John F. Kennedy once said, “Change is the law of life”.

Well. Right now, a single week is enough.

And the sentence not only fits the last week but the last few years as a whole.

Change, transformation – renewal. You didn’t select these keywords for this summit by chance – even though they are more fitting now than was perhaps originally planned. Because these words could also be used to describe the current government’s tenure over the last three years.

Partly because – let me briefly remind you – we deliberately chose this as our theme at the start of this coalition. We said that there had to be renewal, transformation, change.

We said in what was a new constellation back then: now more than ever. Let’s dare to do what has not been dared before. We made a conscious decision to make this a focus of our coalition – out of a sense of responsibility for our country, as well as a sense of responsibility for Europe. For some of the major problems plaguing us today have arisen because they haven’t been tackled before: particularly major structural issues such as digitalisation, the energy transition, but more especially the failure to get our country’s infrastructure into shape during the good times. The problems here have become so acute during the last few years because we have found ourselves in a genuine crisis – and because nobody had the courage to tackle them before!

And that’s why the motto of my own last three years has been to say time and again in the face of all the crises: the glass is nevertheless half full. My political philosophy is: if someone no longer has the confidence – even in the most difficult times – to go a bit further, even if it’s only a millimetre, then they obviously no longer have the strength. And that’s why I personally have advocated that we shoulder this responsibility together.

Evidently, things haven’t turned out that way.

However, the thinking of preceding governments: “we’ll just stick to a relatively safe course” – resulted, as you as representatives of industry, as business leaders and entrepreneurs know only too well, in us falling behind our international competitors. Every transformation requires not only courage but also strength and foresight. Because, as the Covid-19 pandemic showed, as the issues before that showed, it’s human nature when there’s uncertainty to initially say, “If I’m unsure what’s coming, then I’ll just stick to what I already know.” And that’s the very reason why the major issues, especially infrastructure issues, weren’t tackled.

I’d like to take this opportunity to express my greatest respect for Volker Wissing. He launched a modernisation of our railway network for which we knew, also the coalition, that others would get the credit. Because everyone’s initial reaction when high-speed train lines are closed is annoyance. But if we hadn’t closed these lines then the question would have been: when will more bridges quite literally collapse in this country?

And I believe that this way of thinking, “Change is the law of life”, is needed more than ever today. And, at the same time, one lesson learned from the last few years is that we also have to create a sense of security when carrying out this transformation. Obviously, and we have to be self-critical and admit this, we haven’t succeeded in this in every phase of the last three years. In my view, however, that doesn’t mean that we should say: let’s just leave things as they are. Rather, we have to look at what has been successful during the last three years and keep asking ourselves: what were the main factors that contributed to this success? We should build on them.

And that’s what I’d like to do here today at the opening of this summit: stop being negative about everything. Others are perhaps better at that. Instead, we should look and see what we learned together, especially in times of crisis, what made us strong and what we need now.

And, of course, 24 February 2022 was a pivotal date. Who in this room, in Europe, and most especially in the Kremlin, would have thought that we – and not just us Germans but Europe as a whole – would manage to achieve what we achieved? To reach a decision over one weekend among 27 member states that had previously been at odds with each other and always stressing their differences.

But at a time when truly important matters are at stake, war or peace, when Europe can stand united or the European Union can collapse, we found the strength to act together. And why? Because during the German Bundestag debate when the Chancellor first used the word Zeitenwende or watershed, there was no sign of party political tactics. I believe that everyone present was thinking: how will I answer my children’s questions? When they ask: what did you do in February 2022 for Germany, for Europe, for our freedom and security.

And it’s evident that the societies of Hungary, Italy, Poland, Sweden and Spain, indeed all societies, mustered the same strength and resolve.

I believe we should always remember this. That if we have the will, we Europeans have the strength to stand together.

Naturally, that also applies after the events of this week.

America has voted. Donald Trump has won the election.

It goes without saying that we as democrats, as the European Union, congratulated him together.

Because it’s clear to us that the future American Administration must remain a strong and reliable ally. Just like Germany and Europe, America is more than a government. It’s millions of people, thousands of businesses. It’s a link that transcends generations. Transatlantic relations are relations between friends and partners. That’s the very reason why the transatlantic partnership is so important at the moment. It’s crucial that we work on it. And, as we’ve learned during the last three and a half years with other players: naturally, it’s important that we engage in cooperation. Wherever possible. That’s the very essence of international relations. But we learned something else, and it has made us stronger: we Europeans need to be able to stand on our own two feet when necessary.

We’ll now continue working with our transatlantic partners in this spirit. Partnership, friendship – that’s our offer to the new US Administration.

An offer, and I believe this is new, where we know exactly where we stand. It’s only possible to negotiate as equal partners if you know where you yourself stand. If you don’t know where you come from, if you don’t know your values and interests – then how can you fight for them? At the same time, and I really have felt this myself during the last three years, it’s so important to put yourself in someone else’s shoes. The most important prerequisite for finding solutions in difficult times is the readiness to take a step back from your own standpoint.

That, too, is only possible if you know where you stand. Because only then is it possible to anticipate what the opposite standpoint or the commonalities are. Therefore, it’s important to me, especially at this time where we’re making it clear that we want to expand our partnership based on cooperation, to make it equally clear that we not only know where we stand but that we want to emphasise the elements on which this transatlantic partnership has been built and developed over decades. On freedom, on democracy and on international law.

In earlier times, these were perhaps platitudes. We wrote them down but didn’t really think about them. They’re not platitudes today. And it’s important to give them substance. After all, we’ve experienced during the last three years, but also before, that we as democracies are vying with autocracies to secure power and spheres of influence in an atmosphere of global systemic rivalry. We have to become yet more aware of this – especially now. These principles for which we stand are not only our values but also our own best interests.

If free world trade is no longer a given, then we in an industrialised nation like Germany cannot afford to sit back. For our economy relies on this free trade. Especially in light of this systemic rivalry, therefore, we have to defend each other, as well as our principles of democracy, rule of law and international law.

We must remember what another American President, Ronald Reagan, once said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it your children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected and handed on for them – to do the same.”

And that’s exactly what we have to do now. On 24 February 2022, we saw that peace and freedom and our democracy are not the givens which I, and probably many of you here today, always thought they were. They were there when we were born and when we grew up, and we thought that's how it would always be! But now we have a responsibility to remind ourselves time and again that we really do defend this freedom and this peace and democracy in difficult times.

The good thing – and I keep coming back to this now – is, however, that we as the German Government didn’t suddenly decide on 6 November to support Ukraine. Rather, we as the Federal Foreign Office, as the German Government, took that very decision three years ago, the decision to be the biggest European supporter for Ukraine in its fight for survival. For we regard that fight as the fight for our freedom and peace in Europe. We have invested 100 billion euro in our own armed forces.

And I want to stress this again now that there’s no government majority. The decision to invest these 100 billion euro was supported by the CDU, the FDP, the SPD and us Greens. I think it was another one of these moments when everyone asked: do I only have a responsibility to act in this specific set of circumstances or do I have a responsibility for the coming decades?

We also set out this responsibility – incidentally, by way of a very good cross-party debate in the Bundestag – in our National Security Strategy. This strategy is intended to make our society more resilient in the face of attacks on our freedom and, above all, to finally tackle the frequent hybrid attacks and targeted disinformation directed against us. It is intended to make us aware that hybrid warfare is being deliberately waged against our democracy.

And we showed Putin that he cannot use natural gas to blackmail us. That, too, was not a given. Unfortunately, there was no majority for this view in the Bundestag before 24 February. And all of this led to our Baltic and Eastern European partners in particular trusting us more once again.

Let me be honest, especially due to mistakes such as Nord Stream 2 – where we not only made wrong decisions but deliberately failed to listen to our partners – it was essential and also an investment in our own security that we as the German Government made it clear that Eastern Europe’s security is Germany’s security.

We now have to continue along this path. Indeed, we have to continue with increased strength and courage because, of course, uncertainty has continued to grow, not least since last week. We can only do this together at European level. We only found this strength after 24 February by coming together as Europeans. And we can only keep on travelling along this road together with our European partners.

And we can’t wait until spring. This is the period of transition that Putin has been waiting and aiming for. In view of the outcome of the elections in the United States. But that Wednesday evening would also bring ...? You can finish that sentence yourselves.

That’s why, and to some extent I’m also saying this to the Berlin bubble: as important as an orderly process and security for the election date may be, it’s just as important in these decisive weeks in November, December, January and February that we don’t now stumble when it comes to this one question which has united us so much as democrats once before.

For what matters is that we continue to do everything we can in the coming weeks not only to support Ukraine but also to safeguard peace in Europe and peace in our country. First and foremost, this relates to our responsibility to not merely discuss our own security and defence, but also invest massively in them, especially within NATO. We now have to think big when it comes to investing in our European security and we have to actually invest on a massive scale. That means stepping up our support now. It means throwing off the shackles we put on ourselves. We have to recognise that a 2% target for NATO is no longer enough in our current situation. And we also have to recognise that, of course, this is about much more than financial resources. This is about strengthening our defence capabilities in terms of actual material and, above all, in terms of interoperability with other partners.

Here, too, the good thing is that proposals have already been put forward on how to strengthen our defence capabilities by thinking in European terms. We have the proposals of the European Commission President, as well as the large figures which we now have to invest. I believe that this has to happen right now.

If we live up to this responsibility, we won’t be doing it in opposition to our transatlantic partners. Rather, we are making the bridge across the Atlantic more stable. We’ve always made it clear that we have to strengthen our European pillar within NATO – regardless of the outcome of the election. This is not about doing a favour for the President in the White House, man or woman. No, we’re doing this because it’s in our own most fundamental security interest.

It was therefore no coincidence that I was in Ukraine last Monday and Tuesday.

The people there have been living in the shadow of war for almost 1000 days. Almost 1000 days during which they can’t, as we here can, sit together, get up and go to work.

Last month, in October, just before these elections, there were more drone attacks on Kyiv than ever before. These were deliberate attacks on the capital. The war has reached a new dimension. Anyone who is familiar with the situation knows that this war changes every three months. At present, there’s a full-scale air attack.

And that, too, is no coincidence. Not only because of the election date. The drones are also buzzing over Ukrainian cities because temperatures are falling, because the cold winter weather is looming on the horizon. Because Russia is trying to destroy Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

And it is doing so quite deliberately so that people have to sit in the cold and darkness. So that they are forced to flee their homes in order not to freeze to death.

We have taken in around one million Ukrainians. There are still just under 40 million people living there. That’s the strategy behind these attacks on Kyiv, which is roughly as large as Berlin.

We shouldn’t delude ourselves here. The Russian drones are hitting Ukraine, but they’re also targeted against us, against our free and democratic Europe. And more than ever now that we are having new elections, they’re targeted against our free and democratic Germany.

Our intelligence services are now even telling us publicly: Russia’s aim is to ensure that its war economy has the capacity to deal with an even greater confrontation within a few years. I therefore want to make it so clear that we have to gear our answers to these challenges, challenges which nobody chose. We have to gear our answers to these challenges and not the other way round.

That’s why, alongside the measures at European level, we now need more financial means in the budget which we can use in a targeted and clearly defined manner to at least meet the most urgent requirements of Ukraine’s defence. That applies in particular to the defence against drone attacks.

At the same time, we have to ensure that safeguarding peace in Europe isn’t played off against internal security and social peace within our own society.

We have to build bridges, repair and overhaul roads and rail connections that are literally crumbling away, expand digital infrastructure and enhance our defence against cyber attacks.

It’s the Kremlin’s perfidious strategy to claim that we have to decide between digitalisation, our old-age pensions and peace in Europe. Between security and electricity, between investment in the future and trains that run. And perhaps give up our democracy and freedom. No, we don’t have to do that. It’s up to us. We simply have to decide whether we have the strength.

We did back in the spring of 2022. We demonstrated that we were strong and united. We can do both. We can defend our external and internal security, our social security – and invest in them.

Because we’ve understood that security is much more than just military strength. That’s the core idea behind our National Security Strategy, along with the China Strategy and the Strategy on Climate Foreign Policy.

Because everything is interconnected in this world.

That’s precisely what is meant when we talk about making our society more resilient, more resilient against populism, attempts to spread disinformation and the current bids to undermine and denigrate public, democratic institutions.

This free country, democratic and reunified for the last 35 years, depends on this.

And German business also depends on it because the German economy is, of course, built on this freedom and this rule of law. What’s more, and I believe that some people got this wrong last Wednesday, it’s built on political stability. Nine months ago in Davos, I spoke to some of you about location factors and advantages. We don’t have some of them anymore. We’re no longer always leading when it comes to innovative capacity. However, freedom, the rule of law and political stability are factors that set us apart – and they should continue to give us an advantage as a location for business.

Just as you and your companies, as industry, react to changes every day and create security within the context of this change, we have to do the same. Day in and day out, you for your staff and we as politicians for our society.

That means that we have to continue working to create the conditions for diversifying our supply chains. It means that we need more international partners. And that’s why our China Strategy is, first and foremost, a diversification strategy which contains a raw materials strategy, the aim being to ensure that we’re no longer unilaterally dependent. It will ensure that, if the situation arises, we’re not dependent on dictatorships which can blackmail us.

This is a bold strategy that demonstrates self-confidence. That doesn’t mean arrogance or conceit. Rather, self-confidence means knowing where we stand. Being prepared. We also need magnanimity for that. We have to adopt the outlook of the other side and to make it clear: we won’t allow ourselves to be intimidated.

And let me come back to the half full glass. The Climate Change Conference starts in Azerbaijan today. And, of course, we’re asking ourselves what’s going to happen now in light of the change of administration in the United States. If events here in Germany on Wednesday had been different, the question, one of the central issues, would almost certainly have been: green transformation, competitive advantages and disadvantages as we look ahead to the new Trump Administration. What does that actually mean now? This issue won’t disappear just because we now have even bigger problems. But here especially, the glass appears more than half full to me because the world, and this is the good thing about this rapid change, has changed so quickly in this sphere that some things can no longer be unilaterally reversed.

If we now hear from the United States – and let’s wait and see if things are the same as under the first Trump Administration – that it intends to withdraw from the Paris Agreement then I wouldn’t have the same sense of panic that we perhaps had the first time round. That was different in 2017, even though it was actually a more normal period. At that time, the general feeling here was: “Oh my God, what will happen if the United States withdraws!”. We weren’t prepared then but we definitely are today. Secondly, we were concerned at the time that climate action would completely collapse here, too.

However, especially in the case of the green transformation, so much change has come about that a new situation has been created. Even in Texas, where I was recently to, among other things, visit German companies in the renewable energies sector, partly in anticipation of the elections, I was told, “No, your companies should stay.”

Due to the investment in the green transformation, also in Texas, the Governor I met there, a fervent supporter of President-elect Trump, made it very clear that when we speak of “not wanting it anymore” we don’t mean that German companies should withdraw. On the contrary. Because even in Texas, around 30% of electricity is now generated using renewable energies.

Because even Texas is engaged in global competition not just with Europe but also with the Gulf States. And at the last Climate Change Conference it was these very Gulf States, fossil states, who declared in Dubai that the end of the fossil fuel era was coming. They, too, are taking a two-pronged approach. So, even if they don’t want to have anything to do with climate action, for purely economic reasons they can no longer afford to say that they’ll reverse everything. That means – once again under the premise that we don’t take a defeatist approach and paint a completely gloomy picture – there could even be a small opportunity for us in this situation. After all, we’re not saying with only a third of our strength that we want to carry on advancing this green transformation. Rather, we do so as a society, as a business community, as an economy and as a cross-party political class. Because we have said: this is the path we want to lead Germany along to keep it competitive.

But that also means that in the sphere of foreign policy we can no longer afford – and this was another endurance test during the last three and a half years – to sit back as we could at other times and say: if in doubt, we can always go along with the majority. That was perhaps the right answer after we were accepted back into the international community. That was our task after the Second World War. In order to demonstrate that we were a reliable partner. Of course, our role back then was such that we didn’t always want to go it alone.

However, this was a very easy option because we first of all looked to see what the majority wanted to do. These last few years have shown once more – especially the current situation in the Middle East – that we sometimes even have to know where we stand when we stand relatively alone. Because we have a responsibility towards our country, an international responsibility but, above all, we have a responsibility that stems from Germany’s history.

Nevertheless, we have to look time and again to see how we can find partners in such situations. That’s what I mean when I say that we must know our own values and our interests so that when it comes to the crunch we can defend them if necessary.

That not only applies to the Middle East. Naturally, it also applies to China, as well as to trade policy and economic issues.

And in each case we have to act at European level.

We’re one of the world’s strongest economies.

But we can only succeed if we cooperate together as the European Union in this systemic rivalry. For “Change is the law of life”.

And we have already shown that we can master this change. Together with our European partners and together with our American partners.

Because we cannot take our freedom for granted. We know that our most important task today is to safeguard our freedom every day and, if necessary, to defend it.

For us, and above all, for future generations. Thank you very much.