EuroArmy Information from
German Foreign Policy web site
"Information on German Foreign Policy" is compiled by a group of independent journalists and social scientists who observe, on an ongoing basis, the reinvigoration of Germany's endeavor to gain great power status in the economic, military and political arena. The provided information is dedicated to allow interested individuals abroad to evaluate Germany's strategy for hegemony [The predominant influence, as of a state, region, or group, over another or others.]
Articles:

1] Military Measures
2] Independent Armament for
3] The Will to World Power
4] German Armed forces wants influence over nuclear bombs
 
Military Measures
 
BONN/BRUSSELS (Correspondent’s report) – The high speed network of the European railroads shall be made available for war transportation by the EU. In addition, the EU must arrange for commandeering cargo space of all types since that will be required for world wide military operations. At the same time, definite increases of military personnel and expenditures for all EU members are unavoidable. Included are arsenals for "nuclear, chemical and biological" warfare. These as well as other measures for the radical militarizing of the EU are listed in an actual "strategy paper" of the German Bertelsmann Foundation. A "trirectoire" or triumvirate consisting of the German, French and British military is supposed to take over the preparations for and conduct of war.

 

This publication is titled "A European Defense Strategy"1) and had been produced by the "Policy Research Group" of the foundation.2) It recommends military and paramilitary measures enabling the EU to participate in "missions on a greater scale, over a larger radius, with greater fighting strength and extending over a longer period of time". With this, they differentiate between an internal and external line-up for wars which are to be conducted "preventatively" ("robust preventive missions, possibly anywhere in the world").
 

Emergency

An "EU defense council", guiding the military as well as civilian-military measures in all EU states, would preside over the planned attacks. Thus, the Bertelsmann "research group" pleads for a supra national EU emergency body which would be outside of the control of all parliaments and would have the power to abrogate national constitutional requirements. Specifically stated, the operative leadership of emergency measures would be in the hands of a "triumvirate consisting of Great Britain, France and Germany".
 

Military Camp

Besides placing civilian cargo space as well as civilian railroad nets ("to bring EU powers quickly close to the battle zone, i.e.. the Italian Adriatic coast or a port (…) i.e. from southern England to Marseille"), under a continental "EU joint intelligence committee" which, according to the draft, would be working with the "EU Security Council". Their task would be to identify disruptive activities within the EU-states. The internal deployment of military is assumed to be understood ("support for civilian authorities in emergencies"). Furthermore it is stated that the police powers of the EU members must be organized to be paramilitary so that, at least, 10,000 men are, "like the guardia civil and the carabineri" , available for deployment.
 

War Economy

According to the Bertelsmann "research group" the EU has 1.7 million soldiers at its disposal but the quota of 170,000 which can be mobilized for military activities which violate international law ("missions of the kind being undertaken in Iraq today") is insufficient. Likewise the EU arsenal neither contains enough tank busting weapons (ATGM) nor rockets of the more advanced "Patriot" type (PAC-3). Necessary as well is the urgent armament with unmanned digital explosive systems which can hit the enemy from the air and can differentiate between one’s own and the enemy’s troops. The "research group" recommends that the weapons of this future armament should be exclusively produced by European manufacturers ("buy European first strategy") in order to become independent of the USA. The Bertelsmann group demands that the necessary finances should be raised by substantial increases in the national budgets of all EU members (Germany: from an actual 24.4 billion Euro to 42.3 billion Euro in the future).
 

No Prosecution

The "strategy paper" for which the Bertelsmann Foundation is responsible, poses an, until now, unrivaled cataloguing of military and civilian-military measures which, in essence, would eliminate the national constitutional rights of the EU member states and replace it with a dictatorial regime. Furthermore, the publication advocates plans which approve acceptance or arrangements for armed attacks on so-called "failing states", as well as illegal occupation of foreign territories. The authors as well as the publisher, evidently, commit actions which are considered incriminating throughout Europe but which German justice fails to prosecute.

1) Bertelsmann Foundation: A European Defence Strategy. Written by Julian Lindley-French and Franco Algieri. Advised by Thomas Bauer, Yves Boyer, Jani Emmanouilidis, Tuomas Forsberg, Stefani Weiss and Rob de Wijk. Gütersloh 2004; www.cap.uni-muenchen.de. For extracts see Mehr Krieg
2) on Bertelsmann Stiftung cf. Independent Armament for "necessary power base" ; The will to world power and "Downfall or ascent to world power"

Source        back to EuroArmy Word from      back to top
 

Independent Armament for ...necessary power base"

AMSTERDAM/TOULOUSE - Efforts to attain world power status, vis-à-vis the United States, by establishing an independent European military power, are already noticeable in the armaments industry. Berlin and Paris, instead of a US corporation, prevailed in obtaining a significant contract for the A 400M-military transport aircraft for a European consortium. It is said, that only independent control over military technology "will provide the Europeans with the necessary power base to represent their common interests in the context of global policies".

 

Construction of more than 750 engines for the A 400M-military transport aircraft, which will cost more than 3 billion Euro, is the biggest project in the history of European aircraft engine production. In competition for this contract were Pratt & Whitney, a subsidiary of the US group United Technologies, and the Consortium EuroProp International (EPI), in which the French Snecma, the Daimler-Chrysler subsidiary MTU, the British Rolls Royce and the Spanish ITP co-operate. The general contractor, Airbus Military, wanted to accept the more advantageous offer from Pratt & Whitney but, instead was forced to accept the less preferable offer by the European bidder. This was due to political pressure as well as the "recommendation" by the Air and Space group EADS which holds 80% in Airbus.

Berlin and Paris, particularly, had threatened to veto award of the contract to the subsidiary of the US group. The German government which, for "reasons of strategy and industrial policy" pleads for a European provider of aircraft engines for the largest current European armaments project, welcomed the decision against the less expensive but politically undesirable offer by stating explicitly that the sovereignty of European governments was also at issue.

Presently opponents of this decision line up in the US Congress. The US government has been requested to examine the award of the contract and, if applicable, make a formal complaint based on blatant protectionism to the World Trade Organisation (WTO).
 

Being master of one's own military technology"

It is stated more and more openly in Berlin's foreign policy think tanks, that the purpose of "European defence policy" is to serve to integrate the EU partners in securing the military means for pushing through German ambitions for world power status. The "Research Group for Policy" of the Bertelsmann Foundation explains that the "shock of Iraq" forces Europe to act: "A defence union can provide Europeans with the necessary power base to represent common interests effectively in global politics."

The director of the Centre for Applied Policy Research (CAP) calls for challenging the USA for "world hegemony", with the assistance of the EU which is "a developing world power".1) For that reason he considers it indispensable to be "master of one's own instruments for crises and the regulation of conflicts". Since Germany alone cannot provide the necessary military technology, European co-operation must be strengthened. The new strategic direction for the German armed forces - "Away from national defence and toward mobile forces for deployment" - can only be realized through the European co-operative procurement of arms. The partnership should, primarily, benefit the German military: This means that the German armed forces could "obtain the most modern equipment sooner and at lower cost".

Source                          back to EuroArmy Word from      back to top
 

The will to world power

BERLIN - One of the most influential political experts in Berlin believes that the opportunity has arrived to dispute ,"world hegemony" with the USA. He demands that the EU (which he sees as "a world power in the making") should make use of this chance. A foreign policy specialist of the SPD (Social Democrat Party) favors a rapprochement with the "Islamic states" to which the EU could offer an alternative to the USA.
 

Werner Weidenfeld is Director of the Centre for Applied Political Research (CAP) and a member of the presidium of the Bertelsmann Foundation, as well as of the German Society for Foreign Policy. He is reckoned to be the most influential foreign policy adviser in Germany. His article appeared in the newspaper Die Welt, which supports the opposition CDU (Christian Democrat Party) and is committed to the alliance with the USA and skeptical of the German government's aggressive policy.

Weidenfeld foresees an "epoch of disorder, risks and crises" for which no new "forms of order" existed until now. The USA had "neither the will nor potential" for a sustained policy of world hegemony. The United Nations could order nothing above its usual strength and capability. Since the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, NATO had lost its function and was displaying "elements of absurdity". Other potential world powers such as China, Russia and India showed "serious weaknesses" so that they were not in the running for "world hegemony".
 

"A world power in the making"

It was however now valid for the EU to make use of the situation because it has the potential to be the leading world power. "The population of the EU will increase from today's 371 million to 539 million - almost twice as many as the USA. It's area is approximately 5,097,00 square kilometres, rather more than half that of the USA. The Gross Domestic Product is about 15% higher than the USA. This potential could secure the status of a world power - around 35% of world production (USA 27%) and 30% of world trade (USA 18%) lies in European hands. This potential carries outstanding weight". Not for the first time since 1989 the EU was a "world power in the making".

Weidenfeld believes that what the EU lacks to become the leading world power is essentially the will to power. He sees this deficit as "the lack of effective concentration of political energy and the failure to think in world-political categories": "The key question is this: can Europe translate this potential into world-political creative power?" Up to now the EU had merely been a "consensus machine". It did not provide a "world-political strategy and an offensive ability to handle crises and conflict". It not only lacked an "operational centre" (Berlin's claim to this role is no secret). Above all the EU lacked strategic thinking. This was Europe's ...real Achilles' Heel". "There exists no agenda which can give direction to Europe in conflicts and crises. This is lacking for transatlantic disagreements as much as for the Near East, for ethnic explosions in the Caucasus as in South East Asia, for the Kashmir conflict as much as for the breakdown of African states".
 

"The strengths of the law"

To achieve "world hegemony" Weidenfeld favors the closest possible German-French alliance. He cites the Sixties as an example, when Berlin and Paris took the "world political horizon" into their sights and attempted to found a "union of world-political relevance" (against the USA). Weidenfeld is supported by the SPD foreign policy specialist, Egon Bahr, who has for a long time propagandized for the enforcement of "German interests" against the USA (as in the title of his book). In the same newspaper Bahr explained that the closest possible contact between Berlin and Paris was ,"essential if Europe was to achieve its aim - namely self-determination".

The USA would try to frustrate an "independent Europe" ("I am firmly convinced that America prefers to deal with several rather than with one factor"). Bahr believes in keeping a lookout for further partners in an alliance and favors "a policy of reducing tensions with the Islamic states" which he wishes to mobilize against the USA. "Europe should develop an acknowledgeable alternative in its model of society, its armaments and in its policy so that the Islamic world can perceive that there is not only one model in the Western world. They should be able to see that there are two Western models of society (...) We Europeans should try to establish that the strengths of law will supersede the law of greater American strength".

Sources:
--The frustrated World Power"; Die Welt 8/03/2003
--When will we finally wake up?"; Die Welt 8/03/2003

Source                     back to EuroArmy Word from      back to top

German Armed Forces wants "influence over nuclear bombs"

BERLIN - While the German Federal Government pushes for the establishment of a European military nucleus, the German military are already submitting their demands for the creation of a future EU-Army. The military arsenals of the member states are to be subject to the administration of a future EU-government and thus to be available for the utilization of Berlin's ambitions as well. A part of the catalogue of demands is the access to French and British nuclear arms.

 

These demands are the object of an eleven-page paper ("Mit der ESVP zur Europäischen Armee" - "With the ESVP to the European Army"), developed by the leadership of the German military and attributed to the highest ranking military commandant of the Federal Armed Forces, the Inspector General. The catalogue of demands states that the European Union would have to develop independent military capabilities, "while backed by the security of its own military-political influence", in order to be able to act independently of the USA.1)

 

"Visibly taking the lead"

Military which are committed by law to national parliaments will not be essential in the future, according to German concepts; on the contrary, the creation of "an integrated European military force" will be absolutely necessary. The Federal Government should ensure that the "trend toward more national sovereignty and intergovernmental co-operation evident in several areas" should be "permanently redirected toward integration". Since the success of important political projects often depends on "one side taking on the initiative" Germany should play the role of the "pace setter". The military strategists demand that beyond bilateral relations (for example German-French) and "temporary central and isolated solutions" with specifically chosen partners, Berlin should "visibly provide leadership" in the establishment of such a military "European nucleus".

 

"Envisioned goals of German policy"

The policy of military "integration" repeatedly brought into play, aims to render a sovereign and integral national defence, by the smaller European national states, impossible. Only "remnants" of the national armies would continue under the commanding power of their respective governments. Central military arsenals, however, would have to be surrendered to the yet to be established "government of the European Union". Military strategists in Berlin explain that "the envisioned goal of German policy" should be a European Army, legitimized and financed by the European Parliament".

 

"Transfer of national nuclear arms potential"

The "envisioned goals" of the German military specifically include access to French and British nuclear arms. In its paper the German military leadership considers the "question of the transfer of the potential national nuclear arms by several EU states" a possibly "difficult endeavor". In this case, at least the "mechanisms for consultation and participation in decisions by non-nuclear states" would have to be negotiated.

Source               back to EuroArmy Word from      back to top     back to Word from