‘a reason of state’: Analyzing Germany's Public Reaction to the Gaza Conflict
Germany's reaction to the war in Gaza has revealed a complex and divisive landscape, marked by strong political stances, alleged academic censorship, and societal tensions. The German government's unwavering support for Israel, influenced by historical ties and a sense of moral responsibility stemming from the Holocaust, has been a significant factor in shaping the country's response to the conflict. This stance is evident in policies like the requirement for applicants seeking naturalization in Saxony-Anhalt to commit to Israel's “right to exist”, and the crackdown on pro-Palestinian demonstrations and symbols. Gatherings that support Palestine have also been banned in Germany. Berlin police cited “imminent danger” that concerns that these assemblies would cause “inciting, antisemitic slogans” and “glorification of violence”. Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany, as are slogans that directly reference Nazism. German authorities are allowed to ban protests if they judge there is a risk to public safety as a result of the demonstration as a whole. German responsibility for the holocaust has been cited as a driving reason behind authorities decision to ban pro-Palestine protests.
There appears to be a significant division in public opinion in Germany. On the one hand, there's strong support for Israel, influenced by sentiments of historical responsibility and political ties. On the other hand, there is growing concern and criticism over the suppression of pro-Palestinian voices and the impact of such policies on civil liberties and freedom of expression. These concerns were boosted on the evening of October 18, 2023, when hundreds of people protested against the prohibition on pro-Palestinian demonstrations by taking to Berlin's streets. The police reported that over 60 policemen had been “wounded by stones, flaming liquids and acts of rebellion”. Following the event, 174 persons were taken into custody; 65 of them are “under criminal investigation”.
In addition, the division of public opinion in Germany is further complicated by rising anti-immigrant sentiment and the portrayal of Muslim and Arab communities in the context of anti-Semitism. This has to be understood alongside the German states designation of Israel’s right to exists as a German “reason of state”, as described by former chancellor Angela Merkel. This quasi-legal term has proven difficult to apply in a democratic context, but has led to some states to link naturalisation pledges to declarations of support for Israel’s right to exist. The German public seems more dubious about this approach. German’s feel that Germany has no particular historical responsibility to Israel, according to a poll conducted in late November by the research organisation Allensbach, with only one-third of respondents disagreeing. Of those surveyed, 31% agreed with Israel's right to destroy Hamas in its present campaign, while 38% wanted Israel to exercise restraint.
The situation has also been reflected in public sentiment and the media. There has been a rise in xenophobic and anti-immigrant rhetoric, particularly targeting the Muslim and Arab communities. This has been exacerbated by policies and public statements that frame these communities as potential threats to German society and implicitly associate them with anti-Semitism. The portrayal of immigrants as carriers of anti-Semitic views has influenced Germany's migration and refugee policies, leading to stricter measures against asylum seekers.
In academia and cultural sectors, there has been a notable suppression of pro-Palestinian voices. This includes censorship and threats against academics who criticize Israel's policies towards Palestinians, leading to a chilling effect on free speech. The German Bundestag's motion labelling the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement as anti-Semitic further illustrates the government's hardline stance. These actions have led to international condemnation, including a boycott of German cultural institutions by several prominent artists and intellectuals.
Despite this dominant narrative, it is clear that there is a notable opposition within Germany. These include from within Jewish, Arab, and Muslim communities, who advocate for Palestinian rights and criticize the government's approach. These groups face challenges in expressing their views, often encountering resistance and censorship. The situation has sparked debates on civil liberties and the balance between combating anti-Semitism while preserving freedom of expression. The German state’s response to the war in Gaza has been shaped by its historical context, resulting in strong support for Israel and suppression of pro-Palestinian activism. In turn, this position has exposed societal divisions, within Germany itself, and sparked debate over existing policy and freedom of speech.
To address these continuing divisions and tensions a multifaceted approach is necessary. Firstly, enhancing academic freedom is crucial. Universities and research institutions should be encouraged to foster open, diverse dialogues without fear of censorship or persecution. This can be supported by revising policies that inadvertently suppress free speech under the guise of combating anti-Semitism. Additionally, there's a need to address and counter anti-immigration rhetoric. Promoting inclusive narratives and cultural understanding can help mitigate xenophobia and racism. Updating hate speech laws to better balance free expression with the need to protect against hate speech could also be instrumental. These steps, combined with a commitment to upholding civil liberties, can contribute to a more balanced and equitable discourse on sensitive international issues like the Gaza.