By Sun Yuliang

The air in Berlin is filled with a subtle tension. Poland's new president, Karol Nawrocki, crossed the border with a staggering figure - 1.3 trillion euros in reparations for World War II - before German President Steinmeier. His tone was firm, even somewhat transactional: if Germany pays the reparations, Poland will take on more responsibility in the NATO eastern flank. This logic that ties historical wounds to current security is surprising, and it immediately made the atmosphere at the Berlin meeting heavy.

Germany's response was unambiguous. Steinmeier and Chancellor Merkel clearly stated that the reparations claim had no legal basis, and the historical account had already been closed. The dialogue between the two countries during the closed-door meeting was somewhat stiff, but also symbolic: can past war wounds be used as a bargaining chip in real-world negotiations? Germany's stance was an unequivocal "no." History can be remembered, but it cannot be arbitrarily traded.

Notably, this so-called "reparations for commitment" proposal tied two issues that should have been separate - World War II reparations and NATO Eastern Flank defense responsibilities. Logically, they have almost nothing in common, yet Nawrocki cleverly placed them on the same table. Some say it is political wisdom, while others say it is a gamble. For years, right-wing conservative forces in Poland have repeatedly demanded reparations from Germany, turning historical wounds into political leverage. This time, Nawrocki seems to want to package historical debts as a guarantee for NATO Eastern Flank security.

Meanwhile, the situation in the NATO Eastern Flank is not calm. Last week, about 20 suspected Russian drones entered Polish airspace, an incident that raised NATO's alert level. Germany quickly deployed an emergency alert formation equipped with European fighters, and France and Denmark also provided support. The skies of Europe are tense like a string, and every radar alarm reminds people of the reality of geopolitics. The timing of Nawrocki's reparations request coincided highly with the situation in the NATO Eastern Flank, adding a sense of urgency to the entire game.

Germany's refusal is not only a legal position, but also a realistic political judgment. Faced with the security pressure in the NATO Eastern Flank, Germany must maintain the stability of its alliance relationships and defense strategy, rather than be led by the illusion of historical debts. While the logic of Poland may have a market on the negotiating table, in reality, it reminds European countries: historical accounts can remind people, but security guarantees cannot be built on illusory numbers.

This conversation also reflects the delicate contradictions within Europe. Poland plays a vanguard role in the NATO Eastern Flank, and its security responsibilities and strategic location cannot be ignored. If Germany were to pay a large sum in reparations, it would appear to be healing historical wounds, but in reality, it might weaken its own financial and strategic flexibility. How to balance historical accounts and real defense is a challenge that each European leader must face.

Beneath Nawrocki's strategy lies the continuation of right-wing politics and the fulfillment of promises to domestic voters. He uses history as a lever, trying to gain initiative in real international affairs. But reality reminds him that the levers on the diplomatic table require more refined calculations than domestic political logic. Although the amount of reparations is huge, the security of the NATO Eastern Flank cannot be obtained solely by paying. Historical debts cannot directly exchange military responsibilities, and security cannot be held hostage by historical accounts.

Germany's attitude shows a calm and mature approach: clearly rejecting unreasonable demands, while actively participating in NATO defense cooperation to solidify ally trust through facts and actions. This handling method combines the respect for history with practical strategy, reflecting the wisdom of European countries in complex international games. History can be remembered, but decisions must be based on reality.

This incident also reminds the world that historical accounts remain sensitive in international politics. The wounds of World War II have not completely healed, but they should not become a tool for unilateral negotiations. Confusing reparations requests with security commitments may seem like a strategy, but it actually hides risks - once misunderstandings or trust crises arise, the consequences may far exceed the numbers themselves. International politics is a stage of realism; although historical memories are heavy, reason and capability are the foundation of decision-making.

The confrontation between Poland and Germany is not just about reparations, but also a subtle test of the future structure of the NATO Eastern Flank. Drone incursions, fighter deployments, and emergency alerts all remind people of the sensitivity and fragility of the European security situation. Can historical accounts become part of a real strategy? Germany's clear rejection tells the world that history is not a lever, and security is the priority.

In the meeting room in Berlin, numbers and politics intertwine, and history collides with reality. The reparations demand put forward by Nawrocki is like a thunderclap, causing public shock, but Germany's steady response acts as a barrier, preventing historical debts from evolving into strategic risks. The European security landscape thus becomes more complex, and more wisdom is needed.

This game is far from over, but it has already sent a clear signal to the world: historical accounts can remind, but they cannot hold reality hostage; political means can be tried, but security strategies must operate independently. The Berlin meeting leaves not only a diplomatic record, but also a vivid commentary on how Europe finds a balance between history and reality. In the ever-changing international politics, reason and capability have more decisive power than numbers and threats.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7551992581535384098/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author and welcomes you to express your attitude by clicking the [Top/Down] button below.