I'd actually say it is much more prudent to shore up your defenses BEFORE you need it, not after. Playing catch up is hard to do when the tanks start rolling in.
At long last, it would appear that German politicians understand what you still fail to grasp: You can ignore your defense budget, refuse to pull your (contractually defined) weight in a defense pact, and invest your ill-gotten savings elsewhere – but ultimately these investments will have been all for naught if you are unable to defend their returns when push comes to shove.
Also NATO is not some kind of puppet Germany can use however it sees fit. It’s a group, where each member has its own interests and views and one day they might diverge from Germany’s.
While all the things you mentioned are very much needed, so is the power that ensures their security.
ppl die every day, it's the quantity and reasons that should inform a strategy. (saying this as about 60 ppl died in a mining accident the other day)
NATO may or may not have enough guns, but some members aren't paying their share, and this has (as we've seen) bad consequences for everyone.
The personnel is there, they are just not getting the license to open an office.
* https://www.investing.com/rates-bonds/germany-government-bon...
10Y bonds have been negative since April 2019, before the pandemic:
* https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IRLTLT01DEM156N
By borrowing money Germany can actually make a 'profit'.
Merkel has starved the Bundeswehr of resources relying on assumptions that have revealed themselves to be false. Historical alliances can be unreliable (Trump) and historical rivalries can be reignited (Russia). I fully support this move by Scholz.
The lack of reliability regarding the relationships between nations is truly the most significant sign of a changing (changed?), unstable, world.
Germany has so many social issues, we honestly should spend more money to get people off the street and have affordable housing. Not spending another 100bn on weapons and destructive activities.
International treaties are only worth the will of the signing parties to enforce them. Just like the Budapest Memorandum. And NATO is just another treaty.
Europe's deterrent is basically "We're really good friends with the USA."
What does the USA gain from this setup?
The challange is EU governments and armies don't act in unison.
Same with Britain, and any number of other examples throughout history.
Times change, there is no right for Russia to control Ukraine (or to be a "superpower") just because that's how it used to be.
One thing that is often left out of the international discussion of Germany's domestic policies is that we actually put a law into our constitution to limit governments from making new debt... So if the current government wants to take on new debt for Defense and Energy Transition, it will have to either do some tricks (the 100B for the military is supposed to come from a different, special pot), or change the constitution again, for which they would need the votes of the opposition.
A lot of the 90s era monetary economics that the euro is intertwined in has been collapsing as a dominant school of thought. Covid plays a role here, but a lot of it has been building since 2009 & the greek debt crisis. I don't think many are ready (especially in germany) to throw out institutions, even ethereal intellectual ones... but OTOH change has come. Military emergencies, historically, are pivot points for monetary infrastructure... FWIW.
Interestingly, I'm not sure the german constitution necessarily has to change. In some sense, the more conceptually radical solutions wouldn't require it. ECB debt, or at least the debt transferred to the ECB in the 90s, just needs to stop being considered debt.
> German nuclear energy companies reject demands for nuclear power extension
In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't make sense to go back to nuclear power. It is afterall a very expensive technology. It is much more efficient to go full in with renewables. And nuclear power does not work well together with renewables, as it cannot be controlled fast enough.
https://quillette.com/2022/01/27/why-environmentalists-pose-...
So how do we reduce gas use the most, building $X Billion nuclear or $X Billion solar, wind and batteries? The expert consensus is the latter.
Germany should start building nuclear themselves, instead of bailing out the French nuclear industry. $100bn can build a lot of nuclear powerplants.
Why the hell do we have these highly polarized discussions whenever Germany, France and electricity production comes up?
You are aware what Habeck is currently doing?
No, history is not the issue, it's because good luck convincing French or Germans for example, they gotta send their men to fight protecting Poland, Romania or Bulgaria for example, or vice versa.
All you have to do is look at how badly EU countries cooperated during the Greek economic crisis, the migrant crisis of 2015, the Covid crisis, etc. Every EU member government was blaming each other or the immigrants from poorer countries and refusing to cooperate or come to a consensus.
And you think military cooperation will somehow work better?
- The Greek economy is not dead thanks to an EU debt jubilee that could not be called that way.
- The migrant crisis has increased the role of Frontex and other EU level instruments by an extent unimaginable before.
- My significant other is Latvian, lives in Belgium, got her first and second covid shot in France, and her third one in Germany.
- In this crisis, even - hm, let's call them "less cooperative" politicians- like Matteo Salvini, Mateusz Morawiecki and Viktor Orban got behind several common EU policies at political light speed.
- Did you see the recent flurry of NATO moving east announcements?
The war is a few days old. Everyone was hoping Putin is not lying in there faces.
Ukraine is not in the NATO and you want to find the right balance between total war and diplomatic ways.
And yes Russia has nuklear weapons btw.
The problem is that we’d need an even more integrated Europe (and probably language). And a lot of people don’t want that.
That's not what the OP said.
> President Trump told NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg during a meeting in 2018 that the Western alliance, particularly Germany, is "totally controlled" by Russia through oil and gas deals.
> "We're supposed to protect you against Russia but they're paying billions of dollars to Russia?" Trump asked. "I think that's very inappropriate."
> "And the former Chancellor of Germany is the head of the pipeline company that is supplying the gas. Ultimately, Germany will have almost 70% of their country controlled by Russia with natural gas. So you tell me, is that appropriate? I've been complaining about this from the time I got in."
> Trump called on Germany to "step it up" on their contribution to NATO immediately, "not 10 years from now."
> "Germany as far as I am concerned is captive to Russia ... we're supposed to protect Germany while they are getting their energy from Russia, explain that," Trump asked the NATO Secretary-General.
> Trump called it "very unfair" to the United States and its taxpayers.
[1] FLASHBACK: President Trump Told NATO In 2018 That Germany Is A "Captive Of Russia" As Long As They're Buying Putin's Oil And Gas (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2022/02/25/flashback...)
[2] FactChecking Trump’s NATO Remarks (https://www.factcheck.org/2019/12/factchecking-trumps-nato-r...)
With Merkel now gone, Germany is more open to put up a more resistant position - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/08/world/europe/germany-russ... . The odds are very high ( and definitely how it is now), that the rest of Europe will follow.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Most europeans are aware of germany’s involuntary aid for russia but cant do much since germany dominates eu politics. There is a near conspiracy theory amount of decisions that Merkel took and played right into putin’s favour.
Also worth noting the german ceo of north stream is a former stasi officer, the east german communist secret police - a russian tool.
These are many of the reasons why i am against a european army. It will likely be dominated by germany, and regardless of how much germans will try and pr their country’s image, germany has made colossal mistakes.
Germany demilitarized after WW2 and decided to use diplomacy and economic integration to ensure peace, instead of war. And they tried to play nice with Russia, after they killed 27 million Russians in WW2. Now everyone is acting like Putin going mad is Germany's fault. Now everybody wants Germany to be a military power again. The last two times they were, the world burned.
And yes, the German approach to reign in Russia failed. But so did the US approach of treating Russia as an enemy forever.
I and many other, probably mistakenly, believed this would keep putin in check. You have to remember that for the US russia is far away, but for us it's a neighbor and our history is bound together for centuries. East germany was part of the soviet union for decades.
We live, lived, in the longest stretch of peace on the european continent and maybe it was NATO and a common enemy but it was also because of diplomancy, compromise and economic integration.
The US is also importing $25bn of crude oil from russia while telling germany to cut down on gas imports from a reliable parter at that point.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=M...
Putin is a whacko, damn.
Why? Not everything in the world is for sale, particularly what one perceives to be their national security and interest. Former Pakistani President and Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto once famously said: "If India builds the bomb, we will eat grass or leaves, even go hungry, but we will get one of our own."[1]
> for the US russia is far away, but for us it's a neighbor
Technically, only 50 miles separate the US and Russia from each other across the Bering Strait. But, yes, I can see how distances might be perceived in the European context.
> the longest stretch of peace
In geopolitics, permanent peace is not possible. At some point in time, someone will do something to break it. And every generation has to be ready for it.
> The US is also importing $25bn of crude oil from russia while telling germany to cut down on gas imports from a reliable parter at that point.
The US can be self-reliant very quickly if it wants to. I don't know if the same can be said for Germany.
[1] How Pakistan Developed Its Own Nuclear Triad (https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/how-pakistan-develo...)
German is trying to be diplomatic and logical about it and not a military bully like the USA.
All your trump stuff doesn't matter, we are not the USA. We do not want to be proud Germans having dead relatives dying in useless wars.
Putin's attack on kiev is not just a bad day because of the death but also because the hopes of having proper diplomatic talks with Putin failed.
It's still a good thing that we tried.
I just can't believe anyone could eat the diplomatic and logical narrative up.
Most NATO members are under the 2% min required of their membership for years
No surprise Russia can just steamroll all the way through Ukraine with nothing but "strong" messages in the media in response.
But Russia has been encroaching around EU territory since taking Crimea in 2014
and if Ukraine did join NATO, or if Russia makes further threats against other potential NATO members like Finland or Sweeden, why wait until now
It's not the way to play the game unless you really want to lose.
NATO has higher military power than Russia.
The reaction you see is diplomatic driven not military driven.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180610061817/https://www.nato....
NATO can have higher military power, but mostly coming from the USA spending 4% of GDP in military, while the "pacifist" European countries keep under spending, with most of them at only 1%
That's like saying a bunch of buddies team up to defend each other, and each go take self defense lessons. Then in the end only the biggest buddy takes self defense classes, and the rest just hopes this guy is present the next time shit hits the fan. Not really fair is it? I hope Belgium also starts spending the proper amount, as they should have done already.
Because german will now buy expensive gas and weapons from USA.
Watching the crisis from afar (I’m based in Asia, but born in Europe), I can’t help but think how hypocritical Europe and US are right now.
1) Most EU countries right now open their borders with arms wide open to provide for Ukrainian refugees, help them find a job, and send food and clothes. We show basic human decency. Yet, when there was genocide in Syria, which forces 1000s of Syrian refugees to seek shelter in Europe, few countries (apart from Germany) wanted to help. In Denmark, my country of birth, locals were spitting at the refugees from the bridges crossing the highways where the refugees were walking. They were treated, by and large, in a hugely inhumane way. Nobody wanted them. The former Danish right wing government forces refugees to sleep in cold tents with very little space.
2) The US, UK, EU and the NATO allies have been swift and decisive (mostly) at imposing sanctions against Russia. Within days after the invasions, they will now be blocked from the global financial system. Don’t get me wrong, this is the right thing to do. But when the US decide to invade Iraq without a clear UN mandate (and later find out there were actually never any WMDs without any political repercussions) or when Israel conduct another carpet bombing of Gaza followed by further tightening of apartheid policies against Palestinian civilians, the West turn their back on the problem and dare not say a word.
3) The glorification of war and honour. Over the last few days, I’ve seen this photo circulate on social media of a famous Ukrainian boxer who is now out serving his country at the frontline, proud with a rifle in his hand. Yet at Ukrainian-Polish border, families are being split in two by border control so fathers and young men don’t leave the country, they have to stay and fight the enemy.
We are humane when it is convenient (Russia), idolise war heroes even thought 1000s will likely get killed in this country (have we never learned from the psychological damage to civilians and soldiers from the US atrocities, war crimes and aggression against civilians in Vietnam?), and turn a blind eye to breach of basic human rights in our own backyard when things get tough. I don’t want to troll, but it really bugs me how simple and utterly hypocritical we are in facing the tough questions. Putin is a madman and the invasion of Ukraine is awful. Yet I wish our politicians and we, citizens of the world’s richest and safest countries, could face some of the other real issues at stake.
Also, a lot of the "Syrian refugees" weren't actually from Syria: once people from Africa and poorer middle eastern countries learned that Syrians were getting asylum, they tried for it too, pretending to be from Syria.
This is not a proof of racism. These are the rules about asylum.
Not sure why you think this is surprising and/or wrong. Ukrainians are Europeans, they look the same, have similar institution, a compatible culture, etc... It's not hypocritical to feel the need to help your neighbor, and not everyone on the globe.
In other words, if there were US refugees, Canada would most likely accept millions of them because at the end the day we "know" and interact with them a lot.
That's borderline racist thinking. By your definition Irish and South-Italians would not see each others as Europeans, and btw Russia is Europe too.
You'll generally find the left of those countries on the correct side of all those issues. And the right on the wrong side. Even within the countries doing the bad stuff, like Russia or Israel, the people protesting their own leaders will be left, the people doing the bad stuff on the right.
As I said, it's simplistic, but it's less simplistic than "The West are hypocritical", we're talking about hundreds of millions of people, who often get their news from fascist media monopolies.
In her defense, her options were logical and a lot of the money that would otherwise go to less productive sectors of the economy, such as defense, went into more useful ones like research and development. Russia has also bought a ton of German goods, although arguably it would have regardless. However, compounded with her disastrous energy policy, Merkel made Germany more dependent than ever, a weak regional power at best. She simply did not foresee a future like our present.
What does Germany have to show here?
[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03320-2 [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03318-w
Defense contractors are dancing and singing and praising the war while people die and suffer.
People need to stop believing what Biden says he is going to do, and watch what what he actually does.
Also, not sure where that leaves France if Germany "wakes up" militarily.
With Nuclear submarines and rockets, same as the UK.
No one is saying a country should run on Uranium till it exhausts. It is there to supplement renewables till we can have major breakthroughs there.
It is not like burning gas doesn't come with its challenges of handling waste
Which reason? Since when is money spent a measurement of effectiveness?
Some companies will just make more money but the people are fucked. Rotting infrastructure and overloaded social security systems. In the end this will lead to better armed extremists.
I don't know the details of the politics, but i believe this (outdated) article has good explanations about it: https://carnegieeurope.eu/2015/09/02/politics-of-2-percent-n...
But now it's time to accept Putin for what he is.
I can't imagine that he wouldn't have foreseen this. Except if he'd thought to replace leadership in Ukraine in a few days, Western countries would impose some sanctions, and would move on as usual (as happened after the annexation of Crimea and MH-17).
Given the background of pacifist education enforced/encouraged for long by Allies post war in German schools, is it not possible to assume generations have been brainwashed into thinking that they can stay safe while the world burns.
Can such a populace take rational decisions when it comes to defence or offense?
I can honestly can't think of any reason for such bad decisions taken collectively like: 1) Getting into a deep trade relationship with a dictator 2) Assuming such relationship will keep the nation safe 3) Starving their own army of weapons and budget that their own chief of army says he can't guarantee safety of the nation: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/german-army-chief-fed-u...
