Despite Germany’s long-standing respect for its British partners, the Federal Republic trades more with the EU27 than it does with the UK and it has a profound ideological commitment to European integration that is seldom appreciated in Britain. Charlotte Galpin writes that in this context, Boris Johnson may be doing more harm than good by taking German support towards UK trade for granted.
‘We’re used to respecting foreign ministers a lot’, said Wolfgang Schäuble, the German finance minister in response to Boris Johnson’s claim that the ‘automatic trade-off’ between the EU’s single market and freedom of movement was ‘complete baloney’. Mr Schäuble offered to send Johnson a copy of the Lisbon Treaty, suggesting he come to London and personally teach him, in ‘good English’, the rules of the European community.
That the German Finance Minister suggests he might not respect the British Foreign Secretary is striking for two countries whose relationship has generally been shaped by a ‘mutual sense of respect’. The British-German relationship has become strained in recent years in the context of David Cameron’s attempted ‘renegotiation’ of the UK’s EU membership. As Janning highlights, the two countries share very different visions of European integration. In general, however, the relationship has traditionally been characterised by a shared pragmatism, common economic goals and open communication. As Larres notes, Germany has been an important ally for the UK since it joined the EEC in 1973, and the UK has been a key trade partner for Germany.
How UK government ministers involved in Brexit are viewed in Germany should thus be a matter of importance for a country facing its greatest diplomatic challenge in recent history. Germany will be an important partner in forthcoming Brexit talks, and so the UK needs Germany to take its demands and concerns – and by extension, its negotiators – seriously. Brexit proponents have repeatedly reiterated their view that Germany will ultimately acquiesce to their demands to protect their export market. Johnson recently argued that it was ‘overwhelmingly in their interest’ for EU countries to agree to favourable free trade terms, particularly as we ‘buy more German cars than anybody else’.
There is some truth to this. Gunnar Beck, for example, argues that Germany is more economically dependent on Britain than is often claimed. It, therefore, has an economic interest in conceding to some British demands. But Germany’s economic interest lies in the health of the European Union more broadly – as Markus Kerber, head of the Federation of German Industry (BDI) has noted, Germany trades more with the EU27 than the UK alone. What’s more, when it comes to the European Union, Germany has never been motivated purely by economic rationality, but also by its historical commitment to European integration.
Charles Grant argues that EU leaders will be driven by a fear of populism in their dealings with the UK. Indeed, German politicians and media view the rise of populism as one of the biggest threats to European integration. However, their concerns about populism relate not just to worries about contagion to other member states such as France should the UK get a beneficial deal. They also view Brexit supporters themselves as populists with little credibility. Taking the example of just one newspaper’s coverage of the referendum campaign, conservative-leaning Die Welt*, we get an ambivalent image of the UK, but a strikingly negative portrayal of one of Brexit’s leading proponents, Boris Johnson.
On the one hand, Britain is held in high regard. The British are viewed as pragmatic, liberal, outward-looking. Journalists saw many areas of common ground, such a shared desire to make the EU more efficient and democratic. As I have argued elsewhere, the idea of a ‘Northern European community’ of economically liberal, fiscally responsible countries emerged in German discourse on the Euro crisis, juxtaposed against what are perceived as struggling southern European economies. Britain is also included in this concept of northern Europe, an important partner for Germany in economic matters.
On the other hand, many news articles focus on what are seen as the outright lies of the Leave campaign, with Johnson described as someone who ‘shamelessly uttered and repeated untruths’. They paint a picture of someone motivated primarily by personal goals, not least by his childhood desire to be ‘King of the World’, willing to say or do anything if it serves his interests or puts him in the spotlight. In particular, his claims about the £350m cost of EU membership are frequently mentioned, as well as his comparison between the EU and Hitler, and his racist accusations directed at Barack Obama. Finally, following the referendum, he and Cameron are seen as having abdicated their responsibility for the referendum result, willing to disappear and leave others to clear up the mess.
It is, however, the perceived political consequences of his actions that are of greater concern. Johnson and Cameron were seen to have allowed their personal feud to damage the European project. Johnson’s actions are seen as likely to destabilise the European economy, or even threaten the very future of the European Union. Not only this, but he is put into the same category as US presidential hopeful Donald Trump and other right-wing populists who are seen as posing a more general threat to Western liberal democracy. With their readiness to distort the truth, appeal to far-right sentiments and betray voters for their own interests, there is little sympathy in the German press for Brexit campaigners such as Johnson. Historical perceptions of the Brits as a pragmatic and sensible people in Germany are being fundamentally challenged.
While there are many areas of common concern when it comes to the EU, Germany has a broader interest in the future success of European integration. The manner in which the UK government has sought to bring about the changes it wants was seen as damaging to the EU, and leading Brexit supporters such as Johnson are looked upon with a similar unease that many also look upon Donald Trump. With a general election looming in 2017, German politicians must also consider their own domestic popularity. They might be reluctant to be seen conceding to the demands of populists who risk not just the future of the EU but European democracy more broadly.
*Drawing on data for an ongoing comparative project on perspectives on Brexit in Germany, France and the Netherlands in collaboration with Patrick Bijsmans and Benjamin Leruth.
_____
Note: This article was originally published on LSE Brexit.
Charlotte Galpin is a British postdoctoral researcher at the University of Copenhagen, and has research interests in European identities, Euroscepticism, European public spheres, EU democracy and German politics. Her book, The Euro Crisis and European Identities: Political and Media Discourse in Germany, Ireland and Poland, will be published with Palgrave Macmillan in 2017.
Andrew Cole, the United Kingdom chose of its own will not to impose limits on migrants. It would have been within the remit of the British government of the time to impose limits–for that matter, it would have been within the remit of the German government to lift them.
Blaming other countries for the consequences of your own country’s domestic politics is, among other things, useless.
Excellent and well-written article and the 3 comments above as well. ,
The “advisory” referendum poll has no mandate. The government and parliament continue to ignore this fact as well as the fact that nothing was debated in the UK. The comment by Mr. Cole above is valid and important but will never be known to the citizenry, certainly not by BoJo or Rees-Mogg, Gove , Tudor monarch T. May or anyone else. ” A little education is a dangerous thing….” BoJo doesn’t even know his classics, which he is claimed to have in his educational past. It is clear to me that the UK is about to enter a very dark, very long and very deep recession, but of course the other side excuse is the fact of uncertainty. I personally have no doubt at all. All the evidence and information and reality points to that outcome of the bogus referendum. When all is said and done, the simple result is a permanent shrinking of the tiny island no longer called “Great” except in comedic circles around the globe. Charlotte Galpin is a credit to her education and world. Long may she continue. She is a real patriot! Thank you, Charlotte
We want to leave the EU, access to the single market or no. We will be leaving the EU. We hope to maintain friendly relations and trade3 with the EU when we do leave, as well as with the rest of the world.
That’s about it, I think.
This of course does not challenge the German narrative and in doing so relegates UK democracy to being “popularism”, whilst EU “democracy” is deemed to exist (it is more an Oligarchy) and be more valid.
Whilst I appreciate the crossed date of the signing of the Lisbon treaty, taking Boris’s comment, please refer back to the huge exceptions made to freedom of movement when Poland and others joined the EU (and later entrants). Germany and allies giving themselves long exemptions from new entrant migration which was diverted to the UK – in the case of Germany 7 years of work permits, with the UK very much held to ransom in what was a 3 tier apartheid system. I could give many other examples* but I suggest that the saying talk the talk walk the walk needs to be applied to Germany and France especially when the allowing of exceptions directly led to the disparate demographics. It was a situation where the EU forecast 2/3 of its population increase dumped onto an English host population that voted mass migration, that caused the total collapse of EU democratic credibility in the UK.
There is a need for a frank exchange on this issue without the situation that has existed for the last 2 decades where Germany is too powerful for UK politicians to answer back and its narrative, that Brexit occurred because British people are stupid, illogical, and easily led by “popularists” goes unchallenged.
*Another major issue was Germany’s irresponsibility with the EURO, but not allowing transfer payments to keep it stable and instead imposing internal deflation, it caused further mass migration to the UK and undermined the balance of trade with an artificial exchange rate.
Very interesting, thank you.