Auswärtiges Amt

http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/www/en/ausgabe_archiv?archiv_id=4155
Tuesday 28.10.03 / 01:08

Interviews

"You can't use war to force disarmament" - Interview with Federal Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer in Stern magazine, 5 March 2003

Stern: Minister Fischer, Saddam Hussein has started to destroy his first missiles. From Washington we hear that this is all just a ploy. When you talk to your friend Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, do you have the impression a war can still be avoided?

Fischer: Our relations are close. We speak about everything but our talks are confidential.

Stern: So is war a foregone conclusion?

Fischer: There is no way I can speculate about this in public. As long as the US has not taken a final decision here and officially informed us, I proceed from a different assumption. Nothing is too much trouble for peace. Because if there is military action against Iraq, then this is a very long-term, very risky decision. The US then has to assume responsibility for the cohesion of the country and the stability of the entire region. Before taking such a step, all other peaceful means have to be exhaustively explored.

Stern: But it seems that even the destruction of missiles isn't enough to change President Bush's mind. What next?

Fischer: The missiles are not something that Iraq has concealed. It reported them, they were examined by the inspectors, their range proved to be too long and now they are being destroyed. That is exactly the procedure laid down in UN Resolutions 1441 and 1284. Why should this successful process now be abandoned?

Stern: Because above all the French and Germans are possibly underestimating the danger emanating from Iraq.

Fischer: Iraq is being monitored much more stringently today than in the past. This may not be enough yet, but the risk coming from Iraq is considerably less today.

Stern: What would actually be the problem if democracy were to miraculously emerge in Iraq thanks to the Americans?

Fischer: None. I am not a vehement opponent of regime change. It is always exhilarating when a nation is liberated and a dictator overthrown. But this does not justify a war from outside. Non-military means have not been exhausted.

Stern: Even the hard-liners in the Bush Administration are saying they only want to bring democracy to the Middle East.

Fischer: I have my doubts that a large Western army on a long-term deployment between the Euphrates and the Tigris will achieve this goal. The question is whether the inherent risks are not considerably greater than the benefits.

Stern: But if Saddam is overthrown it will only be because the Americans have built up impressive military pressure.

Fischer: It's not that simple. I would have liked to see other priorities set after Afghanistan. For us to really tackle the problem of terrorism, religious hatred and weapons of mass destruction. I would have preferred us to have thought about the Saudi proposal of seeking a serious solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. I very much doubt that Iraq really was the right priority.

Stern: When the decisive meeting of the UN Security Council comes, 13 of the 15 states could vote in favour of a second resolution authorizing war and Germany would be isolated.

Fischer: If there is a vote on such a resolution at all. And before we ask whose side we are on we will have to ask ourselves where we stand. I have the impression that there is currently broad support amongst the international community for the Franco-German-Russian Memorandum, calling upon Hans Blix to rapidly present a list of priorities which outlines precisely what still has to be done.

Stern: So you are not concerned that Germany will stand alone with Syria at the end of the day?

Fischer: No, I'm not concerned about that.

Stern: Would a second resolution tabled by the British and the Americans definitely be rejected by the Federal Republic?

Fischer: It isn't just that we see no need for a resolution to end the inspection process and open the way for military action. Rather we see this as a step in the wrong direction.

Stern: So there will be a German "no" in the Security Council. Or just an abstention perhaps?

Fischer: I follow the principle that I only talk about decisions when it is clear what is really at stake. Nevertheless, our negative stance is clear.

Stern: The US feels Germany is already isolated.

Fischer: Well, repeating this ad infinitum doesn't make it any more true. Our contributions are almost unparalleled within the Alliance. What are the supporters of military action contributing? If you look a little more closely, you see that there isn't much there apart from this verbal support.

Stern: How come you're so sure that you will get a majority? We read time and again that US envoys are travelling the world with a fat chequebook to bring wavering candidates such as Chile, Angola and Guinea into line.

Fischer: You can also read too much! Why don't we let the Security Council do its work? And then let's see.

Stern: The Americans are pursuing a type of domino theory. If you bring democracy to one Arab country, the rest will follow suit. Can you relate to this?

Fischer: This isn't a theory I subscribe to. Bringing democracy to the Muslim-Arab World is a central goal. But can we achieve this goal through military action against Iraq? Looking a little at the history of the country, we can see that Iraq is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious tribal society. There is a real danger that Iraq could be balkanized after a war. The entire region is a tinderbox, there are other regional conflicts where terrorism is rife. Let me say again, my great concern is that the US and many other countries, not just those in the West, have to reckon with far-reaching consequences.

Stern: So is US policy on the Middle East a recipe for disaster?

Fischer: Those are words I would never use.

Stern: Are preventive wars permissible to prevent a greater evil?

Fischer: In the 21st century you can't use war to force disarmament. To my mind, we have to develop an effective international monitoring regime with effective instruments.

Stern: How is that meant to work? Europe is at loggerheads over the preventive war.

Fischer: I'm not as sceptical here. There will always be different voices in Europe, it will never be a homogenous continental state with all its peoples, languages and cultures. This diversity is in fact one of Europe's strengths.

Stern: Were you surprised that so many Eastern European countries prefer to follow the US rather than the Franco-German axis?

Fischer: Axes are something I don't speak of. But I understand that the Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Poles and all the others now want to lead their own lives in freedom after 50 years of foreign rule and Soviet occupation. That determines their perception of the US.

Stern: Did President Chirac not give them a rude brush-off for exactly that reason?

Fischer: I also understand Jacques Chirac very well.

Stern: You understand everyone.

Fischer: That's the way you have to act in Europe. There can be no united Europe without an understanding for the history and development of individual states. (...)

Stern: Ms Merkel tried to repair the seriously damaged German-American relationship. You ought to be grateful to her.

Fischer: You must be joking. German-American relations are not seriously damaged. What is more, Ms Merkel's repair efforts weren't all that fantastic.

Stern: But was she not right to criticize the Federal Government for entrenching its position so early on: no matter what the UN says, we're not joining in?

Fischer: If Ms Merkel now says she is in favour of a second resolution, that is for the draft supported by the US, Britain and Spain, then she ought to tell the German people. I wish her the best of luck.

Stern: How do you plan to improve relations with the US?

Fischer: We are living in a democracy and, bearing in mind just how much we owe America, the sympathy and closeness I feel to this country are unshakeable.

Stern: Also to the Administration?

Fischer: To the country. Transatlantic relations are indispensable, our Western integration is also a belated democratic revolution, a revolution we unfortunately were never able to stage on our own. If Germany had disposed of Hitler itself ...

Stern: With a preventive war perhaps it would all have been nipped in the bud.

Fischer: Pardon me, but that is something quite different. You can't compare the situation today with 1938. Has Saddam been "appeased"? Has the world concluded despicable agreements with Saddam? Did we give something up to him? Do the immediate neighbours feel threatened? Is it not true that Saddam Hussein was much weaker at the start of this crisis than during the Gulf War in 1991? That is a completely inappropriate comparison.

Stern: That's not what the Americans think. They accuse the Europeans of knuckling under to any dictator.

Fischer: I'm sorry but Germany was there when Milosevic's butchering was stopped. We were there when an insane carnage was to be prevented in Macedonia. And we were there when Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden were to be removed from power in Afghanistan. The case was compelling each time.

Stern: Milosevic was only overthrown when the Americans intervened.

Fischer: It wasn't that simple. In recent years, the Federal Chancellor and I have put our coalition on the line three times to secure involvement in military action at the side of the US and other allies. Why? Because we saw no alternative solution. But based on this very conviction, I say to you that there are alternatives to war in Iraq. I don't see why we shouldn't use them.

Stern: Is Europe really so weak because the US is so strong? Or does Europe have to increase its military strength?

Fischer: I don't think that we are weak because the Americans are so strong. It is all in the hands of the Europeans. We have to modernize where necessary. But I think it is a mistake to believe that the military, important as it is, mind you, is enough for security in the 21st century.

Stern: Does Europe need a strong president?

Fischer: I don't want to pre-empt developments but I believe we need a strong constitution.

Stern: And a strong president?

Fischer: Either one or two. I would have preferred one but I have to accept that is perhaps too early for some.

Stern: Would the post appeal to you?

Fischer: You can forget Joschka Fischer where you see the word "president".

(...)

published: Wednesday 05.03.03

© 1995 - 2003 Auswärtiges Amt