Canada and Germany have a similar status in the international balance of power. Germany´s influence as a traditionally strong power in the Middle of Europe has been redeveloped after the reunification and even more so after the integration of many Eastern European states into the European Union. Additionally, Germany has been urged from different sides to become a more active global player over the last decade. The same could be stated for Canada and chances are high that Canada will benefit further from the lessening strength of the United States of America – morally, politically and economically. Both countries are led by conservative governments at the moment but even a change in government in upcoming elections would influence the international standing and the aim of foreign policies only slightly (at least in Canada). Both Ottawa and Berlin have outgrown their traditional role as mediator and financial backer of the big international organizations and want to have more influence on what the money is spent on. Both countries participate in UN- and NATO-missions and have therefore changed their attitude towards military interventions in the past. And yet, politicians and even more so the citizens of both countries embrace this new role only reluctantly, especially the legitimation and necessity of military interventions. In the past, these questions have influenced the outcome of major elections, as it has happened in Germany during the Bundestagswahlkampf, the national elections in 2002, when Gerhard Schröders “no” to a German participation in America`s Irak war was a major factor to his later victory in the election.
This borderline position between military power and development aid worker will most likely shape the upcoming term in the Security Council for either of the countries. Canada, the inventor of “responsibility to protect” is an esteemed member of the international society and a spokesperson for the re-invention of the design of international policies. Germany is highly influental on the diplomatic level, for example in Russia and China, but also as a mediator and partner in the Middle East - after the failure of the latest peace talks still on the future political agenda of the United Nations. So, who would be the better choice?
Paul Heinbecker, former Canadian embassador with the United Nations, set up a few criteria and major aims for Canada´s campaign. In the foreground on the future agenda should be human rights and democracy, poverty reduction and disarmament. Hence, he demands from Stephen Harper´s government to put more effort in the battle for women and children´s health. As important as this agenda is, expectations of and from Germany are not going to be any different. Germany has already send signals that it wants to be a strong balance weight against the client politics of the members with Veto-right. The scepticism towards the United States of America is still at hand in Germany´s mainstream, even in a conservative-liberal government. Germany will most likely continue on the basis of their last term in the Security Council (2004/05) when Germany opposed strongly against the United States intervention in Iraq. So, again, does it really matter which of the two countries will be elected? Maybe it is just a matter of taste.
Germany doesn´t have a common position on the question whether we should or should not claim a seat in the Security Council. On side calls for a permanent seat since decades (but, with the ongoing unification of Europe those voices have become more quiet) the other side opposes against such a claim and rather strives for a more modern and suitable division of seats. Like some Canadians these voices demand a new design for the United Nations Security Council (as well as for most of the international summit architecture) with one seat for the European Union and more seats for the Second and Third World countries. Naturally, neither London nor Paris is quite enthusiastic about this approach which might lead to the fact that they would rather see Canada taking a seat (or Portugal).
For both the United Nations and its Security Council it would not make much of a difference whether Ottawa or Berlin will gain some more international influence during the next two years. Both countries share a similar agenda, stand on common ground as for their aims and have a comparable world-wide reputation. Both countries are still peace-keepers rather than military superpowers and hence have a high interest in peaceful conflict resolution. I guess we can lean back and relax. And who knows, maybe Portugal will surprise us all.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen