Germany’s Hesitation and Europe’s Security Dilemma

By Jackson Mitchell — World & Politics

---

For decades after the war, Germany played it safe in Europe. Instead of flexing military muscle, it leaned on its economic strength and made a habit of building consensus. That approach fit a continent convinced the toughest chapters of its history were closed. But these days, with war raging to the east and old alliances looking shaky, Germany’s go-slow reflex isn’t just neutral anymore. It really matters.

Ever since Russia stormed into Ukraine, politicians in Berlin have kept repeating one word: Zeitenwende—a turning point. They said it meant Germany would finally break from old habits. Germany would spend more on defense. It would take on more responsibility and step up in Europe’s security game. But here’s the thing—almost three years later, the change hasn’t really arrived. Germany’s promises outpace its actions, and the gap between what Europe needs and what Berlin actually does just keeps growing.

This isn’t some minor detail. Germany isn’t just another country in Europe. It’s the continent’s economic powerhouse, its political anchor, the country others follow. When Germany acts with conviction, Europe often rallies. When it hesitates, Europe loses direction.

Why the hesitation? A lot of it comes down to history. Memories of the twentieth century still shape how German politicians think. Military power makes people nervous. Being too assertive feels risky. For years, these instincts worked—they kept Germany grounded in a rules-based system. But in a world where brute force is back on the table, restraint only gets you so far.

The war in Ukraine made this tension impossible to ignore. Germany did send weapons and cut back on Russian energy. It did boost defense spending, but this usually happened after long, agonizing debates. Every move seemed reluctant, driven less by conviction and more by outside pressure. For countries in Eastern Europe, this was hard to watch. They don’t think security can wait for endless consensus.

Things get even messier inside Germany. Coalitions mean compromise, which slows everything down. Big business still wields a lot of influence, especially industries tied to global trade and energy. And regular people are split—some want Germany to do the right thing, others worry about the economy, and many still cling to pacifism. The result? Foreign policy that feels reactive, not strategic.

And the ripple effects go far beyond Germany’s borders. France wants Europe to get tougher on defense but keeps running into German hesitation. Eastern European countries are growing impatient and turning more to the US or forming their own groups. Even smaller countries that once looked to Germany for steady leadership now wonder if they can count on it when things get tough.

But don’t mistake hesitation for irrelevance. Germany’s choices still set the tone in Europe—sometimes just by dragging its feet. When Berlin moves slowly, everyone else slows down too. By putting stability ahead of urgency, Germany quietly draws the line on how far Europe will go.

Really, the big question isn’t whether Germany could lead. It’s whether it’s ready to change what leadership means. In the past, leading meant calming nerves, keeping markets steady, holding the EU together. Now, it’s about being clear—about dangers, about commitments, about what Europe stands for. Europe doesn’t need Germany to boss everyone around. It just needs Germany to make up its mind.

Here’s the irony: Germany has everything it needs to step up—money, solid institutions, a good reputation. What’s missing isn’t ability. It’s confidence. Germany has to accept that history has moved on, and its role has to move with it.

This is Europe’s crossroads, and Berlin is front and center. The continent can stay divided, relying on outsiders and patchwork alliances, or it can start building a real, shared security identity. What Germany does next will decide which way things go.

If the past twenty years have taught Europe anything, it’s that peace doesn’t keep itself. You have to fight for it—politically and, if you must, militarily. Germany’s reluctance to fully accept this doesn’t make it nobler. It just leaves Europe in limbo.

Looking ahead, the real test isn’t whether Germany leaves the past behind. It’s whether it learns from it. Because leadership isn’t about erasing history—it’s about knowing when history calls for action, not just caution.