Three weeks ago, I was banned from entering Germany. When I asked the German authorities who decided this, when, and under what rationale, I received a formal reply that, for reasons of national security, my questions would receive no formal reply.
Suddenly, my mind raced back to another era when my 10-year-old self thought of Germany as a refuge from authoritarianism.
During Greece’s fascist dictatorship, listening to foreign radio broadcasts was banned. So, every evening, at about 9pm, my parents would huddle under a red blanket with a short-wave wireless, straining to hear Deutsche Welle’s dedicated Greek broadcast. My boyish imagination was propelled to a mythical place called Germany — a place, my parents told me, that was “the democrats’ friend.”
Years later, in 2015, the German media presented me as Germany’s foe. I was aghast; nothing could be further from the truth. As Greece’s finance minister, I opposed the German government’s monomaniacal insistence on harsh universal austerity, not merely because I thought it would be catastrophic for most Greeks, but also because I thought it would be detrimental to most Germans’ long-term interests.
The specter of deindustrialization that today casts a depressing shadow across Germany is consistent with my prognosis.
In 2016, when choosing a European capital to launch DiEM25, the pan-European political movement that I helped to found, I chose Berlin. At the city’ Volksbuhne Theater, I explained the reason: “Nothing good can happen in Europe if it does not begin in Berlin.”
To reinforce the point, in the 2019 European Parliament elections I chose symbolically to be DiEM25’s candidate not in Greece (where I could win easily), but in Germany.
Given my lengthy relationship with the land of Goethe, Hegel and Brecht, the German center-left government’s decision to ban me is more bewildering than even my nearest and dearest can imagine.
I shall leave to my lawyers the legality of being denied the right to know the rationale behind the ban and I will set aside the threat to my safety from the reckless insinuation that I am, somehow, a threat to Germany’s national security. Nor will I delve into what my ban means for a EU where free movement and association are singular virtues.
Instead, I want to focus on the ban’s deeper significance.
The trigger for banning me was a Palestinian Congress co-organized by DiEM25’s German party (MERA25), Palestinian support groups and, crucially, German organization Jewish Voice for a Just Peace.
However, the writing had been on the wall well before that.
In November last year, Iris Hefets, a friend and member of the Jewish organization, staged a one-woman protest in Berlin. Walking alone, in silence, she held a placard on which she had written: “As an Israeli and as a Jew, stop the genocide in Gaza.”
Astonishingly, she was arrested for anti-Semitism.
Soon after, the bank account of her organization was frozen — by officials unable to grasp the irony, indeed the horror, of the German state seizing Jewish assets and arresting peaceful Jews in Berlin.
In the run-up to our Palestinian Congress, a coalition of political parties representing almost the entire German political spectrum (including two leaders of my former comrades in the Left party) took the extraordinary step of creating a dedicated Web site for denouncing us.
Their charges?
First, they branded us as “terrorism trivializers” vis-a-vis Hamas’ attacks in Israel on Oct. 7 last year. It was not enough for them that we had condemned as war crimes all acts of violence against civilians (regardless of the identity of perpetrator or victim). They wanted us to condemn resistance to what even Tamir Pardo, the former Mossad director, described as an apartheid system designed to push Palestinians either into exile or into permanent servitude.
Second, they claimed that we were “not interested in talking about possibilities for peaceful coexistence in the Middle East against the background of the war in Gaza.”
Seriously?
All participants in our congress are committed to equal political rights for Jews and Palestinians — and many of us, taking our cue from the late Edward Said, support a single federal state as the solution to the conflict.
Dismissing their groundless accusations, let me home in on the central question: How could almost the entire German political class embrace this denunciation, which prepared the ground for the subsequent police action? How could they remain silent as the police arrested Udi Raz (another Jewish comrade), prohibited our conference and, yes, banned me from entering Germany — even from connecting via video link to any event in the country?
Their most likely answer is the German state’s official semi-rationale, the protection of Jewish lives and Israel’s security.
However, the German state’s recent behavior is not at all about protecting Jews (especially my friends Iris and Udi) or Israel. The purpose is to defend Israel’s right to commit any war crime its leaders choose in the process of enforcing an agenda the goal of which is to render impossible the two-state solution that the German government claims to favor.
If I am right, something else is behind the political consensus in Germany. My hypothesis is that Germany’s political class has a penchant for national catechisms that unite its members behind a common will: net exports as Germany’s strength; China as German industry’s playground; Russia as its source of cheap energy; and Zionism as proof that it has turned a page, morally.
Once such a catechism is established, debating it rationally becomes next to impossible.
Moreover, the fear of being denounced for abandoning it motivates the concerted denunciation of any apostate who questions it.
A silver lining here is that young Germans, seeing the bodies piling up in Gaza, are not afraid that they will be denounced if they challenge a catechism that has jeopardized German democracy, the rule of law and basic common sense. This is why, despite the ban, I am not giving up on Germany.
Yanis Varoufakis, a former Greek minister of finance, is leader of the MERA25 party and a professor of economics at the University of Athens.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In a meeting with Haitian Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Victor Harvel Jean-Baptiste on Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) vowed to continue providing aid to Haiti. Taiwan supports Haiti with development in areas such as agriculture, healthcare and education through initiatives run by the Taiwan International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF). The nation it has established itself as a responsible, peaceful and innovative actor committed to global cooperation, Jean-Baptiste said. Testimonies such as this give Taiwan a voice in the global community, where it often goes unheard. Taiwan’s reception in Haiti also contrasts with how China has been perceived in countries in the region
The world has become less predictable, less rules-based, and more shaped by the impulses of strongmen and short-term dealmaking. Nowhere is this more consequential than in East Asia, where the fate of democratic Taiwan hinges on how global powers manage — or mismanage — tensions with an increasingly assertive China. The return of Donald Trump to the White House has deepened the global uncertainty, with his erratic, highly personalized foreign-policy approach unsettling allies and adversaries alike. Trump appears to treat foreign policy like a reality show. Yet, paradoxically, the global unpredictability may offer Taiwan unexpected deterrence. For China, the risk of provoking the
On April 13, I stood in Nanan (南安), a Bunun village in southern Hualien County’s Jhuosi Township (卓溪), absorbing lessons from elders who spoke of the forest not as backdrop, but as living presence — relational, sacred and full of spirit. I was there with fellow international students from National Dong Hwa University (NDHU) participating in a field trip that would become one of the most powerful educational experiences of my life. Ten days later, a news report in the Taipei Times shattered the spell: “Formosan black bear shot and euthanized in Hualien” (April 23, page 2). A tagged bear, previously released
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
RSS