Not even an icy welcome for German reunification

[Skybird]

Long but substantial read:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...719848,00.html

It tells parts of the story slightly different than what we believed to know, due to the fact that last year many secret document had been released by the Germans and were allowed to be examined uncensored.

If there still were doubts, than this should make it clear that in principle EVERYBODY was completely pissed by the prospect of Germany reunificating - with the only exception of the the Germans, of course.

[Catfish]

The article in the printed issue is much better, apparently the Foreign Office has allowed to publish some material ...

"We have beaten the Germans two times, and now they are back again!"
Maggie T.

At least they did not again declare war to Germany, though this had been considered by Thatcher and Mitterand, if only for a very short time

Greetings,
Catfish

[Sailor Steve]

Interesting reading. It's always hard to get someone who has lived through a war to admit that the former enemy might not be all bad.

Originally Posted by Skybird

EVERYBODY was completely pissed by the prospect of Germany reunificating - with the only exception of the the Germans, of course.

I wasn't.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I wasn't.

Öh - nations I mean. And it seems to be true, no European nation wanted reunification of Germany. None. And for long time, the US and the USSR as well. I always was believing reports saying that Gorbatchev was in favour of it from much earlier on, although he still seems to have been amongst the earliest major players changing their minds.

And that the Brits until the end wanted special rights to hold sovereign British manouvers on former GDR soil after reunification, just showed how very pissed they were indeed. The Americans at some point started to be pragmatic and wanted to secure that Germany stays in NATO. The french conpsirated and playxed the britsh versus the Germans and the Germans versus the british. And it seems to be true and coifnirmed indeed now: the softening-up of the planned Euro currency and the earlier-than-planned introduction of it, was part of their price to accept Germany reuniting.

The article again reminds of that the Russians were angry about the eastern expansion of NATO for justified reasons, and that NATO has rightout lied to them 20 years ago. We should not forget that that way we may need to share some part of the responsibility that Putinism has grown strong in Russia. If Russian trust would not have been betrayed in following years after reunification, with all that constant moving East of NATO's borders against clear and direct promises earlier, the U-turn in Putin's thinking - who originally was a once very Europe-friendly politican who wanted to move Russia closer to Europe, and for that even was compared to Alexander who envisoned the same modernisation and pro-Western reorientation at his time - maybe would not have taken place, or would not have become so extreme. That Putin strengthens Russian central authorities again like in Soviet times, has somethign to do with his change of mind, and that he realises that Russia strands alone and that NATO cannot be trusted. At least that is how things necessarily must appear to the Russian mind. Russia moving closer to Europe, like I thought ten years ago that it would be possible, I cannot imagine anymore for the forseeable future - meaning my lifetime by that.

On the other hand, the German example shows how historic things can develope a self-dynamic so unimaginably fast and irresistible that everybody gets rolled over by how fast things are changing.

[GoldenRivet]

i remember much fanfare and celebration in the states when the wall fell.

I was a young kid at the time... but i do remember many people being very excited and happy about it. even my ww2 vet grandfather seemed happy to see that country moving toward a more peaceful and unified existence if memory serves.

I remember some weeks after the wall fell, our teacher had a rather large chunk of it... about the size of a brick i guess. It was passed around the room as we all got a chance to hold that little chunk of history.

[Skybird]

Nations and people are not the same. Some constitutions seem to imply that, and democracy claims that, in a way, but it simply is wishful thinking only. Nations are monsters living a life of their own - and often without the people living in them being aware of it.

While indeed the ordinary, "private" people in most countries probably indeed meant it honest when congratulating the Germans, politically the issue was another story. Leaders and politicians obviously were anything but pleased by what was happening. After fourty years, one had arranged oneself with the status quo in Europe and Germany, and very comfoprtably so - the German division was to the advanatge and greater influence of practically all other nations in the West. Reunification thus necessarily came at the loss of such boosts in influence for the other nations - and not only for the big players like France and England, but also medium powers like Italy and small ones like Holland, Belgium, Denmark.

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Nations and people are not the same. Some constitutions seem to imply that, and democracy claims that, in a way, but it simply is wishful thinking only. Nations are monsters living a life of their own - and often without the people living in them being aware of it.

That's a very European attitude to have. Thankfully this way of thinking is not as prevalent on this side of the pond.

While indeed the ordinary, "private" people in most countries probably indeed meant it honest when congratulating the Germans, politically the issue was another story.

That doesn't really matter. Politics, at least American politics, is all about public perception and if the people feel a certain way about an issue then right or wrong the politicians must soon follow or risk being tossed out on their ears come the next election. Unless, of course the people can be led to believe that their government has a life of it's own and nothing they can do will change it. Maybe that dependence on public perception is what makes our leaders so "pragmatic" to use your term.

Also, if I were you I wouldn't be so quick to view the people from allied countries as being uniformly on the side of the Germans when it came to reunification. In 1989 there were still plenty of WW2 vets alive who had first hand memories of the darker side of the German psyche, and while I generally agree with the concept of not blaming the present German generations for the sins of their grandfathers, German resurgence was going to be viewed with a certain amount of trepidation and that would be reflected in their national leaders, mostly veterans of WW2 themselves.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Öh - nations I mean.

I know; I was just trying to lighten the mood a little. I think we here in the States were more for it, being as we were a lot farther from the actual war and more willing to forgive and forget. After all it was President Wilson who tried to get the British and French to modify the reparations demands after the First War.

[Skybird]

They just released another analysis paper on basis of documents that before were kept secret, examining the role of sacrificing the Deutsche Mark for reunification. While what it says may not be wrong, I think it is not complete, because the priority Paris has traditionally put on trying to dominate Europe by establish a centralised European administration inside which Paris hopes to have a decisive word, is not being mentioned with even just a single word. Before reunification, there already were rifts between Bonn and Paris over currency unions and the role the EU should play, and Germany was very much opposing the visions of the French - much over fears that in past years we have learned to have had some very realistic basis indeed.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...719940,00.html

Maybe it was a mistake of Germany to think in terms of feared time pressure, and due to that pressure allowing a lousy compromise with the French. As a price of reunification, I think the Euro and the current state of the EU supertstate is topo high - for all of Europe, not just Germany. Article 23 of the German constitution always allowed reunification if the German states voluntarily would agree on such a step, and if they would have done so (and the civil disobedience in the GDR was working for the destruction of a political elite that could have wanted to prevent that), in the long run there would have been little any of the Allies could have legally done against that, practically. But the diplomatic fallout maybe was feared too much.

It has been avoided at the cost of an even bigger economic and financial fallout, and a continental superstate eroding freedom more and more. And that is quite some price tag for the interests of just 78 million people in the middle of Europe. Now, almost half a billion pay the price for that.