spiegel

Earlier this month, a "true friend of Israel and the Jewish people” is welcomed by Israeli President Isaac Herzog at his official residence in Jerusalem, a somewhat weathered complex known as Beit HaNassi. His guest is Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Herzog’s German counterpart. The two have known each other for decades. Indeed, Steinmeier publicly refers to Herzog by his nickname, "Bougie,” and their wives are on similarly close terms.

The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 21/2025 (May 17th, 2025) of DER SPIEGEL.

Large round tables have been prepared for the state dinner, with one of them, intended for the presidents and their wives, standing apart from the others. A small stage with two microphones has been set up in front of it. Appetizers are served as Herzog presents his guest with a medal of honor and showers him with accolades.

"On behalf of the people of Israel – on behalf of the generations who remember and those yet to come – I thank you for your steadfast friendship in our most difficult hours,” Herzog intones. "As you said: The friendship between Germany and Israel is a gift – and it is also a responsibility.”

It was, says one banquet guest, an extremely emotional moment.

Then it is Steinmeier’s turn. Speaking in English, the normally matter-of-fact German president allows his language to become a bit flowery on this evening.

"Every visit to Israel makes my heart beat faster,” says Steinmeier. "The State of Israel has left a deep, deep mark on who I am. As a politician, but even more so as a human being.”

The occasion is the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany. Herzog visited Steinmeier the day before in Berlin before the two then traveled together to Israel. In truth, however, there is more at stake.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog with German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier on a visit to the National Library in Jerusalem.

Frank-Walter Steinmeier speaks about the German-Israeli relationship since October 7, 2023, the day of the Hamas terrorist attack that prompted Israel to invade Gaza and seek the Islamist group’s destruction. He reminds his audience of the peace that seems so far out of reach. And he closes with the words: "Germany is on your side.”

Then, Ivri Lider, a popular Israeli pop star, sings "Imagine” by John Lennon. "Imagine all the people, living life in peace.”

That same evening, in Beit Hanun, some 70 kilometers southwest of Jerusalem, Yahya Hamad does not know how he is going to feed his family. The situation has never been as grim for them as it is now, he says. Hamad, 50, lives here with his wife and seven children. The day before they ran out of flour, he says in an interview conducted over the phone, and now all they have left are a few packages of rice and noodles and some canned food.

"Our reserves are dwindling, and the prices are so terribly high.”

The aid organizations have nothing more to distribute, he says. A single meal for the family now costs the equivalent of $25, which he cannot afford, even though he had a well-paying job as an IT specialist at Al-Quds University before the war and still receives a portion of his salary.

Gaza Strip resident Yahya Hamad standing in front of the ruins of his home.

A look into the shelter where the Hamad family lives in the northern part of the Gaza Strip, next to the remains of their home.

Since returning to northern Gaza in mid-January during the ceasefire, all nine of them have been living in a four-by-six-meter shelter next to the ruins of their home, which was bombed at the start of the war. There are likely still bodies beneath the rubble of the neighboring house. "The smell of decay is often in the air,” he says, adding that the stench blends in with the sewage and trash piled up at every corner. The vermin are everywhere, he says, with the rats coming out at night. Last night, Hamad says, they attacked a hungry dog. The children are suffering from insect bites, rashes and stomach problems due to contaminated water and undernourishment.

His two youngest daughters often cry from hunger, Hamad says. He tells them they should drink water or go to sleep early. But going to sleep is made difficult by the constant noise of war: gunfire, explosions and the perpetual whirring of drones. A few days ago, he says, an Israeli helicopter struck a nearby target causing his wife and children to cry out in fear. "And I couldn’t protect them.” His youngest daughter Malak, he says, frequently asks when she can return to school.

"We don’t have a future here anymore,” Yahya Hamad says, "the world has betrayed us.”

A "gift” is what Frank-Walter Steinmeier called German-Israeli relations, and he is no-doubt correct, even if the relationship was still rather probationary in 1965. It was hardly to be expected that just 20 years after the liberation of the concentration camps, both a democratic German state and a democratic Jewish state would even exist, let alone establish diplomatic ties.

More than any other country, Israel forces the Germans to question their own identity and to ask themselves who they are and who they want to be. Israel is the land of Holocaust survivors. The people who, if Adolf Hitler and his many German supporters had had their way, should have been exterminated.

The lessons drawn from the Holocaust by Israel and by Germany may be diametrically opposed: the Germans swear to never again be perpetrators, the Israelis to never again be victims. But this changes nothing about the deep connection between the two countries based on their shared experience.

In a 2008 speech before the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, Angela Merkel gave the German half of this relationship a name: the security of Israel, she said, was an element of Germany’s "Staatsräson” (raison d’état). It is a term that implies that the relationship between Israel and Germany is not and cannot be a normal one: To learn from the Holocaust means doing everything possible to guarantee the security of Israel.

Chancellor Angela Merkel seaking in the Knesset in 2008: "Learning from the Holocaust means doing everything possible to guarantee Israel's security."

But what does the crime of the Holocaust really mean for Germany? Does the country primarily have a responsibility toward Israel, toward Jews everywhere? Or does it also have the responsibility to prevent further genocides and misanthropy, regardless of where and of who is committing the crime? Both the concept of "crime against humanity” and that of genocide – the latter developed for the UN by the lawyer Raphael Lemkin with the aim of preventing similar events in the future – both internalize the concept of a universal catastrophe.

This puts Germany in a bind. There are few countries that defend the rule-based order as vigorously as Germany. Yet when it comes to the relationship to Israel, the Germans have stretched this order time and again. National interests are not always straightforward, and they can be contradictory. That, at least, is how it has always been. But the war in Gaza has cast doubt on this German-Israeli agreement. Israel was always an exceptional case. But now, the contradiction may have become too extreme to be ignored any further.

Allegedly to bring Hamas to heel, Israel has blocked the entry of food and aid into Gaza since May 2 and resumed its military offensive with even greater brutality than before. Again and again, the air force has bombed hospitals and schools serving as emergency shelters. Civilians are killed nearly every day. Israel has defended its attacks by claiming that Hamas positions are frequently beneath or next to civilian facilities. Proof of such allegations is hardly ever given.

The death toll kept climbing during Steinmeier’s visit as well. At the same time, there are still hostages being held prisoner in the Hamas tunnels. Many of them may be dead; their families have to live with the uncertainty. The blockade, though, also has consequences. International aid organizations have warned that the risk of famine in Gaza is high and growing. Nearly half a million people are severely at risk. Already, every second child suffers from food insecurity.

Meanwhile, the Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is openly admitting its intention to expel the Palestinian population or compel them to leave, preparatory to a permanent occupation of the territory. Netanyahu has repeatedly said he intends to implement Trump’s plan for a "Riviera of the Middle East.” Shortly before his meeting with the German president, Netanyahu said of the people in Gaza: "If we give them a way out, I’m telling you, more than 50 percent will leave. In my opinion, many more.”

It was nothing short of an expression of support for the mass expulsion of the people of Gaza – on the same day he then met with the German president. Can Germany really continue its support of this man?

Food being distributed to Palestinians in Khan Younis in May.

Steinmeier is fully aware that he must strike a delicate balance. His visit’s itinerary was evidence enough. It included not only the obligatory meetings with the country’s top politicians, but also a visit to a kibbutz, a long stopover in the National Library of Israel, and a trip to the Weizmann Institute, one of the country’s most important research institutes. And he met with Israeli intellectuals to discuss the concerns of Israeli civil society about the state of democracy in Israel and their request that Steinmeier pass these concerns along to Netanyahu.

According to a press release from the German president’s office, Steinmeier expressed the "urgent necessity of highlighting political perspectives on how to end the war.”

Even Donald Trump, in concluding his recent agreement with the Arab countries, did not insist that they take up relations with Israel. Likewise, in negotiating the release of an Israeli-American hostage, he bypassed Netanyahu – Trump, who just a few weeks ago published a bizarre AI-generated video of himself sitting on the beach in Gaza with Netanyahu. The French President Emmanuel Macron has sharply criticized Netanyahu, saying his course of action is "unacceptable” and calling Israel’s blockade "a disgrace.” At times one has the impression that Germany is Israel’s last remaining friend.

The statements made in Israel in mid-May by the new German foreign minister, Johan Wadephul, do nothing to dispel this impression. Wadephul said it was "perfectly clear,” in light of the plans for a new mechanism for aid distribution in Gaza, that Israel could not be accused of breaching international law. Yet this is anything but clear. Aid organizations have characterized this U.S.-devised solution as insufficient, saying it would not meet their benchmarks for humanitarian aid. They see it primarily as a tool to displace the population while fending off criticism.

After the massacre of October 7, in which Hamas and its allies slaughtered roughly 1,200 people and took more than 250 hostages back to Gaza, Israel initially received widespread sympathy from much of the global community. During that attack, Israelis were forced to listen helplessly through the media to the cries for help from civilians trapped in their safe rooms near the border. Next to the Arab assault at the start of the Yom Kippur War in 1973, it was the greatest shock in Israel’s history – and the deadliest day for Jews since the end of World War II. Their safety, which formed the basic principle of the Zionist project, was suddenly in doubt. And when images circulated of some Palestinians celebrating the attack, many Israelis became convinced that "there are no innocents in Gaza.”

Israel hit back hard, bombarding Gaza and later sending in ground troops. It would have been appropriate for Israel’s allies to at least ask Netanyahu for a clear plan of action. But then U.S. President Joe Biden failed in his attempts to temper the Israeli response. And it took a long time before appeals to moderation were heard from Germany. Berlin never seriously considered a general halt to arms shipments.

A worker standing in front of containers containing the bodies of Israelis killed in the October 7 terrorist attack.

As a result, the war became a retaliatory campaign with no obvious blueprint. It remains unclear to this day who or what should succeed Hamas as the authority in Gaza. Netanyahu has spoken of revenge and a "total victory” – a vague goal which allows him to extend the war indefinitely. This primarily benefits his right-wing extremist allies, who want to establish new Jewish settlements in Gaza. The prime minister, who is standing trial on corruption charges, is dependent on these coalition partners. Moreover, he is determined to prevent an official investigation into October 7.

Two legal proceedings, both before international courts in The Haag, are currently underway against Israel or its leaders. The case before the International Court of Justice was initiated by South Africa, which accused Israel of perpetrating genocide in the Gaza Strip. The case is still being heard, and a decision is not expected for several years. In the course of the proceedings, however, the court has already granted three urgent requests, all of which boil down to the demand that Israel protect the civilian population of Gaza and allow humanitarian aid to reach them. The emergency rulings do not prejudice the outcome of the case, but they make clear that the judges do not take the accusation of genocide lightly. To find Israel guilty under the Genocide Convention, the court would have to be convinced of the presence of "genocidal intent.”

Then there are the investigative proceedings at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which concern both Israel as well as Hamas. In November 2024 the ICC issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Netanyahu and then Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. A warrant was also issued for a leader of Hamas who has since been confirmed dead. Arrest warrants were requested for two other Hamas leaders but not issued because the men had already been killed.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant in 2024.

The chief prosecutor accuses Netanyahu and Gallant of war crimes and crimes against humanity. He lays special emphasis on the claim that Israel has allowed too little food, water, medicine, fuel and electricity into Gaza and thus threatened the survival of its civilian population. Starvation as a method of warfare – it is a grave accusation, but one that may be easier to prove than individual war crimes that involve attacks on civilians.

Germany’s previous government under Chancellor Olaf Scholz struggled to find a response to these cases, especially Annalena Baerbock, Scholz’s foreign minister, who frequently invoked international law. For a long time, politicians evaded the question of what they would do if Netanyahu visited Germany. Because Germany is party to the Statute of the ICC, the authorities would be obligated to arrest him at the court’s request. Yet the idea of an Israeli prime minister being arrested – in Germany of all places – was unpalatable.

During his election campaign, Germany’s new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, publicly voiced confidence in the proportionality of Israel’s military campaign. He announced plans to again boost arms deliveries and stated one day after winning the election that he would invite Netanyahu to Germany – only to backtrack the day he was sworn into office. "We are deeply concerned about Israel,” he told German public broadcaster ARD. It must be "made clear that the Israeli government is obliged to fulfill its obligations in international law, in the law of war, and humanitarian aid must be provided to the Gaza Strip.”

But what if Israel ignores these requests? The problems can no longer be solved by mere rhetoric. Their causes lie deeper – they go back to the Holocaust and the question of what lessons to draw from it. The German-Jewish intellectual Meron Mendel writes in his book "Talking About Israel” (Über Israel Reden) that instead of seriously reflecting on its relationship to the Jewish state, Germany has mostly remained in conversation with itself. It is a nation of 80 million experts on the Middle East, he says, who hold strong opinions despite having little familiarity with the realities on the ground.

When DER SPIEGEL reached Mendel earlier this month, he was on a train to Berlin to meet Steinmeier, whom he would accompany as part of the delegation to Israel. Mendel is director of the Anne Frank Educational Center in Frankfurt am Main, a cultural institution dedicated to the fight against anti-Semitism and racism. Mendel has become Germany’s go-to expert on anti-Semitism.

Raised on a kibbutz in Israel, he moved to Germany after his service in the military. Already then, 20 years ago, he was struck by the importance of Israel to the German national psyche. A key experience for him was witnessing two opposing demonstrations in downtown Frankfurt, separated by a police barricade – one pro-Israel, one pro-Palestine, screaming at each other across the barricade. It reminded him of a football match.

Mendel argues that the relationship to Israel allows Germans to construct "an alleged consensus.” It helps to define a collective identity. As the world becomes more confusing and Germany more diverse, Mendel says, the relationship to Israel gives people orientation – albeit in often conflicting directions. Some believe the German past dictates unconditional solidarity with the Jewish state; others believe that Israelis are the new Nazis. "But a great deal of that is just projection,” says Mendel.

Historian Meron Mendel and the political scientist Saba-Nur Cheema.

He points to the example of Frank-Walter Steinmeier’s opening speech at the 2022 Documenta, which faced allegations of anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli art. Great to have you here, Steinmeier said, addressing the Indonesian art collective that curated the art festival, adding that he is in favor of artistic provocation. But one thing must be made clear, he intoned: "For us, the recognition of Israel is the basis and precondition of debate!”

Shortly thereafter the debate exploded anyway, when anti-Semitic symbols were discovered in several of the artworks exhibited by the collective. Mendel was called to Kassel to resolve the scandal, but he gave up the job after reaching the conclusion that there was little interest in nuanced discussion.

The mechanism described by Mendel shows up frequently in the German debate over Israel. It is a complicated dispute because of the difficulty of extricating the issue from anti-Semitism. The question often arises of what can be said when criticizing Israeli politics without crossing the line into anti-Semitism.

Indeed, it is a boundary that frequently gets crossed. And when it comes to the various definitions of anti-Semitism, or the distinction between political anger and anti-Jewish hatred, the debate in Germany is more vehement than anywhere else.

The Russian-American author Masha Gessen was set to receive the Hannah Arendt Prize in Bremen. But because Gessen – who comes from a Jewish family – wrote an article comparing the situation in Gaza to that of Jews in the ghettos of Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe, the original award ceremony in City Hall was cancelled in favor of a smaller venue. The philosopher Nancy Fraser, who was invited to give lectures at the University of Cologne, had her invitation revoked because he signed an open letter that relativized Hamas’ terrorism and called for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel.

At German universities, particularly in Berlin, students have repeatedly staged occupations, in the wake of which the lecture halls often look like battlegrounds. The protests have resulted in significant repair costs. The official response has been inconsistent.

A lecture hall in Berlin's Humboldt Universitiy following its occupation by pro-Palestinian activists.

The debate is now firmly embedded in the German public sphere. Articles circulate, views are exchanged. The problem is that the debate has not really translated into the political sphere.

This is partly the result of the anti-Semitism resolutions passed by the Bundestag. They were well-intended expressions by the German parliament against anti-Jewish hatred. The resolutions are not legally binding, but their effect is very real: Aside from raising awareness for how anti-Semitism manifests, they have led the so-calledStaatsräson –which originally applied only to foreign affairs – seeping into the domestic arena. Many feel that their ability to criticize Israeli politics has been unduly restricted.

The effect of theStaatsräsoncould be observed in March at the 80th anniversary of the liberation of the concentration camp at Buchenwald. The German-Israeli philosopher Omri Boehm, who was invited to speak at the event, was ultimately prevented from doing so. Boehm had planned to underline the universal lessons of the murder of the Jews. He believes that Israeli particularism, with its assumption that the fate of the Jews is unique and cannot be applied to other peoples and events, leads only to war and exclusion. Thus, he believes that Israel has no future as a Jewish state. Peace and justice cannot be guaranteed by the two-state solution, as is commonly professed in German politics (even if hardly anyone believes it anymore), he argues. A one-state solution is the only way.

But at the center of Boehm’s intended speech was a larger question: How can the remembrance of the past attain new meaning? How does particularism, or the emphasis on Jewish tradition and identity, relate to universalism, or the values that apply to everyone? And what is the meaning of this for today’s world, for Israel and for Germany? Questions that go to the very heart of the German-Israeli encounter.

Boehm was uninvited, primarily due to the pressure that was put on the memorial site by Israeli ambassador Ron Prosor, who called Boehm’s invitation "ludicrous.” He considers Boehm, who lost relatives in the Holocaust, an "anti-Semitic Jew” – a smear that the top representatives of the Netanyahu government in Germany have repeatedly used against critics of the Israeli campaign in Gaza. It is a tool for discrediting both opinions and individuals.

Hardly any politicians stood up for Boehm. What Boehm wanted to talk about was swept under the rug. Instead, the question became whether he was allowed to say anything at all. TheStaatsräsonprevailed. The substantive debate was brushed aside.

Philosopher Omri Boehm in Vienna: How can the remembrance of the past attain new meaning?

It was Angela Merkel who introducedStaatsräsonas an expression of the German bond with Israel. She cared deeply about the country and visited Israel a total of eight times as chancellor. Originally,raison d’étatwas a concept from political philosophy, developed by Niccolò Machiavelli to describe the ruler’s art of preserving power. Merkel’s point was to underline the link between Israel and Germany and its historical foundations. Yet in choosing this word – whether she intended to or not – Merkel touched on something with deep roots in postwar German history.

A great deal had to happen before diplomatic relations between Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany could be established in 1965. With the Luxembourg Agreement of 1952, also referred to as the Reparations Agreement, West Germany agreed to pay 3.5 billion deutsche marks: 3 billion to Israel, 450 million to Jews living outside Israel, and 50 million to others who did not belong to a Jewish religious community.

Chancellor Konrad Adenauer justified the agreement on moral grounds, even if it was clear to him that it could not make amends for "the full magnitude of damage inflicted on life and property.” But that was only one half of his reasoning. The Chancellor was also concerned with the restoration of German sovereignty. This required the Federal Republic, the successor state of the German Reich, to demonstrate that it had changed. Guilt and self-interest were intertwined from the start.

In Israel, the payments were hotly debated. Was it okay to accept this blood money? But it was clear to David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father, that his country needed the money to survive – as well as weapons, which were also supplied by Germany. In 1957, an Israeli delegation presented then Defense Minister Franz Josef Strauß with a long list of requests. The Israelis wanted planes, anti-tank missiles, helicopters, and artillery. With the chancellor’s blessing, Strauß secretly began fulfilling these requests by allowing weapons – and even a helicopter – to disappear from German stockpiles. Submarines were built in Great Britain following German designs, all in secret. And this was long before the Americans started shipping arms to Israel.

In West Germany, too, the relationship to Israel was contested. West German foreign policy at that time followed the Hallstein Doctrine: Whoever wanted diplomatic ties with the West Germany had to cut ties with the GDR, their East German rival. The military cooperation with Israel precluded diplomatic relations with the Arab states, who were successfully courted by the GDR. The West German Foreign Ministry fought to keep Israel at a distance. But Adenauer had his way: Weapons from Germany helped Israel assert itself, while in return Israel provided supplies to the Bundeswehr. This would be the lasting arrangement. No one used the termStaatsräsonat the time, but this is where the concept got its start.

What is often overlooked – and which is reflected in public opinion polls to this day – is the fact that the friendship with Israel is more firmly anchored in western Germany than in eastern Germany. The GDR was strictly anti-Zionist. When the Yom Kippur War broke out in 1973, the East German People’s Army even sent an air force squadron to Aleppo to support the Syrian dictator Hafis Al-Assad. The pilots were ultimately never called into action because the war ended so quickly. But the 12 MiG-21 jets remained in Syria, the arch enemy of Israel, where they formed the core of a new air force.

And then there was the radical left in West Germany. Originally friendly toward Israel, they pivoted after the Six-Day War in 1967. From that point on, many leftists began to see Israel as a mere outpost of American power, a view supported by the fact that the militarily inferior Arab states were backed by the Soviet Union. The student movement and the New Left that emerged from it were mainly aligned with the Palestinian cause. The Green Party politician Joschka Fischer later said that the Six-Day War was one of the key events that steered him toward a life in politics.

It was the horror of Entebbe in 1976 that made him reconsider his position. That year, an Air France flight heading from Athens to Paris was hijacked by a German-Palestinian commando. One of the German hijackers was even a passing acquaintance of Fischer’s. After re-routing the plane and landing in Entebbe, Uganda, the terrorists let all the passengers free – except for the roughly 100 Jews on board. On the basis of their passports and last names, the Germans helped identify them. That Jews could once again be "selected” in this way "horrified” Fischer and steered him off the anti-Zionist path. (Eds. Note: The German word "selektieren” is closely linked to the Auschwitz practice of dividing newly arrived trainloads of Jews into those destined for the labor camps and those sent to the gas chambers.)But not everyone had the same reaction.

The end of the plane hijacking in Entebbe carried out by leftist terrorists from Germany.

In the militant left of those years, there was a deeply rooted hostility towards Jews. The leftist terrorist group "Tupamaros West Berlin” tried to blow up a Jewish community center in 1969, though a technical defect prevented the bomb from detonating. Already then, Dieter Kunzelmann, one of the best-known activists in the scene, spoke disparagingly of the Germans’ "Jewish hang-up.” Leftist terrorists also received military training at Palestinian camps in Lebanon in the 1970s, as did the right-wing extremist group "Wehrsportgruppe Hoffman.”

In these circles, Israel was considered the tip of the spear of American imperialism. This was still evident in the debate surrounding the First Gulf War in 1991, which leftists tended to frame along the same lines – despite fears that the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein could attack Israel with poison gas, many refused to support them. Poison gas that Saddam possessed solely due to the help of German specialists. Israel, in other words, was under threat from German gas – quite a scandal.

The intelligence services work together closely. Weapons are bought and sold. Even though there is no official acknowledgement of it, military experts believe that Israel’s nuclear second-strike capability is guaranteed by submarines built in Germany. And when the going gets rough, the German government is there to cover Israel’s back in the diplomatic arena.

All in all, Germany’s policy towards Israel has remained fairly stable over the past decades. During official visits, German representatives will criticize the construction of Israeli settlements. Sometimes these words have an effect, other times they do not. The Germans like to think of themselves as an "honest broker” in the Middle East, as they also nurture relationships in the Arab world. Israel has been critical of such ties, but the relationships have proven helpful to more than one German mediation mission. For example, it was partly due to German diplomacy that the soldier Gilad Shalit, taken hostage by Hamas in 2006, was freed from captivity five years later.

In the wake of the terrorist attack of October 7, Olaf Scholz was one of the first heads of government to travel to Israel. He positioned himself in the European Union against the French, who are considerably more critical of Israel than Germany. And he promised Israel further arms deliveries.

Former German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on a visit to Tel Aviv to demonstrate Germany's solidarity with Israel.

The public opinion of Germany in Arab countries has plummeted. Their impression, according to Sven Schwersensky, who manages the Jordanian office of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, is that Germany "continually ships weapons to Israel and comes to their defense before the International Court of Justice, while at the same time suppressing criticism domestically.” An employee of another foundation, who prefers to remain anonymous, has observed such developments worldwide: "The blow to Germany’s image caused by their unconditional allegiance is not limited to the Middle East. It can also be felt, for example, in the Balkans or in East Asia. The damage is global.”

Germany is entangled in Israel’s war and can only hope that the Israeli government will restrain itself. But there is little evidence to indicate that it will.

In January, international mediators pushed through an extended ceasefire, during which 33 Israeli hostages were exchanged for 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. The first phase was supposed to be followed by a second, which in turn would lead to an end to the war. But Israel chose to abandon this scheme, demanding instead that Hamas extend the first phase and release the remaining hostages. The Netanyahu government blocked the entry of food and all other aid and promptly resumed its attacks on Gaza.

Since then, it has become less and less possible to get aid to the people in Gaza. Recently most soup kitchens were forced to shut down, their reserves having been depleted. Even Israeli officers anonymously told theNew York Timesthat Gaza faces "widespread starvation.”

Around 70 percent of the Gaza Strip has been declared no-go zones. For over 19 months, the Israeli Army has obstructed the free access of international journalists into the territory.

Drone footage of extreme destruction in different parts of the Gaza Strip.

Earlier this month, the Israeli security cabinet adopted a plan to again expand the war effort. The official reason is to pressure Hamas into freeing the hostages, but the operation’s core objective is to round up over 2 million Palestinians in the southernmost portion of Gaza in order to facilitate their "voluntary departure.”

It is unclear if the army has enough reservists at its disposal to carry out this expansion. There are reports in the Israeli media that half the soldiers called up for duty have not reported to their units. In April, former and current members of the Israeli air force wrote an open letter in which they demanded the immediate "return of all hostages.” The letter lamented the fact that the resumption of the war in March had led to the death of hostages, Israeli soldiers, "and innocent civilians” as well as to the exhaustion of reservists. Since then, roughly 150,000 Israelis from different sectors of the military have signed this appeal or a similar one.

The Netanyahu government has been pursuing its radical agenda beyond Gaza as well. The construction of settlements in the West Bank has exploded since October 7. A few weeks ago, the cabinet succeeded in pushing another piece of the so-called judicial reform through the Knesset, thus further eroding the division of powers. At the same time, they tried to remove both the head of domestic intelligence and the attorney general, taking aim at the final watchdogs of democracy. Israel is on the road to autocracy.

Meron Mendel is having an early breakfast at a Berlin hotel on a recent Thursday morning. He looks tired. The previous evening, he returned from Israel with President Steinmeier, the end of a two-day loop from Germany to Israel to Germany – geographically, politically, and emotionally.

He says it is too simple to blame the difficulties in the German-Israeli friendship solely on the war in Gaza. Still, there must be an honest discussion about what is happening in Gaza. He describes the reception that the Israeli president was given at Bellevue Palace in Berlin and the one Herzog gave the Germans in Jerusalem. Critical remarks were made, he said, but the speech in Jerusalem did not contain a word about the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Mendel gets the impression that German politicians are stuck in the routines of the Merkel era – a well-ordered world from a German point of view, but a world that has long since ceased to exist. "When Angela Merkel spoke to the Knesset about the GermanStaatsräson, Ehud Olmert was prime minister. There was the threat from Iran, but also negotiations with the Palestinians, a prospect of peace. That was the context in which this term came into being.”

When German politicians look at Israel, says Mendel, they still see a liberal democracy. This has been the basis of the countries’ friendship. But in reality, he says, the situation today is very different. Netanyahu is in the process of turning Israel into another Hungary. He is restricting the independence of the judiciary, obstructing the work of NGOs – the full Victor Orbán program. And it might not take very long. "We’re not talking about the next 30 years. More like the next three.”

Germany is also changing. Earlier this month, Margot Friedländer passed away. But it’s not only the Jewish survivors who are disappearing – so are the German perpetrators. The 1968 generation and the boomers are the grandparents of today. Germany has become a country shaped by immigration; it is more diverse today than at any point its history. All the efforts to tie Germany’s identity to Israel’s cannot change the fact that millions of Germans who came from the Middle East have brought their own histories along with them – as have immigrants from the former Eastern Bloc, many of them Jews.

Israeli society has long been shaped by Misrahi Jews – those of Middle Eastern or North African origin – who often relate differently to Arabs than do Israelis of European descent.

For these reasons, too, one could expect a rift in German-Israeli relations. Especially if the gruesome images keep flowing out of Gaza. The German-Israeli friendship has persisted for the past 60 years on the basis of a deeply felt sentiment: "Never again.”

But this will not be enough for it to persist in the future. The frequently invokedStaatsräsonseemed to dictate an automatic political response. But times have changed. One can no longer claim credibly that there are no alternatives. Choices will need to be weighed more carefully.

Translated from the German by Charlie Zaharoff

In the conflict with U.S. President Donald Trump over Greenland, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, 47, has a lot to lose. Two days prior to her interview with DER SPIEGEL, the Social Democratic prime minister held a speech on Europe in Danish parliament and shortly thereafter published an open letter together with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni in which they sharply criticized the European Court of Human Rights. Getting to her requires passing through four security doors. Frederiksen is waiting at a conference table in her office, and she is quick to interpret her guests’ sweeping glances through the expansive space. "Like in the Netflix series 'Borgen,’ yes.” She clearly has no interest in small talk.

DER SPIEGEL:Ms. Prime Minister, it has been about five months since U.S. President Donald Trump again declared that he was interested in buying Greenland. At what point did you realize that he wasn’t joking?

Frederiksen:I was convinced early on that Trump was serious. But we are serious, too. For me, it is clear – and this is enshrined in our laws – that the future of Greenland will be decided by the people there. It is their land. According to the UN Charter, international law, and everything upon which we have built our world order since the end of World War II, you cannot simply claim part of another country or take it by force. Our Kingdom of Denmark is a community, and it includes Greenland. That is the reality.

The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 23/2025 (May 31st, 2025) of DER SPIEGEL.

DER SPIEGEL:Trump seems not much to care.

Frederiksen:Many people around the world are wondering whether we are entering a new era. The more I think about it, the clearer it becomes to me that we are. I was born in 1977. My political awakening began with Nelson Mandela and his fight for freedom. At the age of 12, I was a member of the African National Congress (ANC) youth group that supported him. Looking back, the three-and-a-half decades since the fall of the Berlin Wall were almost a golden era – despite the wars in Yugoslavia, terrorism, and all the other crises. That era is over. We are at the beginning of a new age, one that is more uncertain and, therefore, more dangerous.

DER SPIEGEL:What other factors make you believe this?

Frederiksen:Russia is very aggressive. I am convinced that Vladimir Putin and his allies want to continue what we have been witnessing in Ukraine since 2022. They have restructured their economy for a prolonged war and are being supported by North Korea, Iran and, unfortunately, also by China.

DER SPIEGEL:In April, during a visit to Greenland, you said that the Danes have always regarded the United States as a partner. How do you view the U.S. today? As an ally or as an adversary?

Frederiksen:I hold on to my values. Even if things are changing in the U.S., that does not alter my view of trans-Atlantic relations. Without NATO, we would not be able to protect our population. Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, the collective defense clause, is our most important insurance policy.

DER SPIEGEL:It is questionable how long the mutual defense clause will remain valid.

Frederiksen:You can accuse me of many things, but not of being naïve. I see our weaknesses. It was a historic mistake for Germany and Europe to buy gas from Russia and make itself dependent. We Europeans have paid a price for that. Today, we must clearly recognize the new reality. We will have to reconsider our decisions. I hope that everyone remains committed to NATO. But Europe must become capable of fully defending itself.

DER SPIEGEL:It has been reported that the Americans have already begun calculating internally how much it would cost each year to take over Greenland. Denmark currently supports the island with the equivalent of $650 million per year. The U.S. might be willing to spend significantly more. According to reports in the American media, they are apparently looking for potential informants among the local population. What preparations are you making?

Frederiksen:I can imagine many things, but I prefer not to share scenarios with you. The people of Greenland and their government have made their position clear: Greenland’s future can only be decided in Nuuk, the capital. I expect everyone to respect that – including us.

DER SPIEGEL:The people of Nuuk are deeply concerned. One parliamentarian, for example, said she is worried that U.S. soldiers might land at night by plane, patrol the streets in military vehicles and dissolve the parliament.

Frederiksen, Greenland's newly elected premier Nielsen and his predecessor Egede: "The people of Greenland and their government have made their position clear."

A protest in front of the U.S. Consulate in Greenland's capital city of Nuuk in March.

Christian Klindt Soelbeck / AFP

Frederiksen:I generally do not engage in speculation. Instead, I focus on what is actually happening.

DER SPIEGEL:Your tone has become more urgent in recent months. During your last visit to Greenland, you addressed the American public directly in English.

Frederiksen:I always say clearly what I think and what I want. We must try to de-escalate the situation. Conflicts between allies are not a good idea. What are we witnessing globally? An aggressive Russia that not only attacks Ukraine but also confronts us with hybrid attacks, cyberattacks, and disinformation. Then there is the situation in the Middle East, the ongoing threat of terrorism, and climate change. At such a time, we should not have conflicts between Europe and the U.S.

DER SPIEGEL:You recently delivered an historic keynote speech on Europe’s future in Danish parliament. You referred to former French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman, who supposedly rewrote his speech on the founding of the European Community nine times to find the right tone. How often do you adjust your messages?

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen: "Ten years ago, I resolved never to change a plan spontaneously."

Frederik Danielsen / DER SPIEGEL

Frederiksen:Not often. I do not believe in constant strategy changes. Ten years ago, when I became chair of my party, I resolved never to change a plan spontaneously. Otherwise, you get overwhelmed – especially in today’s world. Things change so quickly. You have to stick to your own strategy and believe in it.

DER SPIEGEL:What can Denmark do to stand up to a global power whose leader some observers describe as a tyrant?

Frederiksen:When I talk about rearmament, I think in European terms. It was a grave mistake to cut our budgets so drastically after the end of the Cold War. As Europeans, we must ask ourselves: If we are not willing to fight for ourselves now, who are we? To me, Europe is not just a spot on the map. Europe represents our values, our ideas, our worldview, our way of living and building societies. If we lose the willingness to fight for that, we lose ourselves.

DER SPIEGEL:U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening Europe with new tariffs. The former U.S. Ambassador to Copenhagen, Rufus Gifford, suggested that Denmark should stop exporting the weight-loss drug Ozempic to the U.S. as a symbolic countermeasure. Would you be prepared to fight fire with fire if necessary?

Frederiksen:We are against any form of trade conflict. The consequences affect not only our companies but also the U.S. We have no intention of being divided. Tariffs are set jointly in Europe. But it’s clear that we have various means of defending ourselves. If Trump wants a trade war with us, we will respond.

Heads of government of Greenland and Denmark in Nuuk in early April.

DER SPIEGEL:Some military officials and experts have suggested that European countries should support you and send a message by stationing troops in Greenland. What do you expect of your European allies?

Frederiksen:The European heads of state and government already took a clear position in February. The European Council issued a joint statement supporting the Kingdom of Denmark. We are members of the European Union and NATO, and in the case of the latter, this includes Greenland. Regarding security in the Arctic region, all allies in the area need to do more, because the situation there is changing. But we need to do it together.

DER SPIEGEL:Are you planning an increased presence in the region?

Frederiksen:We are already working on that. I am primarily thinking of drones and frigates, and certainly more fighter jets. There is a lot of critical infrastructure in the region. Recently, we had a meeting in Oslo of the Joint Expeditionary Force, the UK-led military cooperation of northern European countries, where we discussed the High North. Greenland and the Faroe Islands were part of that discussion.

DER SPIEGEL:The fact is, the GIUK Gap – the gap between Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom – could allow Russian nuclear submarines to move undetected towards North America.

Frederiksen:We are in intensive discussions with the UK on this.

DER SPIEGEL:Recently, you announced plans for four new ships for the Arctic. The old ones have been operating for years without functioning weapons systems. Why did you wait so long?

Frederiksen:If you look at the map, you can see that the area is vast. Everyone needs to do more. When I became prime minister, we were spending the equivalent of 1.3 percent of GDP on defense. Now it’s more than 3 percent.

Denmark and Greenland have a long, sometimes troubled history that began with the colonization of the island in 1721. Frederiksen seems genuinely pleased when she hears that one of her most vocal critics, a member Danish parliament from Greenland, described her in a conversation with DER SPIEGEL as being compassionate in her approach to Denmark’s colonial history, despite all their differences. Her facial features briefly relax before she quickly regains her composure.

DER SPIEGEL:You once studied African studies and have likely spent more time considering colonial legacies than most world leaders. Can you understand why some Greenlanders saw an opportunity earlier this year in aligning themselves with the United States?

Frederiksen:I don’t know if my perspective has anything to do with my studies. But Greenland’s future belongs to the people of Greenland. I advocate for Greenland more strongly than almost any other Danish politician before me. I respect that Greenland wants to work globally with various partners.

DER SPIEGEL:It doesn’t worry you?

Frederiksen:The prime minister of Greenland has made it clear that his people do not want to become part of the U.S. but are open to business. I understand that.

DER SPIEGEL:During your visit to Greenland, you spoke about "modernizing” your relationship. What did you mean by that?

Frederiksen:There are dark chapters in our shared history, and if we don’t openly address them, it will be difficult to shape a common future. Greenlandic children were once forced to move to Denmark, losing their families and their language. I have officially apologized for that.

DER SPIEGEL:Earlier this year, a televised debate took place between politicians from Denmark and Greenland. A woman from Greenland was present who had been forcibly fitted with an IUD – a fate that befell half the women of Greenland in the late 1960s and early 1970s. These women have yet to receive an apology from Denmark.

Frederiksen:We have found out that these things happened under Danish responsibility. But we also learned that this practice continued even after it was no longer our responsibility. It is primarily a Danish problem, but not exclusively. So we decided to establish a commission to examine the matter together with Greenland. Once the commission has completed its work, we will have a political discussion and find a way to address the issue.

DER SPIEGEL:The women may not want to wait for a commission to complete its report. Their pain is acute.

Frederiksen:I take this seriously and have spoken with several of these women. I acknowledge their pain and am not afraid to apologize officially. But I will wait for the results in coordination with the Greenlandic government.

DER SPIEGEL:We have heard from people in your circle that you have great confidence in Germany’s new chancellor, Friedrich Merz. What do you expect from him?

Frederiksen:Leadership. I know him well and I like him. He has a clear vision for Europe. A strong Germany means a stronger Europe. We work closely together in supporting Ukraine, as we do on security, defense and migration issues. I hope this strong cooperation will also be expanded further in the fight against climate change. We share the same sea and have interesting opportunities regarding renewable energy.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at a summit in Albania together with other European leaders.

DER SPIEGEL:You recently said that Denmark also needs new ships for the Baltic Sea. Would you be open to having them built in Germany?

Frederiksen:I’ve told my military experts: buy, buy, buy! We must be able to defend ourselves in the short and medium term. Of course, we also want to increase our own capacities for strategic reasons. I visited one of your major companies, Rheinmetall. Cooperation with Germany is a given for us.

DER SPIEGEL:Party allies in other countries praise you in conversations for your clarity. However, there is recurring discontent about how you speak about migrants – saying, for example, that mass migration is one of Europe’s most pressing problems or that living according to the Koran is incompatible with being a democrat. Do you still see yourself as being on the left of the political spectrum?

Frederiksen:I am a Social Democrat. That shapes my stance, including on migration. And I suspect that the majority of Germans would agree with me.

Frederiksen:That mass migration to Germany and Denmark has destroyed parts of our everyday lives.

DER SPIEGEL:What makes you think that?

Frederiksen:I read German newspapers and see what is happening in your country as well, especially regarding crime. I don’t think people flee for fun. Those who are persecuted must be protected. But I am convinced that we cannot take in and protect everyone. I disagreed with German policy in 2015 and think it was a big mistake. The consequences are so enormous that we cannot simply continue as before.

DER SPIEGEL:Is it possible that you speak about migration in this way because you speculate that your stance might appeal to, say, U.S. Vice President JD Vance?

The prime minister’s face grows serious. She leans forward over the table and maintains eye contact as she searches in Danish for the right English word. It is clear that the issue is an important one for her. Her adviser takes a deep breath and says: "She feels offended.”

Frederiksen:Whoever says such a thing insults me. I’ve been saying the same thing about migration for more than years. People need to feel safe when taking the bus at night, going to work early in the morning, or at school. With the current level of crime in Europe, there are areas where people no longer feel safe.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen: "I doubt that people will talk much about me in 10 years."

DER SPIEGEL:You recently published an open letter with Giorgia Meloni. In it, you sharply criticize the European Court of Human Rights. Its judges have repeatedly criticized your handling of migrants and demanded changes – for example, after the deportation of a mentally ill man. How much of the European idea remains when Social Democrats and post-fascists jointly question a pillar of European order?

Frederiksen:We believe in the rule of law and in the idea of human rights. But if someone comes from the Middle East into our society and wants to destroy it, we must be able to defend ourselves.

DER SPIEGEL:You wrote that the court has "gone too far.” How so?

Frederiksen:As far as I can tell, the Human Rights Convention was originally created to protect minorities, particularly after World War II. Today, however, we must protect the majority. It cannot be a human right to come to us from Afghanistan and rape a young woman or murder someone. If someone does that, we have a right to say: You must leave. If someone kills my partner, do I allow them to sit at my table? No.

DER SPIEGEL:So far, only countries governed by conservative or right-wing parties have joined your letter, along with Estonia, which borders Russia. Sweden and Finland are not on board. What do you hope to achieve with this course?

Frederiksen:My goal is for us to have control over our external borders. I want Europe to remain a safe place in the future.

DER SPIEGEL:Donald Trump's place in the history books seems to be already predetermined. He is the U.S. president who possibly destroyed the Western world as we knew it. How would you like to be seen in 10 years?

Frederiksen:I doubt that people will talk much about me in 10 years. But if they do, I hope they will say that I contributed to striking a balance between the hopes and aspirations of the ordinary people and the continued strengthening of Europe. And that I was among the leading voices in support of the defense of our continent in the face of Russian aggression against Ukraine.

DER SPIEGEL:Ms. Prime Minister, thank you for this interview.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz can be unpredictable with a microphone in his face.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was clearly feeling quite comfortable last week as he chatted on German public broadcaster WDR about his recent conversations with Donald Trump. He mimicked the U.S. president’s praise for Chicago – "a really great city" – and went on to say that every second or third word out of Trump’s mouth is "great." The chancellor seemed quite pleased with himself.

It was the kind of chitchat one could find refreshingly entertaining. Or concerning. Merz is currently striving to develop a decent relationship with Trump and, together with other European leaders, seeking to prevent him from suspending U.S. military backing for Ukraine. Furthermore, the European Union is hoping to strike a tariff deal with Trump this week.

And despite all that, the German chancellor mimics the moody U.S. president on public television?

During his stint as leader of the German opposition, Merz developed a reputation for shooting from the hip. He triggered a multi-week debate when he complained about "little pashas” with migration backgrounds, for example. And he had to eat crow after a summer interview in which he seemed to suggest that working with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party might be acceptable at the local level. Ill-considered bon mots were always part of the deal with Merz.

Now, though, Merz is chancellor. He is no longer just acting on the national stage. In his initial weeks in the Chancellery, he has prioritized foreign policy and has thrust himself into the role of Germany’s senior-most diplomat. Merz has to realize that international diplomacy follows a different set of rules than domestic policy debates. In foreign relations, every word carries weight. Every gesture. Small missteps can ruffle feathers and have broad international implications.

The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 23/2025 (May 31st, 2025) of DER SPIEGEL.

Merz, though, doesn’t seem to be sufficiently aware of the impact of his words.

That became apparent just a few weeks before he was sworn into office. On a televised talk show, he was speaking about possible deliveries to Ukraine of long-range ballistic missiles. And he said that the destruction of the Kerch Bridge – the strategically important land link between Russia and the Russian-occupied Crimea Peninsula – would "give Ukraine a leg up.” Here was the future German chancellor providing advice on how to attack Russia. It was a comment that likely made a diplomat or two break out in a cold sweat.

Last Monday, during the aforementioned interview on WDR, Merz then declared that there would no longer be any range restrictions for weapons supplied to Ukraine. Ukraine, he said, could now defend itself by attacking military positions inside Russia. Newswires immediately picked up on the comment and sent it around the world as breaking news. Whether that was Merz’s intention, however, seems doubtful.

After all, it was a confusing comment. In contrast to its allies, Germany has thus far refrained from supplying any weapons to Ukraine that could reach targets on Russian territory. What, then, was Merz talking about? It was only two days later, during a visit of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Berlin, that the riddle was solved: Germany intends, in the future, to help Ukraine develop long-range weapons systems of its own – and for these weapons, there would be no range restrictions. Merz, though, was apparently not yet able to speak about those plans during his Monday interview. Why, then, didn’t he avoid the subject entirely?

Merz’s spontaneous style, which sometimes leads to comments that have not been carefully considered, is a mixed bag. It is a trait that clearly differentiates him from his predecessor Olaf Scholz, whose terse, sententious comments full of polit-speak earned him plenty of derision, and who was particularly careful in discussing Ukraine out of fear of triggering an escalation.

Merz clearly wishes to define himself as a more emotional leader who speaks directly and doesn’t always follow the script. Domestically, such a style has plenty of advantages: It makes him seem more approachable, more tangible, and it may even counteract widespread disenchantment with politics. But when it comes to foreign policy, it is risky. In part because Merz’s full-throated proclamations raise expectations that he cannot fulfill.

Still today, there has been no "massive" ramping up of sanctions with which Merz had threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin if he refused to consent to a 30-day ceasefire. Merz has managed to get the most important European countries to start speaking with a single voice on Ukraine. But it seems as though he has promised too much.

It would, of course, help nobody were the chancellor to become a policy robot hiding behind focus-grouped formulations. But as the country’s top diplomat, Merz must constantly consider the effect that each and every one of his words might have. There is a lot at stake.

It’s Li’s first ever visit to Taiwan. He is here for a human rights conference in the island state off the coast of China. It has been several years since he has been so close to his homeland, with his last visit to China coming in 2019, back when he was studying art in Italy and posting short stories on the internet. Had he left it at that, he would have the option of boarding a plane tomorrow morning and, two hours later, arriving in the country he still loves, as he says. “But for me, there is no going back.”

The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 24/2025 (June 7th, 2025) of DER SPIEGEL.

Li Ying, 33, who goes by the nickname “Teacher Li,” is today likely China’s most effective dissident. He has managed to do something that Xi Jinping’s regime wants to avoid at all costs: He is able to share uncensored information with hundreds of thousands of fellow Chinese. He has two million followers on X and operates a daily news broadcast on YouTube. He calls himself “Teacher Li Is Not Your Teacher,” a brand of humor that matches up well with his profile picture: a hand-drawn kitten. “China’s most dangerous cat,” as he is fond of joking.

There is likely no country in the world that invests as much in censorship as China does. Media outlets are tightly controlled, and every social media post that is critical of the government is quickly deleted. Indeed, it is best to avoid typing the words “Xi Jinping” at all because it immediately attracts the attention of Beijing’s army of online watchdogs. The “Great Firewall” that surrounds the Chinese internet blocks numerous foreign media outlets and Western social media platforms. Those who use a VPN without authorization are in violation of the law.

Many do it anyway to have a bit of online freedom. And to read Teacher Li.

“I get around a hundred submissions a day,” Li says. He opens his inbox and scrolls through photos and videos. “Here, someone has sent in their employment contract because it’s apparently been violated … Here, there are protests about an insolvency … Here is a scandal at a funeral home.”

Li’s laptop showing the “Teacher Li” account: “For me, there’s no going back”

Li’s account isn’t always focused on grand declarations of regime opposition. He frequently shares snippets of daily life offering a more nuanced view of Chinese society than that presented by local media outlets. A disabled mother unable to find healthcare for her child. Schoolchildren protesting against weekend classes. But then there are videos like that of the bold 22-year-old on a bridge in the province of Hunan demanding the overthrow of “dictator Xi Jinping” – who sent his manifesto directly to Li.

Teacher Li acts as a virtual channel through which the Chinese broadcast their displeasure to the world. And as the medium they turn to when they want to know more than just the achievements of Comrade Xi on any given day.

He is, in short, perhaps China’s most important news agency – a cat lover on the edge of the Alps.

“I see myself as a hole in a tree trunk,” Li says. “People whisper their secrets into tree holes because they know they are safe there. And the hole doesn’t speak back to them.”

He is sitting on the bed in his hotel room. It is the morning after the photo shoot, and his stubble is visible in the daylight. Clothes are lying about on the floor, along with two partially packed suitcases. He is telling the story of fall 2022, when his life changed for good within the space of just a few days.

Li Ying had just completed his studies at an art academy in Tuscany when protests broke out in China. People in Shanghai and other cities were suffering under the seemingly endless and increasingly arbitrary measures associated with the government’s “zero-COVID” policy. In November 2022, the pent-up frustration burst forth, and thousands took to the streets. As symbols of their powerlessness, they held up blank sheets of paper. Ultimately, the “White Paper Movement” produced demonstrations of a size the country hadn’t seen since 1989. That was the year the army violently quelled pro-democracy student protests on Tiananmen Square in Beijing.

The White Paper Movement in November 2022 in Beijing

How, then, could people in China’s digital cage share information about demonstrations without putting themselves in danger? Through Li.

Sitting in disbelief at his desk in Milan with his cats, he heard people on a video shouting words that require unimaginable courage in China: “Xi Jinping, resign!” He posted it.

Li was not known as an activist at the time. He had been living in Italy since 2016 and had been posting short stories on Chinese social media for a while, giving him a certain reach. But once his content grew more political, the censors blocked his accounts. So he moved over to Twitter, as X was still called at the time.

Li’s post about protesters who called out “Xi Jinping, resign!” in November 2022 in Shanghai

Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass mir externe Inhalte angezeigt werden. Damit können personenbezogene Daten an Drittplattformen übermittelt werden.Mehr dazu in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

There, videos of the White Paper Movement spread rapidly. Participants began sending Li videos so that he could post them on their behalf. Soon, he was receiving dozens of messages per second, he recalls. He reduced his sleeping hours to the bare minimum. He was alone, after all. And in his inbox, history was happening.

“That was the dividing line when my old life ended and my new life began,” Li says.

His old life began in 1992 in the eastern Chinese province of Anhui. Li grew up in a privileged family, with both his parents working as art professors in the metropolis of Fuyang. “I was raised on a university campus. I knew nothing of how the population at large lived, the farmers and the workers.”

His father, though, spoke frequently about the wounds of the past. During the civil war, Li’s grandfather had been a medic with the Kuomintang, the Chinese national government that was overthrown by the communists in 1949. “Because of my grandfather, my father was seen as a counterrevolutionary from the moment he was born.” The repression, the famines, Mao’s bloody Cultural Revolution – all of that left its mark on his family’s history.

“Traitors” being publicly presented during the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976): “I saw it as the price for a strong fatherland”

And yet, says Li, he used to be a “Little Pink” when he was younger. The term is Chinese slang for young nationalists who are fanatic adherents to Communist Party ideology. “I saw the fact that some people had to sacrifice their rights as the price for a strong fatherland.”

After all, it didn’t affect him personally, the talented young artist who started giving painting classes as a teenager, earning him his nickname, “Teacher Li.” A prodigy who would hold his first exhibition at the tender age of 19. These days, he hardly paints anymore at all.

The 2022 protests were quickly put down by the regime, with many participants being arrested. In exile, though, Li remained a megaphone for the silenced. “I would boot up my computer in the morning and not turn it off until the evening.” Only after a year did he start putting together a small team. “Today, there are more than 20 of us all over the world.” They screen submissions, prepare content and check facts. How thoroughly? Hard to say. Most do it as a side gig, Li says, primarily paid through voluntary subscriptions. Li has become a dissident and an editor-in-chief in one.

“Journalists, analysts, authors – all of us use him as a source,” says human rights activist Yaqiu Wang, who lives in the U.S. “Li is the most important Chinese activist abroad. Even larger media outlets that report on China recycle news that only became known through his posts.”

Fengsuo Zhou, one of the student leaders from 1989, sees Li as a kind of heir. Not long ago, Zhou visited him in Italy. The two men went hiking together. “His work reminds me of what I did on Tiananmen Square,” says Zhou, who is also based in the U.S. Back then, he and the other activists would create pamphlets using a printing press to make the masses heard, he recalls. “Today, Li does it on social media.”

On the Chinese internet, it takes about 30 seconds to get a decent idea of what the regime thinks of Li. On Baike, the heavily censored Chinese version of Wikipedia, there is a long entry about him. The category? “Internet Traitor.” A chapter entitled “Character Evaluation” reads: “After he moved abroad, Li Ying began earning his money by slandering China to pay for his corrupt lifestyle and was identified as an immoral person.”

His old Chinese address and mobile phone number were leaked, as were those of his parents. Somebody who must have had access to official documents published his ID number and passport photo. Once, early on, Li allowed himself to be photographed for an interview. But after everything that he has experienced since, he says he doesn’t want new pictures of himself circulating. “They harass me in every way you can imagine.”

Activist Li in Taipei: “They harass me in every way you can imagine”

Videos of cats being tortured have become a frequent presence in his inbox. Once, when he ordered painting supplies online, the vendor in China was visited by officials demanding his address in Italy. The police have also paid countless visits to his parents in an effort to force his return, he says, threatening to eliminate their pensions if he refused. Later, someone posted fake pornographic content of them.

After followers told him that they had been questioned about why they follow Li, he called on them to unfollow him. Within just a few days, about 200,000 of them complied.

Li has frequently changed residences in Italy, a response, he says, to the numerous informants in the overseas Chinese community who cooperate with the regime. “Former classmates of mine have told me that they have been asked about my daily life. When do I get up? What restaurants do I go to? What kind of friends do I have?” He believes someone is trying to assemble a psychogram of him in order to exploit potential weaknesses.

But Li doesn’t give the impression of being demoralized. On the contrary, he seems full of self-confidence. During the short walk through the hotel lobby, he gently places a guiding hand on his visitor’s back. He often laughs as he talks. If he is at odds with himself, he doesn’t let on. “I wake up on the morning and can immediately see everything that is happening in China. It’s not a lonely feeling. It gives me a sense of purpose.”

And yet, he has just triggered a controversy that could ultimately drive a wedge through his community. A controversy about money.

It is an age-old dilemma among dissidents in exile: They are transformed into heroes overseas. Big media organizations interview them, and they are admired for their courage. But courage doesn’t pay the rent, and being a regime critic is not an occupation.

Li says his subscription income varies between 3,000 and 7,000 euros per month, making it difficult to pay his team. One possibility would be to accept funding from Western governments, such as the U.S., China’s geopolitical rival. “But I don’t want to be controlled by anyone,” he says.

Which is why Li, together with other political influencers, founded his own cryptocurrency in late 2024. Called “LiCoin,” he believes it is perfect for his purposes: decentralized, not state-controlled, and donors can remain anonymous.

But the project wasn’t well-received by his followers. Not long before, another Chinese opposition activist had been found guilty of crypto-fraud in the U.S. Many started wondering if the selfless Teacher Li had likewise become a shady profit hunter. Share prices collapsed immediately after launch.

“He made the decision to enrich himself,” believes Huang Yicheng, one of the protesters from 2022 who sent Li videos directly from Shanghai. He now lives in Germany. For two years, Huang says, he and Li would speak frequently on the phone. “At first, he always sounded optimistic. He believed that China would soon become a democracy, and all of us could then go back home. The disappointment that this didn’t happen, combined with the harassment from the regime, has made him cynical.”

Li denies this. “I have never been interested in profit, nor am I now,” he insists. He wants to professionalize the opposition, he says, to get away from the situation in which dissidents are forced to operate completely on their own. That, he adds, costs money.

Just a few days after the conversation, news will break that Radio Free Asia and the Voice of America are to be shut down – two of the most important media outlets where Chinese in exile can practice journalism in their native languages. The two outlets, both funded by U.S. Congress, have been broadcasting news for people in China and in other authoritarian countries for decades. Now, they are in danger of falling victim to Donald Trump’s own cultural revolution.

Li packs his things. He has to leave for the airport soon. The direct flight from Taipei to Rome isn’t an option, he says. Instead, he will fly east, in the wrong direction, first crossing the Pacific and making a stopover in the U.S. before heading onward to Europe. “So that I don’t have to fly through Chinese airspace,” Li says. He has been strongly advised not to do so. By whom? He asks that such information not be published.

Teacher Li has powerful enemies. And powerful friends.

Sometimes, just 20 minutes lie between a dream vacation and a horrific travel experience. It’s early May in Seattle – in the far northwestern corner of the U.S. Birgit and Martin Kreil, both from Vienna, are experienced travelers to the U.S., with the couple having made the trip around half a dozen times. They have family in Seattle, which is why they regularly fly the 11 hours across the Atlantic. Never before have they encountered any problems.

The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 25/2025 (June 14th, 2025) of DER SPIEGEL.

But this time, it’s different. This time, as they are standing before the border control officials, the procedure appears to have changed. The officers flip through their passports before consulting with their colleagues. Then comes the command: "Follow me.” They are led to a neon-lit room with a handful of chairs and forced to relinquish their mobile phones. Nobody tells them why or gives them any kind of explanation as to why they have been pulled aside, says Birgit Keil, 45. They are left completely alone and began growing concerned. "I thought that was it and that we would be placed on the next flight back,” says Martin Kreil, 46.

Their ordeal ends after 20 minutes, though it seems far longer to the Kreils. The officials wordlessly return their passports and mobile phones and gesture to the door. They are allowed to enter the country to attend Birgit’s family reunion in addition to a flight to Hawaii to celebrate her father’s 85th birthday. But they are left with a bad taste in their mouths. "Arbitrary,” she says. "Banana republic,” he says.

Vacationers Birgit and Martin Kreil in Hawaii: "Banana republic."

"I can have a visa. I can have solid proof that I really only want to go on vacation. And it still completely depends on the Homeland Security official who is on duty,” says Birgit Kreil. And this despite the fact that the U.S. is like a second home for her. The atmosphere in the country, the food, the warmth – everything is so familiar. Its roots in democracy are also an attraction. "This is not how I want my vacation to start,” she says. Next year, her husband interjects, "we’ll definitely go somewhere else. We won’t be coming back to the U.S. anytime soon.”

It's quite a statement. And not one you would have expected to hear even just a year ago. For decades, the U.S. has been the holy grail of vacation destinations for many in Europe, the Germans first and foremost. It has been seen as a synonym of freedom, of wide-open spaces, of a shared system of values and open arms. A country with a democratic view of the world and plenty of comfort to boot. Now, though, under President Donald Trump, all that has changed. The U.S. is becoming a no-go area for tourists. As a European, you "don’t feel welcome there at the moment,” says Joachim Meyerhoff, the bestselling German author and actor, summarizing the view held by many Germans.

Over and over again in the past several weeks, there have been headlines about travelers being rejected at the borders or even arrested. There were the young high school graduates from Rostock who flew to Hawaii with their backpacks and valid papers, but without a hotel reservation. They were handcuffed and interrogated before having to fly back home after spending several hours in custody. Or the Berlin tattoo artist Jessica Brösche who spent six weeks in pre-deportation detention because she had her tattooing needles with her and the border officials presumed she had been intending to work illegally in the U.S. Or the French scientist who wasn’t allowed to enter the country after a border guard found messages critical of Trump on his mobile phone. And then there were Lucas Sielaff and Fabian Schmidt, two German citizens who were detained simply for trying to enter the country – even though Schmidt even had a Green Card, a permanent residency permit for the U.S. Not everyone was allowed to enter the U.S. before Trump either, of course. But now, every case that hits the headlines reinforces the impression that the U.S. has become inhospitable. And more and more people from Germany and elsewhere in Europe are thinking twice before booking a vacation there.

The president’s inhumane deportation policies, which even some conservatives have a problem with; his tariffs, which ignore America’s decades-long alliances; his furious assault on the LGBTQ+ community, Blacks, Asians, leftists, the woke and the liberal; his attempt to prevent foreign students from studying at America’s elite universities; his temporary halt to visas for au pairs and exchange students; his complete ban on travelers from more than a dozen, mostly African countries while giving preferential visas to wealthy foreigners. And, more recently, Trump’s aggressive assault against relatively harmless demonstrations. Taken together, it sends a clear message to the rest of the world: If you aren’t with me, you are against me. And if you are against me, you may face persecution.

It leaves an impression. And it isn’t a good one.

The world’s oldest democracy, previously the land of unlimited opportunity – those labels have been obscured by a dark cloud of mistrust. The U.S., until recently one of Germany’s closest allies despite occasional disagreements, has become more foreign than ever. And as is often the case with eroding friendships, the number of visits is dropping and interest is waning. People are staying away.

Instead of the 9 percent increase in international arrivals to the U.S. that had been predicted, tourism authorities are now saying that 2025 will see a 10 percent drop in arrivals – a gap of almost 20 percentage points. According to Oxford Economics, the United States is the only one of the 184 economies analyzed that is predicted to see a decline in spending by international visitors in 2025.

Canadians, especially, are staying away in droves. Since Trump took office, the number of people passing through some overland border crossings has plunged by almost half. Which is hardly a surprise given that the president has referred to Canada on more than one occasion as the 51st state and threatened to annex the country.

European interest in traveling to the U.S. is also dropping. New York now believes the number of international guests visiting the city will be 17 percent lower than forecasts earlier in the year. Denmark and Finland have issued travel warnings for transgender travelers. Germany’s government has at least updated its travel advisories for the U.S. to note that "false information about the purpose of stay or even a slight overstay” may lead to "arrest, detention and deportation.” From the beginning of the year to the end of May, the number of Germans flying to the U.S. dropped by almost 8 percent relative to the same period a year earlier. In the Netherlands, the drop was 11 percent, and it was 6.5 percent for both Belgium and Norway.

Some tourist destinations have seen between 30 and 50 percent fewer visitors. Many places only managed to pull themselves out of the depths seen during the pandemic with the help of huge marketing offensives – only to now find themselves facing the next setback. In recent weeks, one U.S. hotel chain after the next has revised its earning predictions. Whereas before, they were expecting solid growth and rising profits, the new focus is on damage control. Travelers are in "wait-and-see mode,” says Hilton. Which means they aren’t booking. Expedia, the large travel platform on the web, has identified strong "headwinds.” International bookings for the U.S., the platform says, are down by 7 percent, and bookings from Canada have plunged by a third.

The airlines have reported similar stasis. Delta recently announced that reservations have stagnated, while United and Virgin Atlantic bemoaned the weak demand and the "uncertainty,” leading to losses. Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr is still officially claiming that the airline’s profitable U.S. routes have remained stable, particularly in the premium classes and in trips from the U.S. to Europe. Internally, though, there has been talk of weaker than usual numbers when it comes to long-term bookings, particularly from German customers. For last minute travelers, to be sure, that is good news: Tickets to America can be had for cheaper than they have been for years.

From an economic standpoint, the season seems to be over even before the main travel wave. Although domestic travel within the United States makes up the lion’s share of tourism dollars spent, the holidaymakers and business travelers from other countries bring in a lot of money to the tourism strongholds. But according to calculations by the UN’s World Travel and Tourism Council, they will spend around $12 billion less this year than they did in 2024. That would be 20 percent less than before the pandemic – a "wakeup call for the U.S. government,” says WTTC CEO Julia Simpson. The world’s biggest tourism economy, she said, is "going in the wrong direction.” Whereas other countries are rolling out the welcome mats, "the U.S. government is putting up the 'closed’ sign.” And the country is doing nothing to stop the slide. On the contrary: It was recently announced that the U.S. Senate intends to reduce the budget of the marketing organization "Brand USA” from $100 million to just $20 million. Eliminating "wasteful spending” is the goal of such cuts, according to a press release from the office of Republican Senator Ted Cruz.

One of the largest economic sectors of the U.S., it appears, is facing a deep crisis, triggered by U.S. policymakers. A rather significant outcome for a president who has only been in office for half a year.

For Trump, who is also in the hotel business, it’s "no big deal.” After all, as he sees it, the U.S. is unique, and those wanting to see the Grand Canyon, Yosemite and the beaches of Malibu or Maui, in his world, won’t be put off by a bit of sharp rhetoric, the few thousand jobs he intends to eliminate at U.S. national parks and the mining he hopes to allow near national attractions.

U.S. President Donald Trump has inflicted a fair amount of damage on the American tourism industry.

The fear and unease in the travel industry, though, is vast. Many are concerned that the malcontent could manifest itself for years to come and that the wealthy and important clientele from overseas will stay away for several years, preferring instead to explore other countries as well. And that they will learn that other countries, too, serve tasty cocktails on breathtaking natural beaches with warm surf.

"Tourism is a business based on trust,” says Jukka Laitamaki, a professor of tourism and hospitality in New York. Vacationers usually pay in advance, trusting that the flight, hotel room or rental car will be available as promised. "Above all, people rely on having a good time undisturbed and returning home safe and sound.” This trust, it would seem, has been deeply shaken.

But what is to be done? Just write off the season? Pray that Trump sees the light and changes his tune? Hope for the soccer World Cup in 2026 and the Olympic Games in 2028, both of which are set to take place in the United States?

Marco Wischmeier in Cape Coral, Florida: Bratwurst for lunch, Heidi's German Restaurant for dinner.

It’s one of those gloriously refreshing early summer Atlantic mornings in Cape Coral in southwestern Florida when Marco Wischmeier climbs into a Fiat 500 with an oversized cartoon image on the door to start his daily rounds: Greeting guests, making sure the cleaning crew has done its job and generally ensuring that everything is shipshape. Wischis Florida Home doesn’t just rent out his three properties but also manages several dozen others. Wischmeier also buys, sells and builds homes for customers – most of them German.

For many years, it was a goldmine for the 64-year-old. Cape Coral and neighboring Fort Myers are full of German tourists who have graduated from Mallorca and don’t mind the 10-hour flight. Very few come with the aim of brushing up on their English. Instead, they head over to Disney World and NASA Space Center at Cape Canaveral, have a bratwurst for lunch and head to Heidi’s German Restaurant for dinner.

Before he moved here permanently, Wischmeier was part of the German crowds, coming here on vacation with his family every year. He bought his first house in Florida in 2003, adding two more in 2008 after prices collapsed due to the real estate and financial crisis. When he was unable to find a cleaning and property management service to his liking, he started his own, initially helping to look after the houses of friends and obtaining a broker’s license. Wischmeier says he used to fly to Florida seven to nine times a year – before moving there with his family in 2011 when all the travel grew too stressful.

He has seen and experienced a lot during his time in Florida, replacing a number of roofs following the catastrophic hurricanes in recent years: Helene, Milton, Ian – Wischmeier can recite the names like an incantation. Not to mention the pandemic and all the cancellations and travel bans that came with it. It all cost a fair amount of money, he says. The insurance policies for some properties are hardly affordable anymore, he says.

A vacation home in Cape Coral, Florida: Property manager Marco Wischmeier says that bookings have fallen by a quarter.

He has plenty of wiggle room saved up from the good years – enough, he says, "to keep things going for two years without renting a single house.” But does he want to? At his age? Can he put up with Trump’s chaos for that long?

His first priority is getting through the current season. Wischmeier’s bookings have dropped by a quarter. "But I also got permission from all my homeowners to lower prices to boost business.” He hopes that will help on the short term and convince a few "penny pinchers” to make a reservation.

But if the so-called snowbirds – the Canadians, for example, who fly to Florida to get a bit of sun during the cold, winter months – don’t show up, things will get more difficult. Very few vacation homeowners make a profit with rentals, but they also cannot afford for their properties to sit empty for extended periods of time. "The costs are just too high,” says Wischmeier. So what does he plan to do? He shrugs. "In all my years here, I’ve never experienced such a situation.”

Two of the costs Wischmeier is talking about are Joe and Kim Cass, standing in their work outfits in front of "Key West Sunset,” a canary-yellow villa with three bedrooms, a pool and a boat dock where Friedrich Merz, Germany’s new chancellor, once spent a vacation with his family several years ago, as Wischmeier proudly reports. The couple takes care of the grass next to the garage and the roses at the front door – and rely on their earnings to support their four children. He and his wife work seven days a week, says Joe Cass – an ongoing struggle to make ends meet in an environment where everything is getting more expensive.

Landscape maintenance workers Joe and Jim Cass in Cape Coral, Florida.

A canal in Cape Coral, Florida: "We don't know what's in store for us."

That could soon change. He and his wife take care of the yards of around 20 homes, but six of them are currently for sale, says Cass. The situation in the U.S. has simply become too uncertain for the owners, many of them from Europe, he says. "But when they sell, there is no guarantee that I will still be able to take care of the yard.”

Stability, he adds, has always been worth something to his customers. And in the future? He shrugs. Better to avoid talking about politics and Trump, for whom 59 percent of the people here voted. "We don’t know what’s in store for us.”

Tour operator Reinhard Neuhauser near Fairbanks, Alaska: "Business was crazy."

Four time zones, 6,200 kilometers and 75 hours by car away, in Fairbanks, at the northern end of the U.S., the Alaskan wilderness begins at the boat landing behind Reinhard Neuhauser’s house. "Look, a bald eagle,” he says, pointing to a bush on the banks of the Chena River where one of the great birds is perched as if on command. There’s a beaver dam up there, he says, where fish tend to congregate, attracting the eagles, says Neuhauser, 45. When he approaches in his boat, the majestic eagle spreads its wings and takes off, circling above the landscape.

It is moments like these that led Neuhauser, a native of Austria, to fall in love with Alaska 21 years ago. He came as an exchange student – and never went home. With just $6,000 in startup capital, he founded his company and has since expanded it to become one of the leading tour operators in Fairbanks. Last year, around 5,000 people booked tours with Neuhauser’s company, more than ever before.

Alaska is a popular destination for people from all over the world: Germans, Canadians, Asians and even Americans themselves. Business booms even in winter, thanks to ice fishing, dogsledding and, especially, the aurora borealis, the polar lights that can be seen here so clearly. For $199, tourists can admire the northern lights, fish for salmon and eat their catch on the ice in one of the huts Neuhauser designed himself, with panoramic windows, heating and a place to cook.

Neuhauser pushes the control level forward and the boat accelerates into the solitude – toward the snow-covered mountains on the horizon and the islands in the river where he loves to fish, barbecue and relax with his family on the weekends. "Business was crazy,” he says. "But then, in February, it suddenly collapsed.” A third of his revenue is gone.

Tour guide Gregory Schneider fishing near Fairbanks: Fully 48,000 jobs in the state depend on tourism.

The Chena River in Alaska. Tourism here even booms in winter.

More than 3 million visitors come to Alaska in a normal season, bringing in $3.9 billion and providing 48,000 jobs. Tourism was recently on the verge of displacing the state’s fishery as the second-most important sector of the economy, right behind the oil and natural gas industry.

Now, the slowing stream of visitors is even making itself felt in the elegant Candlewood Suites. Hotel manager Lloyd Huskey, in his mid-60s, points to a table on his computer screen showing that his hotel has only been 66 percent full since the beginning of the year on average. In 2024, it was 87 percent at this point in the year. And because management has cut rates, turnover has taken a hit, with the hotel bringing in only $1.5 million instead of the normal $2.5 million. Hardly surprising, says Huskey: "No one feels safe to travel.”

New York and San Francisco are tired of just watching events take their course. On the East Coast this year, the number of international guests is expected to be 17 percent lower than initial projections while the West Coast is forecast to host 9 percent fewer visitors than in 2024. Trump has especially scared away the LGBTQ+ community, which can immediately be felt in what are likely the two most liberal cities in the U.S. – especially in June, Pride Month. For that reason, the heads of tourism for both New York and San Francisco, Julie Coker and Anna Marie Presutti, decided independently of each other to travel to Europe to drum up business, both making their trips earlier this month.

Head of tourism for New York, Julie Coker: "We are more than just the current headlines."

Anna Marie Presutti is the head of tourism for San Francisco: "We welcome everybody."

Coker spoke about New York’s current campaign in a conversation in a five-star hotel in Frankfurt. Called "With Love + Liberty,” it sounds a lot like a direct response to Trump. New York, she says, is the most tolerant destination for people from the LGBTQ+ community – for homosexuals, for queer and transgender people. And it should stay that way, says Coker, even if that might be difficult to believe given the current political climate. "I hope that our guests have a long memory,” she says. "We are more than just the current headlines.”

Coker has been working in the industry for more than 30 years. She says that New York has always managed to bring the tourists back, even after the terror attacks on the World Trade Center and after the financial crisis. The city has "continually reinvented itself and always come out even stronger,” as she describes it. She hopes that will hold true after the current crisis as well.

Anna Marie Presutti, Coker’s counterpart from San Francisco, has adopted an attitude of forced optimism. Her itinerary includes stops in London and Berlin, and she is also focused on LGBTQ+ travelers. If they do plan to travel to the U.S. this year, she says, she hopes they will make a stop in San Francisco. The LGBTQ+ community has "always demonstrated that it is unafraid to stand up for their rights and for what they believe in.” San Francisco, she insists, "is a safe place. We welcome everybody.”

The fact that she even has to say such things says a lot about how things currently stand in the U.S. But for San Francisco in particular, there is a lot at stake.

An LGBTQ+ even in San Francisco on April 20: "This is a safe place."

Following the coronavirus pandemic, the city struggled with a homelessness crisis and a drug epidemic, creating years of negative headlines, falling housing prices, temporarily rising crime rates and a city center that lost its vibrancy. Presutti says the city has since recovered, and initially, they had hoped to achieve visitor numbers on par with those prior to all the crises. Now, though, it might be years before that happens: "2027 at the earliest.” That means there will be less money coming into the city which translates into fewer investments. The crises are continuing, she says – thanks to Trump. "It takes years to build an image. And just a couple of tweets to destroy it.”

In an attempt to address the problem, Presutti and Coker recently traveled to Washington, D.C., with their counterparts from a number of large American cities to meet with lawmakers and cabinet members to lobby for policy changes and, especially, a change in tone. To no avail. "I was shocked,” says Presutti, "how little attention most people in Washington pay to tourism. How little they know about how important our industry is.”

And this despite the statistics: Last year, the United States received more than 72 million visitors from abroad. The tourism industry employs 18 million people, a third more than the manufacturing industry. Now, though, economists at both Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan are forecasting that the U.S. GDP, already stagnating, could lose 0.3 percentage points if the tourism sector doesn’t soon recuperate. That equates to the gigantic sum of $71 billion being taken out of the economy because restaurant tables aren’t being reserved, city tours are going unbooked, Broadway tickets are lying unsold and service personnel are losing work.

According to a recent analysis performed by the European Central Bank, there is also another part of the story. Consumers are "very willing to actively move away from U.S. products and services.” Tourism, says Laitamaki, the tourism professor, is an international industry. "There are a lot of alternatives these days.”

Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro: Brazil has become an international tourism magnet.

In the Museum of Tomorrow in Rio de Janeiro, a futuristic building on a pier jutting out into Guanabara Bay, Marcelo Freixo can hardly contain his glee at the annual meeting of Brazilian tourism executives. The number of air travelers, visitors from abroad, revenues and profits – all the key indicators from the Ministry of Tourism, and from the Tourism Board he leads, are trending in the same direction: Upward. Thanks to the unwitting assistance from Washington, 2025 is likely to be a record year for tourism in Brazil. Freixo believes his country will receive a boost from travelers who had originally intended to visit the United States. "Who wants to travel to a country that is hostile to foreigners?” he asks. In Brazil, he says, visitors can expect "alegria.”

The word basically means the love of life, coupled with unbounded optimism. That may not be reflected by the living situations of the people in the country. But Brazil’s image in the world is more shaped by the exuberant, colorful images from Carnival. And that is what Freixo hopes to build on.

The upswing has already become readily apparent in Rio. Mayor Eduardo Paes says that a million international visitors already came to the city in the first three months of the year, a 52 percent increase over the same time period last year. That includes a 60 percent increase in visitors from the U.S., 30 percent from Germany and 40 percent from the UK. And to attract travelers, Paes says, Rio hasn’t even had to actively position itself as an alternative to New York or Los Angeles. Currently, all that is necessary is to draw attention to "the city’s own strengths and beauty.”

A beach in Rio de Janeiro: Brazil has seen a 60 percent growth in visitors from the U.S.

Does that mean that Trump is going to plunge his own tourism industry into a years-long crisis?

"Travel isn’t political,” says Tilo Krause-Dünow, who is still relying on the Germans’ unquenched desire to visit America. Recently returned from the West Coast, his face is tanned and his sleeves rolled up as he sits at a table in the conference room in the offices of Canusa, located in Hamburg. For over 40 years, Krause-Dünow, the owner and founder of the North American tour operator, has been sending U.S. enthusiasts across the Atlantic. He has lived through a lot of America’s ups and downs. "Each time, I thought things were about to get challenging for us,” says Krause-Dünow. But "from event to event,” he has become more complaisant, he says.

Tour operator Tilo Krause-Dünow: "Travel isn't political."

Experience has taught him that his customers’ appetite for travel only drops briefly at most. His company’s booking numbers returned to normal within just a year after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The same is true this time around as well: After initial uncertainty, passengers are again enthusiastically boarding U.S.-bound planes again, he says. Demand, which fell in the spring, is recovering he says. "The U.S. simply exerts a powerful attraction.”

The weak dollar, the Germans’ reliable yearning for America – is that enough to get the tourism industry through the crisis? Or are they just straws to grasp at – straws which might ultimately break?

A few answers can be found in the basement of a building on Hardenbergstrasse in Berlin. Here, in the Historical Archive on Tourism belonging to the Technical University of Berlin, there are piles of posters, maps books and magazines – more than 15,000 objects – that also help explain the Germans’ fixation on America.

Before World War II, the few travelers that crossed the ocean usually went by ship, mostly to visit family members living on the other side of the Atlantic. Vacation travel only really arrived during the German Economic Miracle in the 1950s and '60s, fueled by all kinds of marketing. Hollywood films, American music, blue jeans and Coca-Cola shaped the German view of the U.S. – creating a widespread desire for the "American way of life.”

It was the promise of freedom, prosperity and unlimited possibilities that motivated the Germans to travel to the United States, says Andreas Jüttemann, head of the tourism archive. The Congress for Cultural Freedom, which was secretly funded by the CIA, and the United States Information Agency (USIA), the cultural organization founded in 1953, did their part to fuel the trend, also supporting until 1969 the anchoring of American ideas on the economy, state and society in West Germany. With success: "Many Germans knew more about the United States than they did about Lower Franconia.”

In 1982, German pop star Udo Jürgens released the anthem to go along with the phenomenon: "Ich war noch niemals in New York” – "I’ve never been to New York.” The U.S. became a place where many young Germans went to study abroad, to work as au pairs, for internships or even to study at university. Later, they wanted to take their children to the U.S. to share their experiences – and booked summer vacations in the States.

It was a time when tourists weren’t just extremely welcome in the U.S., but the country also believed they could serve a greater good. In order to spread the American worldview across the globe, it was helpful to have an army of people who had visited the country. Around the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall, the U.S. even eliminated the visa requirement for German travelers – so that all those from former East Germany could also visit Manhattan and the Golden Gate Bridge.

Four decades later, Jüttemann believes, the excitement surrounding America has been exhausted in many respects. Of course the "Trump wound is still extremely fresh.” But when it comes to vacation, "the Germans forgive a lot.” As such, he doesn’t believe the turn away from the U.S. only has to do with the new administration in Washington. In general, he says, the Germans have become "more critical” than they were in the 20th century. "We have grown less fascinated by the cheeseburger culture. We see more of the social ills in the U.S. Everything seems less and less like a fairytale land.” The much higher prices for hotels and restaurants have also done their part, he says.

So is Trump perhaps merely the most recent symptom of a far larger crisis? Are we witnessing the end of a long, intense friendship?

Jim and Eva Tantillo in Kihei, Hawaii: "The core of our business is trust."

It is a question that Eva and Jim Tantillo are also considering as they sit on the veranda of their bed and breakfast on the island of Maui. They opened their first lodging on the Hawaiian island more than 30 years ago, and they have lovingly run the place since then, expanding and remodeling it in the process. "The core of our business is trust,” says Eva Tantillo. "Part of that is always being there for our guests, no matter what is going on.”

The Tantillos are also facing a shortage of guests. May and June have produced only half of their usual number of bookings, says Eva Tantillo. "A catastrophe.”

Aside from their own economic difficulties, however, she and Jim are more bothered by the broader political atmosphere. People are drifting further and further away from each other, they say.

Daniel Schubert is sitting at the table as well. Originally from Germany, he is a regular guest. He met his wife, an American, in Hawaii. Today, he operates the website hawaii.de, a platform he claims is the largest German-language travel agency for the archipelago. He flew in for a few weeks in an attempt to save his business. Germany is the most important European market for Hawaii, but Schubert has seen his business shrink by a third. He, too, is wondering: Will the German-American crisis be over in a few months? Or will it last?

The group starts talking about the good old days – back when everything used to be a bit smaller, a bit more tranquil and relaxed. And, above all, more equitable. But now? Jim points up the hill to where he says talk show queen Oprah Winfrey has one of her many sinfully expensive properties on Maui. A couple of miles down the coast, says Eva, pointing to the ocean, is the villa belonging to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. "He even has his bodyguards patrol the beach so that no tourists walk by.” Even as locals have to spend more and more every year to make ends meet and can hardly afford their own island, Maui is being commercialized. "Just like all the nice things in this country.”

The table falls silent, the group deep in thought about America. And the world.

The constant mantra of "higher, faster, farther” was always a source of fascination for the Germans, as was unbridled capitalism, the striving for one’s own happiness. Is that fascination now transforming into repulsion because the situation has become so grotesque, the abuses all too obvious? And not just since this president’s election?

Schubert can only give his friends a glimmer of hope. "For Europeans, a trip to Hawaii is an absolute dream vacation. For most, it’s a once-in-a-lifetime experience,” he says. "All the stars have to be perfectly alligned.” Which means, he believes, that many are merely delaying their trip, planning to celebrate their 70th birthday instead of their 65th in Hawaii, Schubert says. "Maui,” he says, "will still be there.”

As will America. Whatever it might look like.