit was very necessary. Particularly in recent months, questions about how to support Ukraine have led to sniping between the three countries, especially Germany and France. The public sparring was turning into an ugly competition over who was providing the most political and military support to Ukraine.
Indeed, at a time when EU cohesion is more at stake than ever and President Vladimir Putin has indicated no intention of withdrawing from Ukraine, this war has the potential to pit these three countries against each other.
Against this background, the summit aimed to bring the three largest members of the EU and NATO into closer cooperation on Ukraine, European security, and transatlantic relations.
All three issues are critical to the continent’s stability, as acknowledged by all three leaders. Nevertheless, for historical and political reasons, they have different views on Europe’s future trajectory.
Let’s take Poland as an example. The Tusk government, like its predecessor, wants Ukraine to: win war. Warsaw’s response was to provide all possible military support to Ukraine to achieve that.
As for Macron, he has changed his attitude towards both Ukraine and Russia. Paris, once keen to build a European security architecture with Moscow, has abandoned that idea and is supplying Kiev with advanced weapons. President Macron openly said in Berlin that his goal was to “never let Russia win.” Paris and Warsaw are strengthening their cooperation over Russia.
But Scholz has never once uttered the word “victory.” At a joint press conference on March 15, the prime minister reiterated what has become his mantra: Berlin will support Ukraine “for as long as necessary.”
Germany, at least under Scholz’s Social Democratic government, has yet to grasp the implications of a Russian victory for Ukraine in particular and Europe in general.
Somehow these Social Democrats united around the party’s faction leader Rolf Mützenich and opposed not only the sending of Taurus missiles to Ukraine, but also opposed the sending of Taurus missiles to Ukraine . They seem ambivalent about helping Ukraine to the extent that it can regain some of the territory Russia has captured.
“What is needed is understanding, prudence and clarity. And that is what the Prime Minister is considering as head of government,” Mutzenich said.
However, Johan Wadepulu, deputy leader of the opposition Christian Democratic Party, responded: [the SPD’s] What appeared to be prudent only served to fuel Mr. Putin’s attacks on Ukraine. That’s the result. ”
The Ukraine war is also raising major questions in France, Germany and Poland about the direction of Europe’s inadequate security, defense and foreign policy. These issues are a bone of contention between the three countries, and all relate to transatlantic relations and who will occupy the White House after the US presidential election in November.
That’s why the Weimar Triangle is so important. Rhetoric and forced smiles in front of the cameras in Berlin aside, these three powers need to work together more closely to give Europe the leadership it so desperately needs. The war in Ukraine demands it.
[ad_2]
Source link
