German and U.S. leaders should calm public tensions over espionage

In the continuing public clash between Berlin and Washington over alleged American surveillance activities in Germany, there may be a calm coming up after the storm. But that will depend on how the leaders of the two nations approach each other going forward.

The entire top levels of political leadership in Berlin — including Chancellor Angela Merkel — have sounded off their anger and resentment about American surveillance. The German consensus is that it was necessary to take the unusual and historically unique step of asking the head of the intelligence section at the U.S. Embassy in Berlin to leave the country. That action was deemed a warning shot over the bow of the U.S. and its surveillance policies. The message: Don’t take us for granted.

While the details of the two suspects who were taken into custody for allegedly aiding U.S. contacts with espionage remain under investigation, as far as the Germans are concerned there is no doubt that the Americans are accountable for their actions, which are not acceptable. Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier are talking about the next steps to rebuild the bridges of trust that have been undermined.

After several days of eschewing the headlines and public accusations coming out of Berlin, the Obama administration has now begun to respond. In official comments on the ensuing controversy, the White House has expressed frustration that the clash was thrust into the public domain and not handled privately between the two governments, as has been the customary procedure in the past. Some voices in the U.S. Congress have been more confrontational, accusing the Germans of grandstanding in public when the two nations’ intelligence services have — for a long time — successfully worked together without difficulty. Others claim that Berlin still needs to be watched, given German attitudes toward policies that may conflict with those of the United States, such as relations with Russia.

What difference is this current tension going to make in the long run between Berlin and Washington?

In many ways, there is less news here than the headlines suggest. The U.S. intelligence services have been engaged with, and in, Germany over many decades at multiple levels. This will not change. Given the increasingly important role Berlin plays in Europe and globally, U.S. interest in Germany’s policy choices and debates will remain of importance for Washington to study and — let us hope — understand. In fact, this mandate is not unlike that of other U.S. intelligence operations in key countries around the world. And it is no different from the need for Germany to understand the decisions and policy process unfolding in the United States.

The main difference is in the capacity and the parameters that U.S. intelligence agencies employ to follow that mandate. The ensuing clash is exactly in the nexus of those capacities and policies.

Over many years, the U.S. has developed extensive global intelligence operations and technological penetration. It has also established multiple institutional tools to use those capacities, including cooperative channels between several intelligence agencies. While these tools can generate advantages for countries in alliance with the U.S., the priority for the intelligence produced by these tools is Washington’s consumption. Germany has less intelligence capacity and also narrower political room to use it. The postwar legacy plays a significant role in shaping those limits. But this has not prevented Germany from working closely with Washington in pursuing the threats and dangers the two countries face. Yet continued collaboration cannot be done in a political vacuum. 

In the wake of last year’s revelations by former U.S. National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, sensitivity to government surveillance has grown exponentially. The blowback against the NSA revelations in the U.S. is a measure of the political controversy over the reach of the government’s surveillance of its own citizens. Regardless of whether it is coming from Berlin or foreign intelligence services, the same applies to Germany. As a result, as seen in Germany over the past few days, politicians are forced to respond when the public is charged up.

In the long run, there is clearly no advantage to be gained by enhanced and ongoing mudslinging across the Atlantic. The fact is that the two countries’ interests continue to be shaped more by shared problems and opportunities than those that divide them. For example, the crisis in Ukraine and the nuclear talks with Iran represent shared challenges for the two countries, and the negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement underline their common goals. The latest flare-up may, in fact, lead to more clarity on what Berlin and Washington need to do to respect each other’s legal and political parameters.

For Washington, this means recognizing the fact that those parameters do exist. In light of the very public debate on the difficulty of addressing security needs while also protecting privacy on both sides of the Atlantic, insisting that the current clash is best solved behind closed doors without public involvement is not persuasive.

The public needs to share in that debate. But we also need a better public understanding of what the needs and benefits of intelligence operations are today and how effective oversight can be utilized. That debate is particularly challenging for Germans, but it needs to be had. After all, Germany’s enhanced global leadership also comes with the responsibilities of being a major power. And that includes accepting the reality of surveillance and espionage.

Ultimately, the ongoing debates offer a unique opportunity to renew a critical relationship, not just for the U.S. and Germany but also for transatlantic relations in general. This ought to be a message shared and emphasized by both the German chancellor and the U.S. president. Still, there needs to be accountability and consequences for the abuse of intelligence toolboxes for both sides. Germany and the United States have forged a partnership over decades of dealing with both goals and disagreements. This is another occasion to review both.