The Decline of Tradition in the German Foreign Service

• Published date: 01 December 1966
• DOI: 10.1177/106591296601900404
• Date: 01 December 1966
• Author: Daniel Lewin
• Subject Matter: Articles

653

THE

DECLINE

OF

TRADITION

IN

THE

GERMAN

FOREIGN

SERVICE

DANIEL

LEWIN

Wheaton

College

TENDENCY

to

concentrate

on

private

rather

than

public

concerns

is

a

/~

widely

noted

characteristic

of

postwar

German

society.

In

contrast

to

X

the

ideological

fanaticism

of

the

Weimar

Republic,

the

style

of

postwar

West

German

politics

has

generally

been

pragmatic - well

symbolized

by

Aden-

auer’s

campaign

slogan,

&dquo;No

experiments.&dquo;

Yet

despite

the

priority

which

the

electorate

and

the

political

parties

have

given

to

&dquo;bread-and-butter

questions,&dquo;

public

opinion

surveys,

as

well

as

occasional

national

controversies

like

the

Spiegel

affair,

suggest

that

fundamental

differences

over

ideological

questions

have

to

some

extent

been

carried

over

from

the

past.

Otto

Kirchheimer

has

suggested

that

these

underlying

cleavages,

largely

absent

from

party

politics,

manifest

themselves

in

&dquo;quasi-political&dquo;

feuds

within

the

bureaucracy.

&dquo;Cliques

and

coteries

still

play a

significant

role

in

a

country

where

relations

of

mutual

trust

often

depend

upon

ex-

periences

shared

in

a

Third

Reich

office,

the

anti-Nazi

underground,

exile,

or

a

prisoner-of-war,

concentration,

or

denazification

camp.&dquo;’

Such

cleavages,

in

which

ideological

differences

find

an

outlet

in

&dquo;office

poli-

tics,&dquo;

have

occurred

in

the

postwar

Foreign

Service.

Remnants

of

political

battles

waged

before

1945

and

before

1933

intermingle

with

personal

rivalries,

professional

jealousies,

and

differences

of

opinion

over

West

German

foreign

policy,

at

times

producing

vigorous

bureaucratic

infighting.

Karl

Georg

Pfleiderer,

a

former

career

diplomat

serving

as

a

parliamentary

deputy

of

the

Free

Democratic

party,

com-

plained

to

the

Bundestag

in

1951

that

&dquo;a

unified

spirit

and

a

unified

will

must

be

brought

into

this

ministry.&dquo;2

Four

years

later

a

journalist

charged

that

&dquo;what

takes

place

in

the

personnel

affairs

of

the

Foreign

Office

can

only

be

called

a

war

of

all

against

all

in

the

diplomats’

jungle.&dquo;3

3

In

recent

years,

internal

feuds

appear

to

have

decreased.

Foreign

Minister

Gerhard

Schroeder,

in

particular,

has

insisted

on

ministerial

solidarity

since

he

assumed

office

in

1961,

and

has

provided

the

Foreign

Office

with

the

administrative

direction

which

it

sometimes

lacked

during

the

years

of

reconstruction.

As

postwar

recruits

take

over

an

increasing

number

of

responsible

positions,

as

reinstated

pro-

fessional

diplomats

from

the

old

Foreign

Service

retire,

and

as

the

unorthodox

entry

of

those

officials

who

joined

the

ministry

laterally

as

adults

after

the

war

is

forgotten,

the

Service

again

gains

a

measure

of

internal

solidarity.

Yet

informed

commentators

insist

that

factional

strife

still

tends,

at

times,

to

pull

the

ministry

apart.

The

up-

heavals

caused

by

nazism,

war,

defeat,

and

the

rapid

reconstruction

after

1949,

coincided

with

universal

changes

in

the

diplomatic

profession,

including

bureaucra-

1

Otto

Kirchheimer,

"The

Political

Scene

in

West

Germany,"

World

Politics,

Vol.

II,

April

1957.

2

Verhandlungen

des

Deutschen

Bundestages,

1.

Wahlperiode,

October

16,

1951.

3

Martin

Boos,

Frankfurter

Neue

Presse,

February

15,

1955.