Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Calls for development policy to place greater emphasis on national self-interest are growing louder in many donor countries, including Germany. There are indeed good reasons to dovetail Germany’s international policies more effectively. Synergies between develop-ment cooperation (DC), foreign trade promotion and research partnerships have not been harnessed systematically to date, yet they could serve the interests of both Germany and its partner countries alike. Moreover, Germany is facing geopolitical competition from actors who have long been using their DC proactively to pursue strategic interests.
We advocate adopting a development policy that pursues German and European interests in those areas in which they are compatible with development policy objectives. Instead of focusing on the interests of individual companies, it is important to identify long-term ‘win-win’ potential, for example through a more strategic approach to planning DC offers that involves the private sector and ministries more actively prior to intergovernmental negotiations with the partner countries.
At the same time, we warn against subordinating DC to foreign economic policy objectives. Conditions such as tied aid provisions that link financial cooperation to business contracts for German/EU companies are expensive, inefficient and counterproductive in development terms. In addition, this approach would risk losing sight of Germany’s overarching interest in solutions to global problems, such as peacebuilding and climate and biodiversity protection.
We set out five guidelines for a development policy strategy that takes due consideration of Germany’s own interests without harming the partner countries:
1. Avoid strict tied aid provisions. These would be inefficient in development terms and would be of little benefit to German companies. As an export nation, Germany should comply with freedom of contract rules.
2. Pursue the interests of German society as a whole where they align with DC objectives. We distinguish between Germany’s global interests and those of individual companies. DC projects should align economic interests with the common good in the partner country.
3. Develop offers strategically prior to intergovernmental negotiations. The most effective synergies are generated if the private sector and other ministries are involved in preparing DC initiatives at an early stage. To do so, Germany needs to define joint national goals, coordinate ministerial instruments to achieve these goals and evaluate contributions by the private sector in advance.
4. Create strategic partnerships that serve as models. Germany has established a number of bilateral partnerships, especially on energy, raw material security and migration. None of these is exemplary in terms of effective interministerial coordination, private sector involvement or demons-trable benefits for both of the countries involved. At least one flagship project in each of the areas mentioned would make Germany attractive as a credible partner.
5. Expand minilateral formats with European states and influential third countries. Triangular and quadrilateral cooperation with ‘global partners’ and donor countries that share the same or similar interests can help advance Germany’s interests in international development for the common good.

Brauchen wir künftig Gaskraftwerke mit Kohlendioxid-Abscheidung, Atomkraft oder gar die Kernfusion? In dieser Folge sprechen Wolf-Peter Schill und Alexander Roth mit Prof. Anke Weidlich (Universität Freiburg) über eine Studie der Wissenschaftsakademien zur möglichen Rolle solcher Grundlastkraftwerke ...

Die Reallöhne in Deutschland wachsen seit Jahren, vor allem dank des Mindestlohns. Die Ungleichheit nimmt trotzdem zu. Woran liegt das?, In der Frustration über die wirtschaftliche Lage in Deutschland gehen einige positive Entwicklungen unter: So sind die Reallöhne in den letzten zehn Jahren in Deutschland so stark gestiegen wie seit Jahrzehnten nicht, vor allem Menschen im unteren Lohnbereich haben davon profitiert. Allerdings zeigt ...

2005 fegte Katrina über die Golfküste der USA. Seither wurde viel getan, damit sich die Katastrophe nicht wiederholt. Doch das wichtigste Projekt, um Louisianas Küste nachhaltig zu schützen, wurde auf Drängen des republikanischen Gouverneurs abgesagt.

Die Bedrohung im Cyber- und Informationsraum geht maßgeblich von autoritären Staaten wie Russland, China, Nordkorea und Iran aus, die hybride Netzwerke aus staatlichen und nichtstaatlichen Akteuren einsetzen, um Verantwortung zu verschleiern und Konflikte zu eskalieren. Langfristige Analysen verdeutlichen ihre hohe operative Aktivität und die zunehmende Vermischung von Akteursrollen. Die EU reagiert darauf mit einem umfangreichen diplomatischen Reaktionsrahmen, dessen Wirkung aber höchst umstritten ist. Eine grundlegende Reform der europäischen Cybersicherheitspolitik sollte daher dem Janus-Prinzip folgen: Sie sollte sich kon­sequent einem Check-up ineffizienter Strukturen und Prozesse stellen und dabei gleichzeitig die technologischen Entwicklungen in den Blick nehmen. Fünf konkrete Reformansätze bieten sich für die EU Cyber Posture an, um Synergien zu heben und eine wirksame, belastbare Antwort auf die dynamischen Bedrohungen zu finden.

The international landscape in mid-2025 is characterized by a retreat from liberal institutionalism, exemplified by the United States' withdrawal from the Sustainable Development Goals and its adoption of transactional, power-based international relations, as well as its potential withdrawal from some multilateral bodies. In this context, this paper argues that traditional models of universal multilateralism are increasingly untenable, and that new forms of collective action grounded in shared interests and normative alignment are both necessary and feasible. This paper revisits and applies the historically rooted concept of “like-minded internationalism,” arguing for its renewed relevance under current geopolitical conditions.

The international landscape in mid-2025 is characterized by a retreat from liberal institutionalism, exemplified by the United States' withdrawal from the Sustainable Development Goals and its adoption of transactional, power-based international relations, as well as its potential withdrawal from some multilateral bodies. In this context, this paper argues that traditional models of universal multilateralism are increasingly untenable, and that new forms of collective action grounded in shared interests and normative alignment are both necessary and feasible. This paper revisits and applies the historically rooted concept of “like-minded internationalism,” arguing for its renewed relevance under current geopolitical conditions.

The international landscape in mid-2025 is characterized by a retreat from liberal institutionalism, exemplified by the United States' withdrawal from the Sustainable Development Goals and its adoption of transactional, power-based international relations, as well as its potential withdrawal from some multilateral bodies. In this context, this paper argues that traditional models of universal multilateralism are increasingly untenable, and that new forms of collective action grounded in shared interests and normative alignment are both necessary and feasible. This paper revisits and applies the historically rooted concept of “like-minded internationalism,” arguing for its renewed relevance under current geopolitical conditions.

Building Resilient Partnerships and Advancing Local Value Creation

Schulfehltage sind in Berlin wie in England seit der Corona-Pandemie deutlich gestiegen – Analyse für England zeigt, wie negativ sich Fehlzeiten auf Abschlussnoten auswirken – Schulen müssen personell und finanziell besser ausgestattet werden, um gegensteuern zu können Die Zahl der Schulfehltage ...

In its 80th year, the UN faces a significant crisis. Severe funding shortfalls are forcing the organisation to make cuts. However, the focus should not be solely on cost savings. Reform presents an opportunity to address unresolved challenges and to restructure the UN both institutionally and politically.

In its 80th year, the UN faces a significant crisis. Severe funding shortfalls are forcing the organisation to make cuts. However, the focus should not be solely on cost savings. Reform presents an opportunity to address unresolved challenges and to restructure the UN both institutionally and politically.

In its 80th year, the UN faces a significant crisis. Severe funding shortfalls are forcing the organisation to make cuts. However, the focus should not be solely on cost savings. Reform presents an opportunity to address unresolved challenges and to restructure the UN both institutionally and politically.

The member states of the European Union are once again arguing about money. More specifically, they are arguing about how much they want to spend on defence, where this money should come from and whether they should spend it jointly. That Europe needs to defend itself better is not in dispute in Brussels or the national capitals. However, despite many discussions, summit decisions, documents and initiatives, it is still unclear what goals the EU should pursue or how it should spend money to improve European defence capabilities. In addition to fresh funding, what is needed above all is agreement on shared European objectives. This would enable the continuation and strengthening of military support for Ukraine, the creation of a single mar­ket for armaments and services and the financing of these from the EU budget.

Die existentielle Not der Menschen im Gazastreifen prägt derzeit außen- und sicher­heitspolitische Debatten. Dort ist die Lage der Zivilbevölkerung besonders dramatisch. Doch auch anderswo – von der Ukraine über Sudan und Myanmar bis zur Demokratischen Republik Kongo und Haiti – haben Kriege und gewaltsame Konflikte verheerende Folgen für die Bevölkerung. In dieser Hinsicht zeichnet auch der Gene­ral­sekretär der Vereinten Nationen (VN) in seinem im Mai veröffentlichten jährlichen Bericht ein düsteres Bild. Zugleich greifen die gängigen internationalen Mittel der Konfliktbeilegung immer weniger. Daher ist es dringend geboten, wichtige Veränderungen im Konfliktgeschehen syste­matisch zu erfassen und Ansätze zum Schutz der Zivilbevölkerung auf dieser Grundlage neu zu justieren.

Motivation: In recent years, foreign aid donors have tried to becomemore transparent, often by sharing information digitally. However,the politicization of individual aid projects has resulted in biasedreporting, raising doubts about the legitimacy of aid in general. Wetherefore examine whether increased transparency leads to greatergovernment effectiveness and public trust. Purpose: Government agencies typically assume that greatertransparency in public administration improves understanding ofbureaucratic actions, thereby fostering trust in the government. Inforeign aid, openness is believed to enhance public confidence andimprove the effectiveness of governments. However, recent publicand political reactions to the disclosure of aid information cast doubton these optimistic assumptions. Approach and methods: Using our sender-mediator-receiver modelof a “fragile transparency loop,” we analyse how communicationbreaks down in German foreign aid. First, we focus on Germany as adonor that shares information through a digital transparency portal,examining the sender side. Second, we investigate the mediator sideby conducting a qualitative content analysis of German online mediaarticles. Third, we examine the receiver side by disaggregating theGerman public into several subgroups. Findings: Our empirical findings suggest that, while donors assumea virtuous transparency loop, the reality can resemble a fragiletransparency loop that is easily disrupted. The government maywithhold information; mediators may spread misinformation; and thepublic may not receive information neutrally. These dynamics explainwhy, despite increasing transparency, donors may not achieve theintended increases in government effectiveness and public trust. Policy implications: Donors should find a balanced approach toforeign aid transparency that upholds democratic accountabilitywhile avoiding information overload. Aid bureaucracies should tailortheir disclosure to serve different audiences, including professionalswith development expertise and the wider public, who may havepreconceptions or be uninformed about foreign aid.

Motivation: In recent years, foreign aid donors have tried to becomemore transparent, often by sharing information digitally. However,the politicization of individual aid projects has resulted in biasedreporting, raising doubts about the legitimacy of aid in general. Wetherefore examine whether increased transparency leads to greatergovernment effectiveness and public trust. Purpose: Government agencies typically assume that greatertransparency in public administration improves understanding ofbureaucratic actions, thereby fostering trust in the government. Inforeign aid, openness is believed to enhance public confidence andimprove the effectiveness of governments. However, recent publicand political reactions to the disclosure of aid information cast doubton these optimistic assumptions. Approach and methods: Using our sender-mediator-receiver modelof a “fragile transparency loop,” we analyse how communicationbreaks down in German foreign aid. First, we focus on Germany as adonor that shares information through a digital transparency portal,examining the sender side. Second, we investigate the mediator sideby conducting a qualitative content analysis of German online mediaarticles. Third, we examine the receiver side by disaggregating theGerman public into several subgroups. Findings: Our empirical findings suggest that, while donors assumea virtuous transparency loop, the reality can resemble a fragiletransparency loop that is easily disrupted. The government maywithhold information; mediators may spread misinformation; and thepublic may not receive information neutrally. These dynamics explainwhy, despite increasing transparency, donors may not achieve theintended increases in government effectiveness and public trust. Policy implications: Donors should find a balanced approach toforeign aid transparency that upholds democratic accountabilitywhile avoiding information overload. Aid bureaucracies should tailortheir disclosure to serve different audiences, including professionalswith development expertise and the wider public, who may havepreconceptions or be uninformed about foreign aid.

Motivation: In recent years, foreign aid donors have tried to becomemore transparent, often by sharing information digitally. However,the politicization of individual aid projects has resulted in biasedreporting, raising doubts about the legitimacy of aid in general. Wetherefore examine whether increased transparency leads to greatergovernment effectiveness and public trust. Purpose: Government agencies typically assume that greatertransparency in public administration improves understanding ofbureaucratic actions, thereby fostering trust in the government. Inforeign aid, openness is believed to enhance public confidence andimprove the effectiveness of governments. However, recent publicand political reactions to the disclosure of aid information cast doubton these optimistic assumptions. Approach and methods: Using our sender-mediator-receiver modelof a “fragile transparency loop,” we analyse how communicationbreaks down in German foreign aid. First, we focus on Germany as adonor that shares information through a digital transparency portal,examining the sender side. Second, we investigate the mediator sideby conducting a qualitative content analysis of German online mediaarticles. Third, we examine the receiver side by disaggregating theGerman public into several subgroups. Findings: Our empirical findings suggest that, while donors assumea virtuous transparency loop, the reality can resemble a fragiletransparency loop that is easily disrupted. The government maywithhold information; mediators may spread misinformation; and thepublic may not receive information neutrally. These dynamics explainwhy, despite increasing transparency, donors may not achieve theintended increases in government effectiveness and public trust. Policy implications: Donors should find a balanced approach toforeign aid transparency that upholds democratic accountabilitywhile avoiding information overload. Aid bureaucracies should tailortheir disclosure to serve different audiences, including professionalswith development expertise and the wider public, who may havepreconceptions or be uninformed about foreign aid.

Die Diskriminierung von übergewichtigen Menschen am Arbeitsplatz ist ein wachsendes Problem. Besonders Frauen verdienen schlechter, wegen neuer, alter Schönheitsideale., Übergewicht hat sich in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten zu einer großen gesundheitlichen Herausforderung mit pandemischen Ausmaßen entwickelt. Die WHO spricht schon seit 1997 von einer globalen Epidemie. Wir wissen zwar viel über die Auswirkungen von Übergewicht auf die Gesundheit und die Sozialsysteme, ...