German president warns world order becoming 'den of robbers'

On January 8, 2026, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier delivered a sharp public rebuke of U.S. foreign policy at the Körber Foundation's symposium in Hamburg, warning that the international order risks disintegrating into a "den of robbers" where the unscrupulous take what they want. The remarks, unusually forceful for a largely ceremonial head of state, came as the Trump administration faced European criticism over military action in Venezuela and continued threats regarding Greenland's territorial status.

The timing and coordination matter as much as the content. French President Emmanuel Macron issued parallel warnings the same day, suggesting this was not diplomatic improvisation but a calculated Franco-German effort to establish a unified European narrative about the crisis in transatlantic relations. For institutional observers, this synchronization represents a significant strategic signal—Europe's core powers attempting to frame the current moment not as tactical disagreement, but as a fundamental values crisis.

The institutional weight of presidential intervention

Steinmeier's office carries limited executive power within Germany's parliamentary system, functioning primarily in representative and ceremonial capacities. This structural constraint makes his intervention more notable, not less. When a president whose constitutional role emphasizes national unity and institutional continuity uses language this stark at a formal foreign policy forum, it represents a deliberate decision by the German state apparatus to escalate the diplomatic register.

The venue itself—the Körber Foundation, a respected platform for European security dialogue—reinforces the calculated nature of the message. This is a prepared address designed for international diplomatic audiences, where Steinmeier articulated concerns about the breakdown of values and the international order. The speech represents Berlin's effort to bring attention to what it perceives as fundamental challenges to the rules-based international system.

Steinmeier's framing went beyond policy critique to invoke what he termed a "second historic rupture," explicitly placing current U.S. actions in the same analytical category as Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This rhetorical choice carries profound institutional implications: Germany's head of state now publicly categorizes its primary security guarantor as a source of systemic instability comparable to its primary adversary.

Unlock the Full Analysis:

Members are reading: How the gap between Europe's values-based rupture rhetoric and its continued security dependence creates acute institutional vulnerability.

Become a Member

The evidence base for European alarm

Steinmeier's warnings did not emerge from abstract principle but from specific U.S. actions that European governments view as violations of established international norms. The Trump administration's recent military intervention in Venezuela and public statements about Greenland that prompted Denmark to warn such actions would end NATO provide the concrete evidence for claims that the world has moved "beyond the stage where international law is not respected."

From a European institutional perspective, these episodes represent a pattern rather than isolated incidents. The concern is not merely that the U.S. pursues interests aggressively—major powers have always done so—but that it now does so with explicit disregard for the rules-based framework it historically championed. This creates an institutional paradox: the alliance meant to defend liberal international order is led by a power European capitals increasingly view as undermining that order.

The question facing European decision-makers is whether this moment forces a permanent recalibration or represents a temporary aberration to be weathered. Steinmeier's speech suggests Germany has concluded the former—that structural changes in American foreign policy require structural changes in European strategy. Yet the mechanisms for such adaptation remain underdeveloped, caught between ambitious declarations and modest capabilities. The coming months will test whether Europe's rhetorical escalation translates into genuine institutional transformation, or whether dependency constraints force a gap between stated principles and operational reality.