“80 years since the Holocaust, and Germany is once again supporting Nazism.” That’s what National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir wrote on X/Twitter in response to German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul’s comments last month that Berlin would now begin the process of formally recognizing a Palestinian state.
Ben-Gvir’s incendiary comparison between supporting the rights of Palestinians with supporting Nazism reflects the deep emotional charge in Israel surrounding the German discourse.
Beneath the outrage, however, lies a genuine concern: Is Germany quietly diluting the long-held principle that Israel’s security is part of its Staatsrason, its essential and moral core interest? This concern is also growing in light of Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s statement that Germany will not transfer to Israel any weapons that could be used in the Gaza Strip.
Nearly 20 years have passed since chancellor Angela Merkel defined Israel’s security as Staatsrason in her landmark 2008 Knesset address. This principle has guided German policy under her successors, Olaf Scholz and now Chancellor Merz. Nevertheless, political dynamics are shifting. The German-Israeli relationship has long been termed “unique” (“einzigartig”), emphasizing moral duty rooted in Holocaust memory and Germany’s historic responsibility toward the Jewish people.
Since the 1950s, German discourse has revolved around “Never Again,” not merely as a vow against genocide but as a German pledge to ensure Israel’s existence and security. Berlin consistently affirmed Israel’s right to self-defense while supporting a two-state solution, balancing historical duty with shared universal values and European leadership.
That balance was largely maintained without confronting Jerusalem directly. However, over the past few years, Germany’s liberal foundations have come to interpret Israeli settlement expansion as violating international norms, causing growing discomfort as Israeli policy diverged from European consensus.
The war changed Germany's perspective
The October 7, 2023, massacre shook Germany to its core. Chancellor Scholz declared immediately: “Germany condemns Hamas’s attacks and stands with Israel.” Ten days later, on a solidarity visit to Israel, he affirmed, “Our history and responsibility demand that we protect Israel’s security and survival. Now, Germany has only one place – to stand with Israel.”
For many in Berlin, the relationship with Israel remained not merely pragmatic but based on deep, shared moral roots. Yet, the ongoing war in Gaza, with its mounting Palestinian casualties, widespread destruction, and humanitarian collapse, reinvigorated Germany’s internal debate: Can abstract moral universality be reconciled with particular responsibility to the Jewish people?
Ben-Gvir’s extreme X post epitomizes a broader question: Does the German principle of Staatsrason require unwavering solidarity with Israel regardless of context or action? Or is Germany evolving to prioritize universal values, even if that means public disagreement with Israel? The debate reflects a growing reevaluation within Germany of how Holocaust remembrance informs modern diplomacy.
In Germany today, voices calling to “normalize” relations with Israel on the wider basis of “no more guilt, yes to universal responsibility” are gaining traction across the radical Left, Muslim immigrant leaders, and young progressives. Meanwhile, older generations and political centrists insist that the Holocaust’s uniqueness demands an exceptional legitimacy for Israel, even at diplomatic cost.
For many Germans, recognition of a Palestinian state represents more than politics. It is about moral closure: “We have done much for Israel; now we must address other injustices.” That gradual shift may fundamentally reshape the meaning of the German-Israeli bond. The debate over Israel within German public discourse is reflected in the differing positions of the coalition parties that make up the current government in Berlin.
In Israel, the implications are unsettling. Jerusalem expects Germany, as a trusted and moral ally, to weigh the repercussions of its statements and actions on Israel’s security and regional stability. Premature recognition of a Palestinian state is seen as weakening the Israeli terms demanded for peace and potentially emboldening extremist factions, especially while Hamas controls Gaza and dozens of Israeli hostages remain held there.
Still, the essential tension is moral, not strategic. The relationship faces no rupture but is, presumably, entering a period of recalibrated restraint and renewed expectations. Germany remains a vital partner, yet no longer gives Israel unconditional latitude.
The looming issue – possible German recognition of Palestine – could determine whether the “unique relationship” adapts to the next generation or falters under shifting political currents. Calls on Israel to use diplomatic dialogue, to apply nonmilitary options, and adherence to global moral standards are likely to grow louder.
Misinterpretation of Germany’s statements poses a serious risk. Germany is not relinquishing its commitments, but it is seeking to fulfill them responsibly.
Israel must respond by listening, not reflexively resisting. Treating every German criticism as betrayal misunderstands the bond: Germany raises its voice not because it forgot its past but because it remembers it. It remains an indispensable partner, though not a captive to any Israeli government.
May the moral bedrock laid over six decades prove resilient enough to withstand current disagreements. A bond forged from memory must endure questions borne of today’s justice.
The writer is a retired Israeli diplomat who served as ambassador to Hungary and Croatia, following a distinguished career in various senior diplomatic and strategic roles.