Germany: The reluctant power

Role-theoretic discourse analysis of German security policy: a case of German parliamentary debate on the mission in Afghanistan

“…The selection of “civilian power” as the archetype for Germany’s security role in this study implies that Germany assumes a relatively “demilitarized” character compared to other nations. Furthermore, it conveys that the goals and methods of German foreign policy possess a “civil” quality and are significantly influenced by Germany’s “culture of restraint” ( Meiers, 1995 ). Identifying Germany as a “civilian power” does not signify the complete absence of elements related to “power” and “material interests” in German security policy; rather, these aspects must be assessed, deliberated upon, and balanced through a framework of norms and values inherent to the role prototype of a “civilian power” ( Harnisch, 2001 ).…”

From security consumer to security provider ‐ Poland and transatlantic security in the twenty‐first century

“…With a relatively low defence budget of its own and with a constitutional ban on the use of its own troops, Bonn consumed the security provided by the stationing of allied troops and nuclear weapons on its territory. 1 The end of the Cold War threw the balance between net-providers and consumers of security into disarray. After 1989 it is far more problematic to ascertain which states are the producers of security and which are the consumers, since security as a commodity now has a far more amorphous quality.…”

The Dangers of German History: Lessons from a Decade of Post-Cold War German Foreign and Security Policy

“…Germany also maintained its deeply embedded commitment to the multilateral fora and neo-liberal institutionalism that help fashion the norms cherished by a civilian power. And Germany acknowl-edged both that 'Multilateralism has ceased to be a pretext for national abstention' 49 and that, with the US less willing or able to exercise hegemonic power through the 1990s, second order powers needed to accept greater responsibilities in the defence and promotion of the established international order.…”