Global Review asked German ex-NATO General Domröse what to make of the latest Bundeswehr conference, which criticized a „cannibalization of the Bundeswehr“ and insufficient funds? The Bundeswehr Association and Zorn warned against this, especially since the 100 billion euro special fund would not be enough and a further 60 billion euros would be needed. Wouldn’t it be better to have an increased continuous defense budget, as demanded by the Christian Democratic Union, instead of temporary special funds. Especially since even at 2%, should Trump be reelected. Somehow, from the point of view of leading German and Western security strategists, all of this is neither fish nor meat
Ex-General Domröse said: “ Scholz made it clear at the Bw conference: * Special assets 100 billion plus 2%, i.e. Defense budget rises from around 50 to around 70 billion p.a. – provided we don’t fall precipitously in economic development.“
So the financial reservation. But such an economic and financial crisis is foreseeable, albeit not its depth, although after systematic disaster reports of a two-week, nationwide blackout, the danger of the collapse of German industry and a possible „people´s uprising“ (Baerbock), louder signals of the calm and „We win and keep it up“ – narratives are now circulated in the media by the government and willing journalists. But the basic question remains, what should these funds be used for? Is it now just a matter of equipping the Bundeswehr to the level it was in before the „peace dividend“ of the 1990s or, as already demanded by Lindner (FDP), the rearmament of the German Bundeswehr to become the „most modern, strongest army within NATO“ after the USA, as in the Cold War, which is intended to relieve the big brother on the conventional central front in Europe for their confrontation with China in the Indo-Pacific, although the Bundeswehr can also be used to a limited extent in the Indo-Pacific via the previous frigate Bavaria and the 11 Tornados, which have already traveled from Europe to Australia and were deployed on joint maneuvers?
Another question: how to understand Lavrov’s threat of nuclear strikes against the USA in the event of delivery of long-range US missiles to Ukraine? First, one wonders why Putin doesn’t say that and send Lavrov ahead? Is that even planned by the US? Does Lavrov want to create fears and discord in the West or just pre-formulate a red line? Does Putin still want to leave room for manoeuvre? Second, it’s unclear what exactly he means by missile range and which missiles? Third is whether this is just another of those nuclear war threats, but calling the US a war party is a step further. Fourth: The range is also relative: If the Ukrainian offensive gets stuck, and Selensky said it is losing momentum, longer-range missiles might only mean: Donbass range. However, should the Ukrainians continue to advance, it could mean that the Ukrainians could also shell Russian territory. Who can guarantee that the Ukrainians won’t want to drag the US or NATO into a direct war with Russia, as they did back then with their proposals for a NATO airlift in Ukraine? It is to be hoped that Biden and the US are aware of this issue. In this self-outbidding competition which even heavier weapons should be delivered, the West also should put an escalation cap on top. German Leo tanks still are actually conventional small stuff, but rockets that can hit Russian soil, which the western Stalin Katuchas like MARS and multiple rocket launchers, drones and whatever have not been able to do up to now, are of a different quality. Therefore, the question arises as to whether a kind of escalation cap should not be put on the arms deliveries.
The question is whether such a cap doesn’t already exist, because the USA is not supplying the Ukrainians with combat aircraft, heavy tanks or warships, and it has not yet become known that the USA intends to deliver the long-range missiles as Lavrov claims. It seems more that the USA wants to let the Russians sink into a never-ending war and quagmire, a Afghanistan 2.0 and let Putin bleed out. Old Soviet tanks are currently being discussed about ring exchanges and only parts of the Christian Democratic Union and the Greens are demanding the delivery of Leos or the former head of the Munich Security Conference Ischinger, who said that this should only be done in coordination with the NATO allies, but Germany should push ahead offensively, propose the delivery of Leopard 2 tanks and other heavy war equipment and set a good example so that Germany can finally fulfill the hoped- for leadership role in Europe and in NATO. Some people still warn against „German special paths“ (deutscher Sonderweg) that should be prevented.
But even such a conventionally well-armed Germany would only remain a subordinate country to the USA, since it has no nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction and the armament restrictions of the Second World War prevent it from doing so, and it did not even have a seat on the UN Security Council of the victorious and nuclear powers , as the red-green government under Schröder was hoping for with a new Ostpolitik: Russia and China in the G 7 and then to act with Germany as a Eurasian bloc against the USA in order to obtain a German seat on the UN Security Council and as an honest broker between the then diverging interests to become a new world power. Weltpolitik like Emperor Wilhelm but without hard power, which also failed with a bang. The hope of the AfD or the corona denier party Die Basis ( The Base) with their foreign policy mastermind Hermann Poppla (Books: Hitler’s American Teachers/ Grip to Eurasia) that a militarily well-armed Germany with a new Rapallo, neutrality of Germany in a then not so neutral Eurasian alliance with Putin-Russia and Xi-China can regain strength and unite against the USA only means that neither Russia nor China will concede any waeapons of mass destruction to Germany, but rather make Germany as their colony against the USA using AfD or Base Gauleiters as their influence agents and puppet regime under their dictatorship.