The Auswärtiges Amt, Germany’s Foreign Office, houses an elite, professional diplomatic corps that is well-socialized into a cohesive diplomatic culture, which makes for disciplined and coherent foreign policy messaging, sometimes at the cost of flexibility and autonomy. The Foreign Office’s role in decision-making has been eroded by the advent of new bureaucratic “actors” and the growing centralization of policy in the office of the Chancellor. Meanwhile, a combination of new challenges—the refugee crisis, Brexit, Russian aggression, and others—have been unsettling, particularly with the weakening of multilateral institutions, through which Germany prefers to act. The resignation of Angela Merkel as Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party leader in 2018 and her announcement that she will not seek another term as chancellor add to the uncertainties ahead.


Germany Auswärtiges Amt Diplomacy Diplomats Foreign policy Foreign ministry Foreign office 



The authors wish to thank the following diplomats and scholars who were consulted in researching and writing this chapter: Philipp Ackermann, Helga Barthe, Harald Braun, Anke Freibert, Maria Gosse, Helge Holleck, John Kornblum, Wolfgang Seibert, Klaus Scharioth, and Stephen Szabo.


  1. Andreae, L., and K. Kaiser. 2001. The ‘Foreign Policies’ of Specialized Ministries. In Germany’s New Foreign Policy, ed. W. Eberwein and K. Kaiser, 38–57. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  2. Ash, T.G. 1993. In Europe’s Name: Germany and the Divided Continent. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  3. Bendiek, A. 2015. The ‘2014 Review’: Understanding the Pillars of German Foreign Policy and the Expectations of the Rest of the World. Working Paper RD EU/Europe, 2015/05, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, May 2015. Accessed January 1, 2019.
  4. Cecil, L. 1976. The German Diplomatic Service, 1871–1914. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Conze, E., N. Frei, P. Hayes, and M. Zimmermann. 2011. Das amt und die vergangensheit: Deutsche diplomaten im dritten reich und in der Bundesrepublik. Munich: Karl Blessing Verlag.Google Scholar
  6. Crawford, B. 2007. Power and German Foreign Policy: Embedded Hegemony in Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crossley-Frolick, K.A. 2016. Revisiting and Reimagining the Notion of Responsibility in German Foreign Policy. International Studies Perspectives 18 (4): 443–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eberwein, W., and K. Kaiser. 1998. Academic Research and Foreign Policy-Making. In Germany’s New Foreign Policy, ed. W. Eberwein and K. Kaiser, 3–18. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  9. ———, eds. 2001. Germany’s New Foreign Policy: Decision-Making in an Interdependent World. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  10. Frei, N., and P. Hayes. 2011. The German Foreign Office and the Past. Bulletin of the German Historical Institute 49 (Fall 2011).Google Scholar
  11. Freibert, A. 2004. Classifications and Career Development in the German Foreign Service. SIGMA (Support for Improvement in Governance and Management), Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, December 2004. Accessed January 1, 2019.
  12. Galtung, J. 1981. Structure, Culture, and Intellectual Style: An Essay Comparing Saxonic, Teutonic, Gallic and Nipponic Approaches. Social Science Information 20 (6): 817–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haftendorn, H. 2006. Coming of Age: German Foreign Policy Since 1945. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  14. Hellman, G. 2001. Precarious Power: Germany at the Dawn of the Twenty-First Century. In Germany’s New Foreign Policy, ed. W. Eberwein and K. Kaiser, 293–311. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  15. Kinney, S. n.d. AFSA Benchmarking Exercise: Brazil, China, UK, Germany, France, Canada, Mexico, India Selection and Entry Level Training. Washington, DC: American Foreign Service Association.Google Scholar
  16. Kissinger, H. 1994. Diplomacy. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  17. Lewin, D. 1966. The Decline of Tradition in the German Foreign Service. The Western Political Science Quarterly 19 (4): 653–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Neukirch, R. 2012. German Foreign Ministry Fights to Stay Relevant. Spiegel Online, May 4.Google Scholar
  19. von Ploetz, H. 1998. New Challenges for the Foreign Service. In Germany’s New Foreign Policy, ed. W. Eberwein and K. Kaiser, 70–86. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  20. Siwert-Probst, J. 2001. Traditional Institutions of Foreign Policy. In Germany’s New Foreign Policy, ed. W. Eberwein and K. Kaiser, 19–37. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  21. Smyser, W.R. 2003. How Germans Negotiate: Logical Goals, Practical Solutions. Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace Press.Google Scholar
  22. Steinmeier, F. 2015. Closing Remarks by Foreign Minister Steinmeier at ‘Review 2014’ Conference. Auswärtiges Amt. Accessed January 1, 2019.
  23. Szabo, S.F. 2006. Enlarging NATO: The German-American Design for a New Alliance. In The Strategic Triangle: France, Germany, and the United States in the Shaping of the New Europe, ed. H. Haftendorn et al., 327–349. Washington and Baltimore: Wilson Center Press and The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Techau, J. 2015. The Steinmeier Review of German Foreign Policy. Carnegie Europe, March 19. Accessed January 1, 2019.
  25. The Federal Foreign Office: Facts and Figures. 2018. Berlin: Federal Foreign Office. Accessed January 1, 2018.
  26. Watt, D.C. 1970. The Reform of the German Foreign Service: The Herwarth and Duncan Reports Compared. The World Today 26 (8): 352–358.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.US Army Fellow, 2016–2017The University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  2. 2.2017 Master of Arts Degree, Global Policy StudiesThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  3. 3.Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public AffairsThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations