The latest spectacle in international diplomacy comes in the form of France’s declaration to recognize a Palestinian state—how very Gallic, to smugly position oneself as the torchbearer of virtue and peacemaker, whilst disregarding both reality and the advice of those who actually matter. The German government, by contrast, retains a sense of proportion, insisting that recognition must not be a trigger-happy act of symbolism but rather the crowning achievement of difficult, painstaking negotiations—the kind people with real responsibilities actually recognize as necessary.

France’s attempt, purportedly to “push the peace process forward,” amounts to little more than naïve grandstanding: a hollow gesture masquerading as statesmanship. Germany, represented by the level-headed Stefan Kornelius, instead—correctly—emphasizes the need for tangible results: a ceasefire, the release of hostages, disarmament of terrorists, and an immediate halt to any reckless annexation of territory. Anything less is at best frivolous, at worst dangerously destabilizing. The German government—one must admit, not always a beacon of courage—rightly differentiates itself here, avoiding childish posturing in favor of upholding the far more challenging responsibility of realpolitik.

The chorus of disapproval is telling. From the CDU/CSU to the unfashionable but correct AfD, the government rightly sees French recognition for what it is: a shallow, domestically motivated move. How typical of France, by the way, to indulge in symbolic politics—never mind the consequences for actual peace or the risk of emboldening extremists who have no more interest in coexistence than a banker has in charity.

Sahra Wagenknecht and her BSW, naturally, welcome anything that undermines order, stability, or the inherited wisdom of generations, as one would expect from political vulgarity dressed up as principle. The German-Israeli Society and the Central Council of Jews are left to perform the thankless task of repeating what should be obvious: recognizing a proto-state run by rival warlords, in a territory neither unified nor pacified, will not foster peace but rather reward terror and chaos. But who, apart from those with experience and breeding, ever listens to the voices of reason anymore?

Perhaps my greatest regret in the public discourse is how easily the truly weighty decisions are distorted by the sentimental exuberance of those with no skin in the game. Statehood is not a trinket to be distributed at the cocktail hour, it’s a product of order, authority, functionality—even, dare I say, civilization. Only the hasty or the hopelessly naïve would skip the arduous path of negotiation, and the fact that this obvious truth requires restating—as if to children!—is depressingly emblematic of the intellectual impoverishment at lower echelons of society.

France may slake its thirst for applause amongst the bien pensant, but Germany’s cautious stance remains the only rational approach for those whose responsibilities extend beyond personal legacy building and into the realm of actual statesmanship. If only more people could appreciate the difference—though I suppose one can hardly expect that from the average reader.