Intentions and consequences

Angela Merkel became the head of the German Federal Government in 2005, succeeding the Social Democrats Gerhard Schroeder, who had dominated the German political scene for the previous eight years (1998–2005). The foundations of her rule, however, were not laid upon her arrival, but were significantly shaped during Schroeder's tenure. Those foundations reflect Germany's three key dependencies: trade dependence on China, energy dependence on Russia, and security dependence on the United States of America. These dependencies, the last of which dates back to the end of the Second World War, while the other two arose during the XNUMXs, shaped and determined the geopolitical position of Germany, which she led when she was chancellor.

photo: ap / tanjug

NATO EXPANSION AND RUSSIAN INTERVENTION IN UKRAINE

Angela Merkel's memories of meetings with Vladimir Putin in the period 2007-2008. provide us with a valuable insight into the current geopolitical situation. These testimonies shed light on key elements of Russian foreign policy and on the motives behind Russia's current aggression against Ukraine. Understanding those events through the lens of this autobiography can contribute to a deeper understanding of the consequences that this conflict has on international relations.

In Western political and intellectual circles, the prevailing interpretation today is that the aggression against Ukraine is an expression of Russia's desire to restore its historical sphere of influence. This undertaking, according to many, is motivated by both geopolitical and ideological goals. On the one hand, Russian aggression is seen as an open challenge to the liberal international order, designed to counter the expansion of institutions like NATO and the European Union. At the same time, it aims to undermine democratic norms in countries that accepted Western values ​​after the collapse of communism in 1989.

Other analysts, on the other hand, emphasize that the goal of this intervention is to revive the idea of ​​the Russian empire. Through a mix of political, cultural, and strategic means, Russia is seeking to reshape regional relations, strengthen Russian nationalism, and regain the great power status it enjoyed during the Russian Empire in the 19th century. In both cases, a similar pattern of imperial aspirations is observed: increasing Russian influence in European countries that were once controlled by the Soviet Union or were part of the Russian Empire. This alleged ambition not only aims to destabilize European countries, but also poses fundamental challenges to the international order, which is based on respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity. In this sense, the events in Ukraine represent not only a regional crisis, but also a turning point for the future of global politics.

Angela Merkel's memories of meetings with Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, during 2007/2008. they can help us understand the background of the current conflict in Ukraine a little differently (more realistically). She met Putin for the first time during intergovernmental consultations in Tomsk in 2006. The meeting was marked by discussions of the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO expansion and Nord Stream 1.

Already then, Putin assessed that the collapse of the Soviet Union was "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century." Merkel points out that Putin interpreted this position through the prism of the disappearance of the bipolar world, where Russia lost its place in deciding key global issues with the loss of the Soviet Union. The process of marginalization of Russia, carried out often in a way that was humiliating, reinforced Putin's ambition to restore Russia's former role on the world stage.

Talks about Nord Stream 1, put into operation in 2011, reveal his willingness to use energy resources as a means of geopolitical influence. This went hand in hand with Putin's provocative gestures, such as being late for meetings or bringing his dog to talks, which Angela Merkel sees as part of a strategy of subtle dominance and testing of interlocutors. Those symbolic moves followed a serious geopolitical vision and a clearly expressed desire for Russia to once again become a factor in redefining relations among world powers, which it lost with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In other words, Angela Merkel was already aware at the beginning of her mandate that Putin was not bluffing and how he is seriously determined to oppose the expansion of NATO and use the control of key energy resources, necessary for Germany and Europe, for geopolitical goals.

The biggest problem in relations between the West and Russia was the expansion of NATO. Angela Merkel recalls that in 2007, at the G8 summit, Putin expressed his strong opposition to plans for expansion into Ukraine and Georgia, considering them a threat to Russia's security. He was equally against American plans to install an anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic, which he perceived as a direct threat, imposed by the West without room for compromise.

The problem culminated at the NATO summit in Bucharest in 2008, when then-outgoing US President George W. Bush first publicly proposed the entry of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. Germany and France, led by Merkel and Sarkozy, opposed this proposal, believing that such a move would provoke a sharp reaction from Russia and destabilize the region. Their resistance prevented enlargement, but they proposed stronger ties between Ukraine and Georgia to the European Union. At the time, Merkel believed that such a decision (stopping NATO expansion) would appease Putin, but she herself (silently) admits that she was wrong. At the end of the summit, Putin clearly told her: "You will not be chancellor forever, and Ukraine and Georgia will one day join NATO." I will prevent it."

Putin's activities against the further expansion of NATO began immediately after the Bucharest summit. Armed conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia due to the secession of these two provinces from Georgia, in which Russia helped the separatists, destabilized Georgia already in 2008. Interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine began in 2013, when it became clear that the pro-Russian President Yanukovych would have to leave. After the Maidan revolution and the escape of Yanukovych in 2014, there followed the annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk. In her memoirs, Angela Merkel points out that Putin's idea of ​​creating a buffer zone between Russia and the West is key to understanding his actions since 2008.

The chancellor's opposition to NATO expansion was driven by pragmatic reasons. Aware of Germany's energy dependence on Russia, as well as the risk of new security problems in Europe, its goal was to preserve the level of well-being of German citizens and European stability. She understood that neither NATO nor the USA would intervene militarily to defend Ukraine, because a direct confrontation with Russia could lead to a nuclear disaster. Her policy, though contested, was a form of realpolitik – balancing Europe's security needs with avoiding open conflict with Russia.

WESTERN BALKANS

Angela Merkel devotes only a few pages in her autobiography to the issue of the expansion of the European Union to the Western Balkans, which gives a rough idea of ​​the importance this issue has for Germany and Europe compared to other issues that were current at the time (migrant crisis, eurozone crisis...) . Merkel saw enlargement as the key to long-term stability and peace in the region. Despite the fact that Slovenia and Croatia became EU members in 2004 or In 2013, other Western Balkan countries were facing serious political tensions. Merkel is referring to tensions between Serbia and Kosovo, as well as within Bosnia and Herzegovina itself. She recognizes that the key problems in the Western Balkans stemmed from unresolved political and ethnic conflicts after the breakup of Yugoslavia and the wars of the XNUMXs. Serbia did not recognize Kosovo's independence, which represented one of the biggest obstacles to stability in the region.

In order to speed up the integration process and reduce the risk of new conflicts, Angela Merkel launched the Berlin Process in 2014, a platform intended to strengthen cooperation between the countries of the Western Balkans and the European Union. In diplomatic terms, this undertaking was a pragmatic step towards bringing the region closer to European standards and values, while at the same time providing EU support in overcoming the political and economic challenges facing the Balkans. Practically, this meant that Serbia and Kosovo, as well as the ethnic groups in Bosnia, had to end their conflicts before joining the EU. The Berlin Process offered an informal platform to achieve this.

In the book, Merkel does not discuss the success of the Berlin process. Nevertheless, we could stop here and ask ourselves: didn't the Berlin process provide an exceptional opportunity for reconsidering the enlargement policy? Ten years later, the results speak for themselves - the Berlin process did not contribute to reducing tensions in the region, nor did it provide a clearer perspective of membership for the Western Balkans.

Paradoxically, this initiative of Angela Merkel, although designed with good intentions, allowed the European Union to withdraw for a while from direct institutional engagement with the region, leaving the key responsibility to local political actors. However, the EU managed to maintain dominant control over the processes, creating a kind of asymmetry of power and responsibility.

The author is a professor at the FPN University in Belgrade