Hanno Hauenstein
+972 Magazine / January 20, 2026
A new bilateral cybersecurity deal and the continued flow of weapons leave little ambiguity about Germany’s stance: not accountability, but normalization.
“Israel has the right — and indeed the duty — to defend its citizens and its existence against those who repeatedly deny the democratic Jewish state’s right to exist.” With these words, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz opened a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem in December.
The language was familiar, part of a well-established lexicon of German-Israeli diplomacy. Against the backdrop of Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, such phrasing now reads as a blunt reaffirmation of the countries’ “special relationship”: an assertion of Germany’s responsibility for Israel’s security and endorsement of a growing military partnership.
That symbolism has since been followed by more concrete steps. A little over a week ago, Israel and Germany signed a cybersecurity agreement to expand their existing cooperation. “I attach enormous importance to the overall cooperation between Israel and Germany,” Netanyahu said during the signing. “Israel’s enemies should know: Our eyes are on them at all times and everywhere,” read a statement on the agreement from his office.
German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt, who travelled to Israel to sign the deal, said he wanted to take Israel as a “model.” “We are relying on systematic exchange rather than ad-hoc cooperation,” Dobrindt told German media. “Israel is Germany’s most important partner outside of NATO and the EU,” his ministry stated.
According to the German newspaper Bild, the agreement includes cooperation between Germany’s elite police unit GSG 9 and the Israeli police’s counterterrorism unit, known colloquially as Yamam. This unit has carried out extrajudicial assassinations of Palestinians in the West Bank, and was also involved in Israel’s hostage rescue operation in Nuseirat refugee camp in northern Gaza in June 2024, during which four Israelis were freed and over 270 Palestinians were killed. Bild also reported plans for a joint German-Israeli AI and cybersecurity research center.
The agreement further includes Germany’s participation in the U.S.-led Office of the Security Coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority (OSC) in Jerusalem, within which Dobrindt reportedly said Germany would “take on a leadership role.” The office provides training to Palestinian police officers and “security forces” in the West Bank, with plans to extend this to Gaza. Germany is already involved in the EU Mission for the Support of Palestinian Police and Rule of Law, which is expected to expand its mandate to train police officers from Gaza as well (overall, 3,000 police units are expected to be trained by European forces).
In response to a parliamentary inquiry by the Left Party, the German government recently confirmed that it is participating — with staff from Germany’s Foreign Office and its military — in the U.S.-led Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC) in the Israeli city of Kiryat Gat. The center was established to support the implementation of Trump’s so-called 20-point peace plan for Gaza, and while excluding Palestinians altogether it has been revealed to be working with U.S. security firms like Palantir and Dataminr.
But cooperation between Germany and Israel extends well beyond intelligence sharing or police training. Germany is Israel’s second-largest supplier of arms after the United States, and one of its most significant customers.
Between 2020 and 2024, Germany supplied over one-third of Israel’s arms imports. And during roughly that same period, Israel ranked third among recipients of German arms, accounting for 11 percent of total exports.
A recent report by the Peace Research Institute Frankfurt estimates that since October 7, 2023, Germany approved arms exports to Israel worth approximately €550 million. In 2023 alone, approvals totalled €326.5 million. Those included roughly 500,000 rounds of rifle ammunition and thousands of portable anti-tank weapons known as “Matador,” which were frequently used by Israeli forces in Gaza to destroy civilian infrastructure — and routinely appear in footage uploaded by Israeli soldiers to social media.
This relationship appears especially crucial in light of Israel’s deteriorating international standing, most notably in the United States, and specifically within segments of the MAGA right. Donald Trump’s unpredictable posture toward Israel only heightens its need to secure reliable allies elsewhere.
Although Germany partially halted its export approvals for arms used in Gaza in August 2025, it restored them just a few weeks after the so-called ceasefire took effect in October. And a closer look at what this “freeze” actually included reveals that Germany never really stopped arming Israel’s genocide.
A halt to arms exports ?
By late summer 2025, even a German media landscape tilted heavily in Israel’s favour could no longer completely ignore the relentless stream of images of starving children in Gaza. As those images circulated, public opinion in Germany, too, began to shift.
The need for a reaction from the government was obvious, and it came in the form of an announcement that Germany was halting the export of arms to Israel that could be used in Gaza. (Merz later even distanced himself from the language of Staatsräson — a gesture that, while striking, rang hollow given his claim just months prior that Israel was doing “the dirty work for us” in its unprovoked attack on Iran.)
But to understand what this meant in practice, it is necessary to cut through a set of legal and terminological distinctions relevant to Germany’s arms export policies.
First is the difference between arms exports and the approval of such exports. When it was announced in August 2025 that Germany “halted” its arms exports to Israel, the measure applied only to new approvals for weapons intended for use in Gaza; deliveries from earlier approvals could continue uninterrupted. As if to illustrate this point, the German business daily Handelsblatt reported that a submarine capable of launching nuclear-armed cruise missiles departed the German port city of Kiel for Israel the same month that the halt on export approvals was announced.
Decisions on such approvals are made by Germany’s Federal Security Council — a secretive body overseeing sensitive arms transfers, whose deliberations are shielded from the public by law.
A second distinction concerns Germany’s legal separation between “Kriegswaffen” (war weapons) and “Rüstungsgüter” (military goods). The latter category includes components and equipment, including engines, warheads, helmets, pistols, certain types of ammunition and explosive materials. As such, German-supplied engines used in Israel’s Merkava and Namer tanks, which were deployed in Gaza, are classified as Rüstungsgüter, not Kriegswaffen.
Although such components are often essential to a weapon’s functioning, these two categories are regulated under different legal regimes. The export threshold for war weapons is much higher, as they fall under the Weapons of War Control Act. Arms, by contrast, are regulated under Foreign Trade Law and thus do not require special governmental approval. In practice, this legal distinction facilitates arms exports and complicates oversight.
“From the perspective of international law, the distinction between ‘components of weapons’ and ‘weapons of war’ is not decisive,” Alexander Schwarz, a lawyer at the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), told +972 Magazine. “The international Arms Trade Treaty applies equally to both. That means Germany is currently violating international law. There is no margin of discretion.”
A third distinction concerns the separation between defensive and offensive weapons. Arms and equipment for air and naval defense — presented as central to Israel’s self-defense — were exempted from Merz’s approval freeze in August. A significant portion of Israel’s naval fleet, including submarines and Saar 6 corvettes, are built in Germany. ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS), the company that manufactures these ships, has confirmed that it continued delivering components for these vessels throughout 2024 and 2025. For TKMS, these contracts are of great economic importance.
Despite being classified as “defensive,” German-made Saar 6 vessels have been used to shell Gaza’s coastline during Israel’s military campaigns since October 7. Videos published by the Israeli military show Saar 6 corvettes in action using a Melara 76 mm autocannon; according to the army, the ship targeted a weapons production facility.
Israel currently operates five German-built, taxpayer-subsidized submarines; a sixth was approved by the German Security Council in late 2023. Israel also operates four Saar 6 corvettes which are heavily armed, equipped with autocannons and a maritime version of Israel’s Iron Dome system.
“At the beginning of the war, we were mainly engaged in defense,” a commander of a Saar 6 corvette told the Israeli daily Maariv in November 2025. “Over time, as the ships matured operationally, we were also able to move into offensive roles … We operated across combat arenas, delivering very precise and heavy fire from the ship’s cannon toward areas in Gaza.”
“The distinction between defensive and offensive weapons is not meaningful under international humanitarian law,” Schwarz, of ECCHR, explained. “Many weapons systems can be used in both ways. What ultimately matters is not the label attached to a weapon, but whether its use complies with international law.” The Arms Trade Treaty, he added, is binding under Germany’s Basic Law and must be taken into account in all export decisions.
The same UN treaty, which regulates international arms trade to prevent misuse, demands continuous risk assessments over human rights violations. Under growing domestic and international pressure and amid Nicaragua’s 2024 case before the International Court of Justice accusing Germany of complicity in genocide, the German government began conditioning arms exports to Israel on a formal self-commitment from Israeli officials affirming that German weapons would be used in accordance with international law.
According to the German newspaper Die Zeit, Eyal Zamir — now the Israeli military’s chief of staff, and then the director general of the Defense Ministry — wrote to the German government in late 2024: “We can assure that all weapons or other military equipment supplied from Germany, or containing parts from Germany, are used exclusively in accordance with international humanitarian law.” In light of abundant video evidence showing German-made weapons used to level civilian infrastructure in Gaza, such assurances seem absurd.
‘We’re constantly grasping in the dark’
Redactions of export figures by German government officials further complicate oversight, as two proceedings before a Berlin administrative court recently showed.
In one of the cases, four Palestinians from Gaza sued the German government (through ECCHR), challenging an export license issued on Oct. 30, 2023, which authorized the German arms manufacturer Dynamit Nobel Defence GmbH to deliver 3,000 Matador weapons to Israel (a fifth plaintiff, Nayef Rayyan, was killed in an Israeli drone strike in July 2025, reportedly in an attack on a falafel stand near Al-Awda Hospital in Gaza’s Nuseirat camp). The four surviving plaintiffs all lost close family members in Israeli attacks.
In a second case, a Palestinian living in Gaza sought a suspension of German export licenses for war weapons to Israel until the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza.
According to Schwarz, who supported the plaintiffs of the first case, the German government’s lack of transparency made judicial review nearly impossible. “We were not told when authorizations were granted, nor were we told about the scope,” he told +972 Magazine. “We are constantly grasping in the dark and having to rely on journalists just to learn that authorizations even exist.”
Remo Klinger, counsel in the first case, argues the government failed to demonstrate that export approvals were subject to any legal review, despite the fact that the Weapons of War Control Act requires it. “Where is that review? Where is the document? It’s completely missing,” Klinger told +972 Magazine. “We have serious doubts that such an assessment even took place.”
The state’s legal team argued that Germany had not issued any new approvals for war weapons exports under the Weapons of War Control Act since February 2024. It also claimed that only 1.8 percent of military exports approved after October 7 were war weapons; more than 98 percent concerned military goods, allegedly intended for defensive use. Any potential rights violation, they argued, would stem not from German exports but from “independent decisions” by the Israeli military on how weapons were used.
The court ultimately dismissed both cases, holding that preventive legal protection was inadmissible without a provable “risk of repetition,” citing the government’s announcement at the time that no new export licenses for arms used in Gaza would be issued. It also argued the situation in Gaza had “fundamentally changed” due to the ceasefire.
“The claim that there was no risk of repetition was disproven almost immediately,” Schwarz told +972. Only five days after the court’s decision, the German government lifted its partial freeze on export approvals for war weapons to Israel.
While dismissing the cases, the court left open the broader legal question of whether Palestinians in Gaza can challenge Germany’s export licenses. Klinger pointed to a recent ruling by Germany’s Constitutional Court — the so-called “Ramstein ruling” — concerning Germany’s role in the Saudi-led war in Yemen. That ruling recognized that affected foreigners may, in certain cases, claim legal protection vis-à-vis Germany. “That applies even more clearly here, where Germany itself issued an authorization; and where that authorization was unlawful,” Klinger explained.
In its written ruling, the court acknowledged that the resumption of arms and war weapons deliveries to Israel means “the factual situation may well present itself differently,” but that these developments could no longer be considered. Klinger now intends to file an appeal. “This is about fundamental questions of law, about whether it is even possible to have Germany’s compliance with international law reviewed.”
‘Israel works for the defense of Germany’
One thing that distinguishes Merz’s and Dobrindt’s latest visits from Germany’s broader Israel policy is a more explicit turn toward German self-interest. While Germany continues to cast itself as Israel’s guardian — in line with its longstanding Staatsräson, which frames Israel’s security as a moral obligation derived from the Holocaust, and arguably helped facilitate the conditions under which the Gaza genocide unfolded — its own security is now explicitly anchored in the alliance and legitimated through Holocaust memory.
For example, in 2023, Germany purchased Israel’s Arrow 3 missile defence system for €3.6 billion. Marketed as a cornerstone of Germany’s defense against Russia (although its efficacy in this regard has been contested), the system recently became operational. The contract has since been expanded by an additional €3.1 billion, making it the largest arms deal in Israel’s history.
In his December press conference with Netanyahu in Jerusalem, Merz opened by referencing his visit to Yad Vashem earlier that day. “Germany will therefore always stand up for Israel’s existence and security,” he declared. “This is part of the unchangeable essential core of our relationship. It applies today, it applies tomorrow, and it applies forever.”
Netanyahu stated: “Not only does Germany work in the defense of Israel; but Israel — the Jewish state — 80 years after the Holocaust, works for the defense of Germany.” In explaining why Hamas can have no role in Gaza’s future, both Merz and Netanyahu explicitly tied the October 7 attacks to the Holocaust.
That Holocaust memory is instrumentalized to shield Israeli state violence from scrutiny — and deflect from German complicity in such violence — is not new. But as numerous UN experts and human rights groups describe Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide, this takes on a far more disturbing dimension.
In Germany, some focused on the fact that Merz reiterated Germany’s commitment to a two-state solution. Yet unlike France, Spain, or the United Kingdom, Germany continues to refuse even the minimal symbolic step of recognizing Palestine.
Moreover, while Merz appeared in his speech to place some limits on the alliance — pledging Germany’s support for Gaza’s reconstruction, and voicing mild criticism of Israel’s annexationist ambitions in the West Bank — he did so while affirming close cooperation with the government that is committing these violations of international law. The sheer scale of the killing in Gaza and the destruction of nearly all of its infrastructure went unaddressed.
Any remaining illusion that such mild statements carried political weight was dispelled when Netanyahu explicitly affirmed Israel’s sovereignty “from the river to the sea.” The irony was hard to miss: Just days later, a Berlin court ruled that the same phrase is a symbol of Hamas and thus constitutes a criminal offence. In Berlin, chanting or posting it in a pro-Palestine context has routinely served to justify arrests, extreme police violence, and, in some cases, deportation orders against EU citizens.
Near the end, Merz was asked whether he would invite Netanyahu to Germany despite the arrest warrant issued for the Israeli prime minister by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The chancellor seemed to sidestep the question: No invitation was currently planned, he said, but one could be extended “if time allows it.”
A new phase of German militarization
Germany is now deep in a phase of national rearmament. Until 2030, Berlin plans to spend roughly €650 billion on defense — a commitment that required a decisive break with years of debt-brake dogmatism. This shift is also contributing to closer alignment with Israel.
At a recent arms conference at Tel Aviv University organized by Israel’s Defense Ministry, one of the largest delegations came from Germany. According to reporting by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Israel’s former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant — whose arrest the ICC also seeks — was among the participants. German speakers included Ulf Häussler, director of operations and planning at NATO; Simon Brünjes, vice president of the German defense tech firm Helsing; and Christian Steinborn, head of business development at Rheinmetall, Germany’s largest arms manufacturer.
A promotional video for the event features participants in German military uniform alongside venture capitalist Shaun Maguire. “I don’t think Israel is that far from building 500 billion- to trillion-dollar hardware giants that change the world,” he says, as the video cuts between the logos of Israeli arms firms such as Elbit, Rafael, and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), alongside the U.S. firm Palantir.
The conference reportedly also featured footage of drone strikes hitting buildings in Gaza, presented as proof of effectiveness. Coverage of the event by India’s public broadcaster DD India shows Rafael showcasing combat footage. As Nir Weingold, recently appointed head of the budget department at Israel’s Defense Ministry, put it on social media in reference to the event: “Battle-tested credibility wins.”
The same logic, outlined in depth by journalist Antony Loewenstein, was later confirmed by Drop Site News, which published audio recordings from the conference. In one, Boaz Levy, head of IAI, states: “The war that we faced in the last two years enables most of our products to become valid for the rest of the world … starting with Gaza and moving on to Iran and to Yemen.”
Meanwhile, Israeli media reported a record year for the country’s defense tech sector, with approximately $1 billion invested in military startups. The Israeli financial daily Globes recently quoted a senior army colonel describing how investors scout Israeli military startups and seek assurances from the Israeli military before signing deals. “Our response provides credibility,” Col. Yishai Cohen said, referring to a meeting with German investors.
The WSJ report also described a side event at the conference that connected Israeli startups with European — including German — investors, and offered advice on how to overcome European bureaucracy.
Since October 7, more than 130 Israeli startups have reportedly been integrated into Israel’s Gaza war effort — around half focused on AI, roughly a quarter on sensor and detection technology such as counter-drone systems, and the rest on navigation and electronic warfare. Israeli arms exports surged in the wake of the genocide, reaching a record $14.8 billion in 2024. Europe emerged as the largest buyer, accounting for 54 percent of total exports. And with Israel having scaled down the intensity of its assault on Gaza, many states appear increasingly comfortable returning to business as usual.
In Germany, these alignments mark a rupture in the country’s self-understanding. Once held up as a model for confronting its historical crimes, the German establishment now applies the lessons of “Never again” selectively and instrumentally. Genocide is no longer treated as a universal crime, but as a conditional one — downplayed or excused when committed by the “right” ally.
Merz’s visit to Jerusalem, and the continued flow of arms between Germany and Israel, leave little ambiguity about the choice being made: not accountability, but normalization.
Hanno Hauenstein is a Berlin-based independent journalist and author
