A

mnesty International has released a report on November 23, 2023, accusing Germany of failing to effectively tackle systemic racism, pointing to ingrained structural issues and a lack of recognition of the root causes. Presented in Berlin, the report provides a critical analysis of Germany’s approach to hate crimes, police behavior, and historical injustices.

Julia Duchrow, Secretary General of Amnesty International’s German section, asserted that despite Germany’s commitment in the 1960s to protect all people from racial discrimination and violence, the nation continues to struggle with racism.

Duchrow highlighted several high-profile cases that have exposed these shortcomings, including the murders by the National Socialist Underground (NSA) and racial attacks in Munich, Halle, and Hanau.

Discriminatory practices sanctioned by the state

The report criticizes discriminatory practices sanctioned by the state, such as the headscarf ban for Muslim women in public service and the prohibition of demonstrations in support of Palestinian rights. According to Duchrow, these forms of state discrimination are as pressing as the issues caused by non-state actors.

Amnesty International’s report draws attention to the problem of racist stereotypes within German law enforcement, specifically mentioning the controversial term “clan criminality.” The human rights organization is calling for an investigation into racism in the police force and for concrete steps to be taken to address and prevent it.

The report insists on the necessity of independent bodies to investigate police misconduct. Amnesty International urges Germany to establish these at both federal and state levels to ensure thorough and unbiased investigations into all allegations of racially motivated behavior by police.

Call to action

This call to action emphasizes the importance of accountability and the need for Germany to live up to its international commitments to fight racial discrimination. The detailed findings and recommendations from Amnesty International aim to prompt German authorities to take decisive and transparent actions to address these deep-rooted issues.

Amidst growing concerns over racial profiling and discrimination, Amnesty International’s recommendations aim to prompt German legislators and policymakers to take concrete actions to reform the current system. The move towards independent investigations reflects a broader global trend emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability in law enforcement.

Source: Anadolu Agency.

The New York Times saw fit to give the title of “Leader of the Free World” to Angela Merkel after Donald Trump’s election in 2017. It is questionable if Merkel, who after 16 years of governing Germany will voluntarily leave her office following the federal elections of September 26, deserves this title. At the moment, the world consists of a West and an EU that have lost their internal unity, and are suffering from an erosion of moral and value superiority. Therefore, when evaluating Merkel’s legacy, it is essential to analyze the developments around the world in the last 30 years.

Breeze of freedom

When Merkel was first elected chancellor in 2005, it was 15 years after the West announced its victory over communism. The two Germanies had merged, and a breeze of freedom was blowing through the world. Moreover, the process of the formation of the European Union had accelerated, and no direct threat remained against the West after the removal of the risk factor coming from Eastern European countries, all of which had begun to join NATO and the EU.

Perhaps most importantly, China was a Third World country which acted as a workshop for the West, far from the challenging model and economic power that it is today. In light of the political atmosphere described above, famous American political scientist Francis Fukuyama had declared the “End of History” hailing the ascension of a Western liberal order and the West’s final victory. However, what is the state of the world and Europe today, 16 years later, as Merkel, the “Leader of the Free World,” prepares to leave office?

Europe and the world are much more unstable and chaotic now than when Merkel first took office, while Europe and the U.S. received a nasty blow in terms of moral superiority. On the other hand, China is now a world power which aims to use its economic power to create an order in line with those of the U.S. and Europe. Meanwhile, Russia threatens Europe’s security just as it did in the Soviet era, and Europe struggles to be the center of weight and appeal with Britain leaving the EU, numerous economic crises, and the rise of the far right. The question is what was Merkel’s role in creating today’s unstable, contemporary world.

It is important to underline that Merkel takes responsibility when it is necessary. For example, even though she wanted to leave politics along with the office of chancellor in 2017, she changed her mind after the election of Donald Trump.

First, it is important to underline that Merkel takes responsibility when it is necessary. For example, even though she wanted to leave politics along with the office of chancellor in 2017, she changed her mind after the election of Donald Trump. The anecdotes of Ben Rhodes, who was an advisor to Barack Obama when he was U.S. president, have offered us some details on the subject.

According to Rhodes, on November 8, 2016, eight days after Trump’s election, Obama privately visited Merkel in Berlin. Obama asked Merkel whether she’ll run again for chancellor during their dinner at the Adlon Hotel. Merkel told him that she feels a responsibility to run again to ensure the continuity of the liberal order after Trump’s election. Indeed, one week after this meeting, Merkel publicly announced that she would run again for office. This is undoubtedly evidence that Merkel has a character that does not shy away from taking on responsibility when it is called for.

Results of a passive attitude

Looking at the material results of Merkel’s policies, one can claim that her patient style did not pay off. Her attitude, patient according to some, “passive” according to others, separated Russia from the West and turned it into a threat for the West once more. The fact is that as the leader of perhaps the most important country in Europe, Merkel didn’t interfere with the EU’s signing of a free trade agreement with Ukraine despite all the opposition from Russia, which resulted in 13,000 deaths in Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea by Russia, and the de facto division of Ukraine in two. In the end, the relationship between Europe and Russia was structurally damaged to the point that they were on the brink of an actual war. Merkel’s pre-crisis passive attitude and post-crisis weak management have dragged the E.U.-Russia relations into a long-term uncertainty.

What happened with Turkey during Merkel’s time in office is similar to what happened with Russia. Following its EU candidacy at the 1999 EU summit in Copenhagen, Turkey started a serious reform and entered a serious economic lunge by triplicating its GNP in a short time. However, after Merkel became chancellor, together with Sarkozy, president of France at the time, they virtually blocked Turkey’s EU accession.

Even though this might be understandable considering her party’s values, it has led to a crisis in both Turkey-EU and Turkey-Germany relations. What is more, Merkel’s exclusionary policies have led to Turkey expanding its foreign policy, first and foremost with Russia, and have interrupted Turkey’s reform dynamic by alienating it from the EU. Even though Merkel started to realize Turkey’s importance after the Syrian refugee crisis, it seems to be quite difficult for Turkey and the EU to build a relationship based on trust following this course of events.

Shortsightedness

In the end, we can say that the state of the world affairs is seriously different today than it was 16 years ago when Chancellor Merkel first took office. Then, the West and Europe enjoyed more stability and power than they do now. However, as Germany’s longest standing leader, Merkel perhaps could have intervened in some way to prevent events from taking the course that they did.