Foreign policy: Germany, almost ready for action

Because 34; more responsibility 34;: The supposedly most powerful country in Europe finally needs a strategic debate on its foreign policy. There is also a need to talk about military capabilities.

Foreign policy: Germany, almost ready for action
  • Page 1 — Germany, almost ready
  • Page 2 — where is German foreign policy currently conceived?
  • Page 3 — it's not about peace, it's just talking about
  • Read on a page

    She shouldn't have said that sentence. She could have just hinwegnuscheln about it, and no one would have complained. None of allies would have been disappointed that Germany was not involved in military strike against Syria; Nor would re have been any public debate about why federal government is going out of its foreign policy. That majority of Germans are against war missions of Bundeswehr? You know in London and Paris. That Bundeswehr planes do not always fly and cannot always shoot soldiers ' rifles? The problems with equipment are also known.

    On Thursday last week, Angela Merkel could have left it at se words: "We support that everything is done to set a sign that use of chemical weapons is unacceptable." But n she was just saying a second sentence. Something that was not coordinated eir with her foreign minister or with her secretary of defense, and was surprising even for her close environment: "Germany will not participate in any military action."

    Although Bundeswehr would have been technically able to do so. Although government reports also confirmed that parliamentary reservation – which requires a vote in Bundestag before a Bundeswehr deployment – would not have been a problem.

    With its categorical no to military aid in Syria, Merkel has stalled a debate that should have been started long ago – and that is by herself: what exactly is Germany's role in world?

    Find right military action, consider it necessary, welcome it – and let ors execute it? Four years after federal president, Foreign Minister and defense minister in unison announced that Germany will bear "more responsibility" in future, International crisis management of federal government is still running according to pattern : When it gets tough, we're not re anymore. The fact that Bundeswehr cannot do something or that Basic Law does not allow something is often used as a justification. But problem is deeper.

    This article comes from time No. 17/2018. Here you can read entire output.

    The largest and most economically strongest country in Europe lacks a strategic foreign and security policy in which a strengned and functioning Bundeswehr finds its place. Because re is no strategy, re are also no debates; Because re are no debates, Germans remain in ir historically conditional reservation against everything military; And because Germans reject military strikes, re is no strategy. It's a vicious circle. The Chancellor has just squandered a chance to break up.

    In Germany, politically, anyone who uses argumentation patterns of anti-military strike front: There is no UN mandate for an attack on Syrian targets; There is a threat of an escalation with Russia; There could be civilian casualties; There was no clear evidence of who used poison gas; The Americans always bombed first and n asked about why.

    Every single point is worth considering, but it is astonishing how little listeners find arguments that speak for military action in Syria: use of poison gas breaks international law; There is an obligation on international community to protect population, which is attacked by ir own government with barrel bombs; All circumstantial evidence, intelligence and previous incidents point to Assad's army as cause of poison gas attack.

    Date Of Update: 21 April 2018, 12:02

    Yorum yapabilmek için üye girişi yapmanız gerekmektedir.

    Üye değilseniz hemen üye olun veya giriş yapın.