Germany and reparations for Poland have become a topic in a recent interview with Dietmar Nietan, a German SPD politician who leads Polish-German affairs in the federal government. The conversation occurred in the context of Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine since February 2022 and highlighted perceived German missteps toward Moscow as well as concerns about Germany’s own defenses.
German missteps toward Russia
Nietan notes that many German politicians are aware of serious errors in dealing with the Kremlin, especially regarding the use of Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 as potential geopolitical tools. He argues that Europe becomes weaker if Germany remains heavily dependent on Russian gas.
He adds that influential figures in politics are trying to learn from these mistakes, while the SPD faction signals awareness. In contrast, he criticizes the CDU for not showing similar self-critique after sixteen years in power during which they produced a chancellor and supported Nord Stream projects.
Nietan also comments on Angela Merkel’s era, claiming she did not acknowledge fundamental mistakes related to Nord Stream 2. When asked about earlier discussions on disarmament versus rearmament and dialogue, Nietan says his own understanding of Russia is limited.
He points out the withdrawal from disarmament agreements like Open Skies, asserting that there is now little basis for cooperation with Russia on disarmament. He emphasizes the need to pursue global disarmament and to prevent more states from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Bundeswehr
Nietan does not hide the current fragile state of Germany’s armed forces. Over sixteen years of governance by coalitions, the Ministry of Defense has often been led by CDU members, and critics say the Bundeswehr’s capacity declined as equipment aged and became less usable.
He supports Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s decision to establish a 100 billion euro fund to strengthen the Bundeswehr, ensuring the country can defend itself and fulfill NATO commitments. He adds that Germany’s defense policy acknowledges that freedom carries a price, including better military equipment, and that resources are allocated to support Ukraine with weapons and other aid. The struggle in Ukraine is framed as a defense of European freedom itself.
Germany’s Eastern policy
Another admitted mistake concerns Berlin and Paris pursuing an Eastern policy that sidelines Central and Eastern European partners, with Poland identified as a key regional actor. Nietan calls this approach inappropriate and a serious error, noting it has contributed to current tensions.
He advocates for a new Eastern policy framed as an EU policy, granting Central and Eastern European countries the main voice in its development rather than Germany or France. He also remarks on the current strain in German-Polish relations and argues that mutual weakening is not the path to a shared European future. The priority, he says, should be unity in supporting Ukraine, pursuing EU membership for Ukraine, and rebuilding Ukraine after the war ends.
Reparations for Poland? Nietan on policy motives
Facing criticism that PiS seeks reparations and that Germany’s position has remained unchanged for years, Nietan rejects the idea of formal reparations. He accuses Poland of using a reparations report to serve other political purposes and suggests that those involved anticipated that Germany would not pay reparations in a formal sense. He adds that Berlin’s formal position reflects a legal stance that finds no remedy in international courts or elsewhere.
The aim, according to Nietan, is to persuade voters that anti-German sentiment has political utility for some parties, while the government itself maintains a formal, legal position that does not obligate reparations. He notes that the legal framework currently provides no avenue for formal compensation.
What could replace reparations?
Nietan offers a different perspective, proposing that Germany should consider alternatives to formal war reparations. He thanks the opposition for including reparations-related paragraphs in their resolution and suggests that recovery could involve billions of euros devoted to a future fund for culture and destroyed goods, alongside a robust defense initiative for Eastern Europe that includes air defense and other protective measures for Poland and neighboring states.
He indicates that the Polish government must decide whether to persist in a difficult battle for formal reparations or pursue a negotiated path with Berlin toward a different form of reparation. He also proposes a memorial in Berlin honoring Polish WWII victims and expanding Polish language education in Germany as a form of cultural reparations.
Nietan expresses dissatisfaction that the German Education Ministry has not yet implemented Bundestag decisions to fund Polish language education in Germany. He acknowledges his own capacity for self-criticism toward his government.
Nietan’s stance is clear: while reparations are debated, the focus should be on broader recognition of the damage and on practical, forward-looking measures that strengthen shared security and cultural ties. His remarks align with his broader view that Germany must engage constructively with Poland and its EU neighbors, balancing historical accountability with contemporary security needs. This framing mirrors ongoing discussions among policymakers about how to address past harms while building a resilient European defense and partnership framework.
Source material appears in wPolityce and interia.pl, with coverage that reflects a charged political debate in Poland about Germany, reparations, and regional security concerns.