"We want to see this war end, it is in Russian hands. Russia could do this tomorrow if it were to withdraw all its units from all Ukrainian territory and recognize its sovereignty. That has to be the end result of the war," Germany's ambassador to Israel, Steffen Seibert, says in an interview with Israel Hayom to mark a year since the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
The conversation with Seibert took place in late January, the same day that Russian President Vladimir Putin and United States President Joe Biden gave speeches to mark a year to the war. While Putin gave a listless speech about Russia's economic resilience and for the umpteenth time placed responsibility for the war on Ukraine, Biden put his emphasis on what for the Kremlin has been one of two decisive surprises over the past year – namely that the Western democracies are continuing to stand by Kyiv (the other surprise has been the fierce resistance encountered by the Russian army and the resilience of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his regime)
Particularly surprising for Russia in the above context has been the European Union, which was seen by Moscow as a convoluted, hesitant, and easily divisible entity. Germany, Europe's strongest economy, held a special place in Russia's perspective of the West because of the special relationship between Bonn (which prior to the reunification of Germany was the capital of West Germany) and Moscow.
Whether due to historical guilt because of Germany's attack on the Soviet Union in World War II; because of the German economy's dependence on cheap Russian natural gas, which began back in the days of the Soviet Union, and had been expected to become even stronger yet with the scheduled coming online of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline; or whether because of the drab image of Germany's leader Chancellor Olaf Scholz, the Kremlin was convinced that it would be able to count on Berlin. Perhaps this should be said another way: Moscow didn't believe that Berlin would become one of the focal points of support for Ukraine as the war went on.
The taboo has been lifted
The change was dramatic: From a country that refused to heed Ukrainian calls not to progress with certification of Nord Stream 2 because it could serve as a means of extortion; from a country that before the invasion refused to allow British planes to cross its skies to supply weapons to Kyiv and itself at first only agreed to send the Ukrainians helmets, Germany has become the third largest supplier of military assistance to Ukraine (along with Poland), having provided it with 2.4 billion euros worth of military aid. Only the United States with 44.3 billion and the United Kingdom with 4.9 billion have given more to Ukraine (according to figures from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy). Kyiv criticized Berlin for wasting time, but in July, 2022 the Germans sent 30 Gepard mobile anti-aircraft guns, and in October it supplied Ukraine with advanced IRIS-T aerial defense systems; most importantly, however, in January of this year, Germany lifted its taboo on supplying Ukraine with the Leopard 2 tank, the most common tank model among NATO armies. This was a decision that paved the way for other countries in possession of the Leopard to also provide it to Ukraine. According to Ambassador Seibert, all in all, Germany has provided assistance worth 13 billion euros in addition to its part in assistance provided by the European Union as a whole.
"The European Union, and in particular Germany, has undergone a deep change over the past year, because until the war we did not supply weapons to war or conflict zones, with the exception of one specific incident, the military operations against the Islamic State (ISIS), to prevent the genocide of the Yazidis. The Russian war against Ukraine is such a gross violation of international law that Germany, the European Union, and NATO were forced to respond; all in all, they have met the challenge. I believe that Russia did not expect the European Union and NATO to respond with such determination and with such a united front. In my opinion, if there is anything good to come out of this tragedy, it is the fact that we were able to come together to meet this challenge and to provide unprecedented assistance to a country in danger."
Q: Will your assistance include weaponry – such as the fighter jets that Kyiv is asking for – that could shorten the route to a Ukrainian victory?
"We provided, and continue to provide, aerial defense systems, tanks, rocket launchers, and ammunition to give Ukraine what it requires to defend itself against this violent aggression. Any additional request from Kyiv needs to be discussed both in Germany and with our partners. That is how we dealt with the issue of the Leopard tanks: there was discussion at the national level and with our partners. I cannot forecast what the future holds, but up until now we have provided a great amount of military assistance and we will continue to do so because we believe that this battle is not just a battle for Ukraine's self-determination and its survival as a nation, but it is also a battle for the liberty of Europe."
Q: So you aren't ruling out the possibility of supplying fighter jets?
"That isn't something that is being discussed right now. The past year showed us that ruling something out on the spot is never wise. There are arguments for and against to be considered and that is what we will do."
A new low
Even after a year of war, support for Ukraine among Europeans and among Germans, in particular, remains relatively high. According to data collected by Eurobarometer, 74% of Europeans support the EU's assistance to Kyiv (the Swedes lead with a 97% support rate, while the Germans are slightly below average at 73% and the Bulgarians close the list with 48%). But here as well, the picture is more complex: A poll, conducted by IPSOS at the beginning of last December (prior to the approval for the supply of tanks), showed that the number of Germans who believe the war is not their problem had grown by 11% compared to March-April period, and the percentage of Germans supporting weapons shipments to Ukraine had dropped to a low of 48%. A Euroskopia poll conducted in nine European countries and published in January found that 56% of the residents of those countries supported continued arms supplies while 48% supported a peace agreement even at the cost of Ukrainian territorial compromise.
"Sometimes we hear voices that say to the Ukrainians: 'Listen, why don't you compromise on this and that and then everything will be resolved," continues Seibert. "Such statements are very troubling. I do not think anybody has the right to say to a country that has been attacked should give up territories so that we are not further troubled by the war.
"The Ukrainians are fighting a heroic battle because they know that their fate is at stake and because they see the war crimes committed in the villages and towns. Germany has sent specialists to document war crimes; one day all of this will be over, and those responsible for the crimes and those who gave them the orders must be punished.
"Don't forget how much this war makes the Russians themselves suffer. I'm not only talking about the six-figure Russian losses, which don't appear to trouble the Kremlin at all but about the fact that Russia has regressed decades backward to a very dark chapter in its history. I am convinced that Russia will be a poorer country in the future; the war is stealing the future of Russian children. The fact that Russia supplies almost no gas anymore to Europe is a watershed moment for us and for them."
Q: Perhaps this irrationality is part of the German and European miscalculation with regard to the Putin regime? After 2014, there were contacts to end the war and reach an agreement in Donbas (the Minsk agreements and the Normandy Format) and it seems that you tried to engage in dialogue with Putin despite the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas. Was that a mistake?
"No, I don't believe that was a mistake. Berlin and Paris never had illusions about the nature of the Russian regime. We knew Putin's deep disdain for democracy in his own country and in neighboring countries. In fact, it was Germany and France that led the international response to the annexation of Crimea with condemnations and sanctions, and, of course, the non-recognitions of the annexation. That was what led to the Minsk Agreement.
"The Minsk Agreement was far from perfect, of course, but that was what was possible at the time. The conflict was frozen in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, which belong to Ukraine and which should never have been put under Russian and separatist control. Without that freeze, the war would have eaten away at further regions of Ukraine as Putin is trying to do now. The plans for a Novorossiyya (New Russia) stretching (from the Donbas) to Odesa were there and plain to see on Russian television screens."
Let the citizens decide
Seibert, 62, a former TV journalist, was appointed to the position of ambassador to Israel last year after eleven-and-a-half years as the chief spokesperson for the federal government – the longest time anyone spent in the post. Why Israel? "Because it is one of the most challenging and fulfilling positions in our diplomatic service," he says.
"The connection between Germany and Israel is a unique one, because of our history, because of our special commitment to Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, because of the tensions in the region, and the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is so diverse; in fact, there are many societies here within one society, so being the German ambassador here is a huge honor and a wonderful and quite difficult role. I see myself as lucky to be here."
Q: You are here at a very dramatic time. Of course, you are aware of the storm over judicial reform. What is the German government's position? Have you tried to advise Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to slow the process as the White House reportedly did?
"Any decision on the way in which the Israeli judicial system is organized must be taken by the Israeli democracy and Israeli citizens. When 300,000 people take to the streets, it is obvious to everyone who lives here just how much this issue is affecting the country. The supporters of the reform and its opponents both argue enthusiastically for their case. In Germany, things are very clear and not controversial at all: In our country, under our constitution, it is very important for there to be checks and balances.
"In our understanding, the interpretation of democracy is not that the majority receives the authority to do whatever it wishes, but that a majority elected democratically is subject to restrictions which are basic laws and fundamental rights. Our liberty is an interaction of the three branches of power. So when we talk with our colleagues in Israel, when our politicians talk with politicians here, we speak to them about our experience and our convictions.
"In a democracy, it is important that the democratically elected majority can act on what it was elected to do, but at the same time, it is important to defend the rights of minorities, and therefore these checks and balances are needed. We have conveyed this position to our Israeli colleagues, who in the end will have to take decisions in the Knesset with the agreement of Israel's citizens. In our democracy, carrying out fundamental constitutional changes needs to be done with a broad majority. We believe that to be wise."
Q: The reform has been heavily criticized in the West and the future of Israeli democracy has been called into question. Are you worried about its future?
"As I said, the relationship between Israel and Germany is unique. The values of democracy and liberty that we have shared for so long constitute an important foundation for this relationship. Therefore, we are following the situation closely."
Since arriving in Israel, Seibert's Twitter account has been extremely active. He shares his experiences and turns to his followers in Hebrew. Last August he condemned the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who, as he stood next to Chancellor Scholz in Berlin, accused Israel of "carrying out 50 Holocausts."
"The statements were wrong and unacceptable," Seibert said at the time. "Germany will never stand for any attempt to deny the singular dimension of the crimes of the Holocaust."
On the other hand, about a month ago, he was criticized after expressing concern about the "high number of casualties" in the IDF operation in Jenin. More recently, when the Public Diplomacy Minister, Galit Distal-Atbaryan tweeted that the protests against the judicial reform are financed by Iranian or German money, Seibert responded by saying that he was "disappointed."
"I have no desire to clash with ministers in the government, but I also have to stand up for my country when somebody says something wrong about it," said the ambassador, who plans to meet with Distal in the near future.
"To say that people in Kaplan street or outside the Knesset are there because of German money is completely wrong. I was also disappointed that she spoke about Iran and Germany in the same sentence because we see ourselves – and I believe our Israeli friends see it this way as well – as true friends and allies of this country.
"Iran is not just a terrible totalitarian regime, but also a state that does not accept Israel's existence and threatens it on a daily basis. I would not want for us to be spoken about in the same phrase."
Q: Let's look at it from another angle: There's a possibility that the minister's statements reflect dissatisfaction among the Israeli Right with Germany's position on civil society organizations. There's also discomfort with regard to the nature of Germany's relationship with the Palestinian Authority. Israel's ambassador to Berlin, Ron Prosor, wrote that Germany for all intents and purposes pays to slay when its money ends up in the hands of the families of terrorists. Is there anything Germany is doing wrong?
"I read Ambassador Prosor's article. He rightly attacked the pay-to-slay policy and I agree with him that this is a method that must be stopped. Germany does not provide funds directly for the Palestinian Authority budget but provides funding for specific projects in the Palestinian territories. I believe that between democratic states such as Israel and Germany, there is no need to fear such contributions to civil society and to democratic discourse. We do this in many other countries in the world. Some of these funds come from German political foundations that are completely independent of the German government in choosing the projects and programs that they support. Every time we support a project, we, first of all, check if it meets our political values, and of course if it operates within the laws. If somebody were to prove that a particular project supports terrorism, then, of course, no German government money would go to that project."
Q: There are Palestinian groups that Israel identified in 2021 as terrorist organizations working under the cover of civil society organizations. Germany does fund these groups.
"Like several countries, including the United States, we asked the Israeli government to provide evidence. We had several rounds of conversations on this issue. And as of yet, we have not been presented with clear-cut evidence. This process is still ongoing. If we see clear evidence, we will reevaluate our position; this goes without saying."
Q: Can you promise us that no German money is going to the families of terrorists or in any way supporting them?
"There are projects that in our opinion contribute to Israeli civil society. For example, improving the economy in the Palestinian territories and increasing awareness of democracy, which are also in Israel's interest. We do not support terrorism. If anybody were to say to us, 'This is a contribution that supports terrorism and there is evidence to support this,' we would take it very seriously. As you can imagine, the accusation of support for terrorism is a very grave one and we would examine this carefully and act in accordance."
Q: Are you aware that such support can be politically colored?
"I am aware of the fact that security is the number one political issue. As a German, when you come to live here, even for a short period, one comes to understand that security is not a theoretical matter. It is something very practical. You have to go to a safe room when there are rockets being shot from Gaza, you hear about a horrifying terrorist attack at a bus stop that kills two children. That is something you can only understand when you live here. And it is clear that all future policy must take into account the issue of security. I am also convinced that a political solution to this conflict can lead to more stable and long-term security for people in Israel. And that is our interest as Israel's friends. That won't happen next week, but it is important to continue working on this and not to dismiss it as a delusion."
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
