Angela Merkel’s tenure as Chancellor of Germany for 16 years is just such a example. While we discuss her time in Donald Trump’s administration, she got through a stormy marriage with the man. As of January 2018, Merkel was well into her thirteenth year as Germany’s chancellor. At the same time, Trump was beginning to make his mark on international relations. These bits of their interactions showed the delicate dance that is today’s diplomacy — marked by a sense of historical awareness, strategic patience and purpose.
In January 2018, Merkel gave one of the best speeches ever written as a call to action at the World Economic Forum in Davos. She railed against the collapse of international alliances. She underscored the importance of the alliance between Germany and the United States, calling it “crucial.” This deep connection has always rested on mutual adherence to democratic principles, rule of law, and political pluralism. It was clear from her tone that she wasn’t optimistic as she offered her comments. She noted the risks of a return of ultranationalism, a concern that resonates with a well-remembered severity in Europe’s collective memory.
Indeed, Merkel’s speech was a cautionary tale inspired by Europe’s history that served as a sobering reminder to everyone present about the fragility of peace. She articulated a vision for future generations: “We need to ask ourselves if we have really learned from history or not.” She navigated her first days confronting Trump with equal parts deference to history’s lessons. Yet, she at once acknowledged the need to negotiate with a volatile president whose volatility was matched by capacity for ignorance.
Although she knew better than anyone how terrible and unpredictable Trump was going to be, Merkel took the position of strategic patience. She knew that dealing with his volatile personality would take a lot of quiet diplomacy. As Chancellor, she more often than not responded to the chaotic flailings of a U.S. president’s twitter finger. She took these steps to shore up support for Europe’s military alliances. The stakes couldn’t have been higher. Trump threatened additional tariffs on any country that stood in the way of his agenda, including the countries that sided with Denmark in the spat on Trump’s proposed acquisition of Greenland and its real estate value.
This may explain Merkel’s clear measure of Trump from their first encounter. As she wrote a congratulatory message to him the morning after his 2016 election victory, her original message came with a warning. That foreshadowed the contentious relationship that would develop during their long contentious interactions over the course of his presidency.
In June 2018, at a G7 meeting in La Malbaie, Quebec, Canada, Merkel appeared alongside these other world leaders. They all had to deal with the problem of Trump’s chaotic and capricious style of foreign policy. A sense of unmistakable urgency enveloped the meeting. Congressional participants were actively engaged in maintaining their coalition when faced with often weekly attacks and incendiary demands from Trump.
Merkel adroitly steered through these choppy waters. Her eye was clearly on the long-term goal of encouraging a spirit of diplomacy. Specifically, she contacted UK Labour leader Keir Starmer during Trump’s tariff threat du jour—on auto imports, if you haven’t been keeping track! This proactive approach showed her commitment to preserving alliances in spite of external pressures.
Yet, in the years since her own departure from office, Merkel’s legacy has come under fire. She fought tooth and nail to maintain order in transatlantic ties during Trump’s tumultuous presidency. This push was not enough to earn her a favorable review of her tenure in office. That her accommodating approach to Trump ultimately eroded the rules she was trying to protect is the central critique leveled against her.
Merkel’s portents of ultranationalism’s return and calls for greater civility sound prescient enough, but their relevance reaches even higher today. The geopolitical landscape has continued to shift, prompting renewed discussions about the importance of historical awareness in shaping future policies.