German Policy towards Intervention in Libya

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

2. Germany and the use of force

2.1. From ‘checkbook diplomacy’ to the intervention in Kosovo

2.2. Increasing contributions and persistent skepticism

2.3. Germany and the use of force in 2011

3. The crisis in Libya and the German response: from early leader to abstention

3.1. Initial German leadership: February 15th to February 26th 2011

3.2. From leader to skeptic: February 26th to March 15th

3.3. Negotiating Resolution 1973 and the German decision to abstain: March 15th to March 17th

4. Explaining non-participation and abstention

4.1. The decision against military participation

4.1.1. A traditional German skepticism towards the use of force and Afghanistan

4.1.2. Uncertainty over military risks of a military intervention and doubts concerning French and British motives

4.1.3. The American change and the shift to “all necessary measures”

4.1.4. The ‘power of parliamentary reservation’

4.1.5. Guido Westerwelle and the FDP

4.1.6. The upcoming elections

4.1.7. No significant role for the Responsibility to Protect

4.2. The abstention

4.2.1. Time and timing contributing to the abstention

4.2.2. Was it possible to vote “yes” and not participate militarily?

4.2.3. A coalition compromise?

5. Domestic reactions and international consequences

5.1. The debate in Germany

5.1.1. Reactions in the press and public

5.1.2. The Foreign Minister and his talking points

5.1.3. Reactions in the Bundestag

5.2. International consequences

5.2.1. The German role on the Security Council

5.2.2. Germany in NATO: reinforcing doubts about ‘pooling and sharing’ and German reliability

6. Conclusion

Objectives & Research Themes

This dissertation examines the factors that led the German government to abstain from United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 in March 2011, thereby refraining from participation in the subsequent NATO-led military intervention in Libya. It aims to clarify whether this decision signaled a strategic shift in German foreign policy or was a reactive choice shaped by specific situational constraints and internal political pressures.

• Evolution of German military policy since the end of the Cold War.
• Chronology of the German diplomatic response to the Libyan uprising in early 2011.
• Analysis of domestic factors, including parliamentary reservation and political election cycles.
• The role of key political figures, particularly Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle.
• Assessment of the international impact on Germany’s reliability within NATO and the EU.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

1. Introduction: Outlines the research context regarding Germany's controversial abstention on Resolution 1973 and defines the paper's aim to identify the underlying drivers of this decision.

2. Germany and the use of force: Provides a historical overview of Germany's evolving approach to military force, from 'checkbook diplomacy' to the debates surrounding Kosovo and Afghanistan.

3. The crisis in Libya and the German response: from early leader to abstention: Details the chronological events from February to March 2011, tracking the shift in German diplomacy as the intervention moved toward a mandate for broader military action.

4. Explaining non-participation and abstention: Analyzes the specific domestic, strategic, and individual political factors that influenced the government's decision to withhold participation.

5. Domestic reactions and international consequences: Examines the intense internal political debate within Germany and explores the subsequent impact of the abstention on Germany's standing among its NATO and EU allies.

6. Conclusion: Summarizes findings, arguing that the abstention was a result of path-dependent skepticism, specific crisis dynamics, and internal political pressures rather than a permanent strategic realignment.

Keywords

Libya intervention, UN Security Council Resolution 1973, German foreign policy, NATO, Responsibility to Protect, Guido Westerwelle, military restraint, parliamentary reservation, multilateralism, German domestic politics, transatlantic relations, coalition policy, civil war, interventionism, German abstention

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this dissertation primarily about?

The work focuses on the German government's decision to abstain from the UN Security Council vote on the military intervention in Libya in March 2011 and its subsequent refusal to participate in the NATO mission.

What are the central thematic areas covered?

It covers the evolution of post-Cold War German military policy, the specific diplomatic chronology of the 2011 Libya crisis, and the internal institutional and political constraints governing German foreign policy.

What is the primary research question of this study?

The research asks why Germany chose to abstain from the resolution and whether this signaled a strategic redirection of German foreign policy or was a decision necessitated by temporary internal and situational factors.

Which scientific methodology is utilized in this paper?

The author employs a comprehensive, qualitative study approach, primarily utilizing 23 expert interviews with politicians, diplomats, and think-tank experts, combined with an extensive analysis of primary sources and parliamentary records.

What topics are analyzed in the main body of the work?

The main body examines the historical background of German military skepticism, the rapid shift in American and international expectations, and the specific domestic tensions within the German coalition government during the decision-making process.

How would you characterize this work through keywords?

The paper is characterized by terms such as German foreign policy, military restraint, NATO, transatlantic relations, Libya intervention, and the 'power of parliamentary reservation'.

How significant was the 'Responsibility to Protect' concept in the German decision?

The study concludes that the Responsibility to Protect played only a minor role in the actual decision-making process in Berlin, which was dominated more by concerns over military risks and domestic political considerations.

Did the German abstention permanently damage its standing within NATO?

The author argues that while the decision reinforced pre-existing doubts among allies regarding German reliability in integrated military structures, the government actively worked to mitigate this damage through other contributions, such as in Afghanistan.