How should Germany have reacted? As I see it there were two possible culprits: Russia or Ukraine. If we make a big deal out of it we have to act.
Say it turns out to be Russia, then we have a direct attack on the infrastructure of a NATO member. If we don’t react to that it sends a desastrous message. If we do we and the rest of NATO have to react with force, something everyone has tried to avoid at all cost so far.
If links to Ukraine turn out to be true (which seems more likely atm) this will give a massive boost to anti Ukrainian sentiment, with a good chance of complete collapse of public support for Ukraine. So what are we supposed to do then? Considering how Germany got bashed by everyone already for seemingly not doing enough (unfairly imo).
Now even getting into a position like that is the result of long-term strategic failure. But in my limited view keeping this topic comparatively small is a favor to everyone involved. Because in the end world goes on without the pipeline as well.
What you describe is exactly the point Ai WeiWei is trying to make in that paragraph: you let something as severe as an blatant attack just slide, because it does not fit in your strategic planning.
And that is the hypocrisy he is calling out: the reaction would have been different if it was an enemy state like Russia or Iran but “silent” when it was Ukraine or Israel for example. Take that “it is not okay to spy on friends” bullshit as another example. Like spying for Russia or China is uncovered and the perpetrators prosecuted (which is obviously a good thing), but nobody ever did something about the large scale spying by our allies.
There is obviously nothing new about it, except that in our age those hypocrisies are more easily uncovered. And that leads to frustration, when it becomes clear, that it is never about the act itself but about who is the actor. That holds true on geopolitical issues like that, but also, as pointed out, for
When Israel genocides it is okay (and Germany even supplies weapons), when China does it it’s not
When the US attacks or threatens another country it is okay (and Germany even might help), when Russia does it it’s not
When rich people commit crimes it’s okay, when poor people do it it’s not
and many more
And the cherry on top is, that nobody openly tells the truth as “yeah, obviously all of that is different for our allies than for our enemies, because it is in our strategic interest”, but always hides behind some “values”, like “it’s about international law or human rights”. No, if it were, we had to do something about that stuff equally.
How should Germany have reacted? As I see it there were two possible culprits: Russia or Ukraine. If we make a big deal out of it we have to act.
Say it turns out to be Russia, then we have a direct attack on the infrastructure of a NATO member. If we don’t react to that it sends a desastrous message. If we do we and the rest of NATO have to react with force, something everyone has tried to avoid at all cost so far.
If links to Ukraine turn out to be true (which seems more likely atm) this will give a massive boost to anti Ukrainian sentiment, with a good chance of complete collapse of public support for Ukraine. So what are we supposed to do then? Considering how Germany got bashed by everyone already for seemingly not doing enough (unfairly imo).
Now even getting into a position like that is the result of long-term strategic failure. But in my limited view keeping this topic comparatively small is a favor to everyone involved. Because in the end world goes on without the pipeline as well.
What you describe is exactly the point Ai WeiWei is trying to make in that paragraph: you let something as severe as an blatant attack just slide, because it does not fit in your strategic planning.
And that is the hypocrisy he is calling out: the reaction would have been different if it was an enemy state like Russia or Iran but “silent” when it was Ukraine or Israel for example. Take that “it is not okay to spy on friends” bullshit as another example. Like spying for Russia or China is uncovered and the perpetrators prosecuted (which is obviously a good thing), but nobody ever did something about the large scale spying by our allies.
There is obviously nothing new about it, except that in our age those hypocrisies are more easily uncovered. And that leads to frustration, when it becomes clear, that it is never about the act itself but about who is the actor. That holds true on geopolitical issues like that, but also, as pointed out, for
And the cherry on top is, that nobody openly tells the truth as “yeah, obviously all of that is different for our allies than for our enemies, because it is in our strategic interest”, but always hides behind some “values”, like “it’s about international law or human rights”. No, if it were, we had to do something about that stuff equally.