By Jim Geraghty
Friday, February 07, 2025
It’s safe to say that the foreign-policy-focused writers
here at National Review have not been big fans of former German
Chancellor Angela Merkel. It’s subtle, but headlines like “Ms. Merkel’s Ignorance,” “Merkel’s Nord Stream 2 Hypocrisy,” “Angela Merkel, America’s Ally (Apparently),” and “Her Inner Brezhnev” offer a hint that we at NR were a wee
bit perturbed by her decisions during her tenure.
The rest of the world has finally caught up to our
skepticism; last year, a headline in The Economist declared, “Merkel’s legacy looks increasingly terrible.”
Just about every big decision taken
by Mrs. Merkel now seems to have resulted in Germany—and often the entire
European Union—ending up worse off. Geopolitically she left the country with a
now-famous trifecta of dangerous dependencies: unable to defend itself without
America, struggling to grow without exporting to China, relying on Russian gas
to keep its industry going. The report card on the economy is if anything more
damning: 16 years of muddling through with no reforms has left Germany once
again the economic sick man of Europe.
A Financial Times columnist recently
called her “the most damaging European leader since 1945.” (That sounds like a
harsh criticism, but let’s face it, the competition for “Worst German
Chancellor of All Time” is really fierce.)
Merkel recently published her autobiography, and as the Wall Street Journal reported, it somehow left
people even more steamed about her record:
Angela Merkel wrote a 736-page
memoir to secure her crumbling legacy. The effort is backfiring.
Her new book, “Freedom”—published
in late November in nearly 30 languages—is riling up even some of her most
ardent supporters, in part because Merkel declines to consider that any of the
policies of her four-term chancellorship, from 2005 to 2021, might have been
misguided.
“Much pride, little
self-reflection” was the headline that the powerful German state
broadcaster ARD, the key media platform of Merkel’s time in power, put on
its capital bureau’s report on the book’s launch. Merkel’s own political heirs
in the Christian Democratic party say that publicity around the memoir is
damaging their current election campaign.
One of the lesser-known odd facts that I’ve been trying
to shoehorn into the thriller series is that the East German Stasi tried to
recruit a young Angela Merkel; in her telling, they offered, but she turned it down.
Now, in light of Germany’s belated realization that for
16 years they had a chancellor who consistently weakened them while
strengthening Russia’s leverage over them, former NSA counterintelligence
officer John Schindler asks a really thorny question: How certain can anyone be
that Merkel turned down any offers to work on behalf of Russia?
First, there are Stasi files that
mention Merkel, yet they are not available to the public. Per German law, this
implies that Merkel wasn’t an informant, rather a Stasi target, perhaps only
indirectly. Knabe also observes that, in addition to the Stasi files known to
have been destroyed as the DDR collapsed, the MfS shredded 15,000 bags of
secret files, most of which have never been reconstructed. Any Stasi file on
Merkel could possibly be hiding there. . . .
Although the KGB considered East
Bloc spy services like the Stasi to be their junior partners, Soviet
intelligence regularly recruited citizens of those countries to spy for them.
The KGB during the later Cold War ran what it termed PROGRESS operations against
Eastern Europe, mainly to assess dissent against Communism. Some of these
agents were declared to partner services like the Stasi, but many were not. If
Merkel was approached by the KGB to assess her willingness to collaborate with
Moscow, the MfS might never have been informed.
Even if Merkel didn’t accept the
KGB’s offer to collaborate, just as she claims she rejected the MfS pitch in
1978, the mere fact that there’s a secret file on her in Moscow lurking in a
spy archive somewhere would give Germany’s chancellor something to fret about.
Here the strained personal relationship between Merkel and Putin offers
tantalizing hints. The Kremlin strongman delighted in making Merkel appear
uncomfortable before the cameras. In an infamous 2007 incident in Russia, Putin
brought his big Labrador Retriever to a meeting with the German chancellor, who
is terrified of dogs. Merkel appeared visibly frightened and intimidated while
Putin smirked. Years later, Putin claimed he didn’t mean to terrify the German leader, it was
a misunderstanding.
Some might look at the story of Putin, Merkel, and the
dog and conclude that Putin wouldn’t treat a Russian asset that way. Others
might interpret it as a reminder to Merkel who has the leverage in the
relationship.
Which scenario is less disturbing, that for more than a
decade and a half, the woman leading Germany kept making decisions that
strengthened Russia because she was secretly allied with the Russian
government, or that she kept making those decisions because she actually
thought they were good ideas?
Keep in mind, Merkel’s predecessor as chancellor, Gerhard Schroeder, became Putin’s top lobbyist in Germany,
working for the Gazprom energy company. This is the worst cooperation
between Germany and Russia since . . . okay, I guess the bar is pretty high in
that category, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment