The state of tension

Between peace and war

The legal basis for the so-called ‘state of tension’ is Article 80a of Germany’s constitution, the Basic Law. It states that its “determination” is made by the Bundestag and requires “a two-thirds majority of the votes cast”. The actual content of a ‘state of tension’ is not precisely defined. It is generally considered to be “a preliminary stage towards a state of defence”. It is to be declared when the Federal Republic of Germany faces “a threatening situation” that could escalate into war.[1] The semi-official Federal Agency for Civic Education cautions that, “There must, in any case, be sufficient probability that a difficult foreign policy situation could escalate into an armed attack.”[2] The media-led discussion of Germany’s power struggle with Russia has created this impression, above all with regular accusations of Moscow’s “hybrid warfare” (german-foreign-policy.com reported [3]). Media are now highlighting the idea that the German Bundestag may “vote for a state of tension in response to hybrid threats”.[4] In non-legal language, the ‘state of tension’ is being defined as a situation “between peace and war”. This echoes Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s menacing words at the end of September: “We are not at war, but we no longer live in peace either.”[5]

Security laws

The declaration of a ‘state of tension’ would have significant practical consequences. It “serves the purpose of mobilisation”, says a spokesperson for the Bundeswehr’s Operational Command.[6] For one thing, compulsory military service for all men aged 18 and over could be immediately reinstated. Indeed, indefinite conscription periods for military service would be permitted. The Bundeswehr’s scope for domestic deployment would also be significantly widened. Military personnel could be deployed to protect civilian objects and regulate transport and traffic. Above all, the “Sicherstellungsgesetze”, i.e. assurance laws applicable in states of emergency to give the military access to infrastructure, the workforce and the economy, would come into force. Civilian workers could be conscripted for military tasks; medical personnel – from doctors to nurses – could be seconded to military hospitals; drivers could be required to transport fuel for the Bundeswehr; and private individuals could be required to provide accommodation in their homes for soldiers.[7] In addition, the authorities would be able to force companies to produce all kinds of goods required by the armed forces. The secondment of medical personnel to work for the military was in fact recently practised as part of a manoeuvre in Hamburg (german-foreign-policy.com reported [8]).

On the road to war

The idea of declaring a ‘state of tension’ was first brought into public discussion in December last year by CDU politician and foreign and military affairs specialist Roderich Kiesewetter.[9] He explicitly called for this legislative shift towards war preparations at the end of September while seeking to increase fears in the context of some unexplained drone flights over German airports. Kiesewetter declared that “triggering the state of tension would make most sense” as a response.[10] Kiesewetter reiterated his position on Wednesday on the public broadcaster ARD.[11] Back in September, he had explained that the advantages of declaring a ‘state of tension’ lay not only in ensuring that “essential infrastructure would be protected by the Bundeswehr”, but also in the idea that “chains of command could be streamlined” and unspecified “options could be used efficiently”. Since then, the talk about a ‘state of tension’ has been growing in volume across German mainstream media. Regardless of whether the declaration of a ‘state of tension’ is supported or not, this discourse is leading to a further normalisation of the notion that Germany is on the brink of war and that the population must be prepared to accept a significant restriction of their rights – even to the extent of pressing civilians into auxiliary work for the military.

Reverse triage

The direct integration of civilians in war scenarios has long been in preparation. Plans for the use of civilian hospitals in the event of war are taking shape. The background to co-opting medical staff and facilities is that military strategists are well aware that the capacities of Bundeswehr hospitals are nowhere near sufficient to care for the high number of casualties expected in open warfare – often cited at around a thousand per day.[12] In Berlin, the Senate Administration – in cooperation with the Bundeswehr, the Berlin Hospital Association and twelve clinics – has drawn up a working paper outlining procedures to be followed by hospital staff in the event of war. According to a statement by the Association of Democratic Doctors (vdää), these would include a so-called “reverse triage” system. The “military personnel with minor injuries would be given priority” even over seriously injured civilians in order to “get the soldiers fit for a return to duty as quickly as possible.” The working paper calls for “an open discussion” on “letting patients who are hopeless cases die.” The vdää notes a clear shift “from individual medicine to disaster medicine.” All of which demands “the transfer of far-reaching powers in hospitals to authorities and the military.”[13]

Investment requirements

As part of war preparations, a study by the German Hospital Association has now issued a study outlining the “investment requirements” for creating war-proof “resilience in German hospitals”.[14] Among other things, the study’s authors highlight the need for emergency power generators and extensive drinking-water reserves. They call for the procurement of decontamination facilities, expanded radio and satellite communications for use in emergencies, and for the installation not only of additional above-ground infrastructure – in case hospitals are attacked – and of site protection measures, but of “alternative treatment rooms” underground. The use of “underground car parks” and “basements” is mentioned here. The money needed for these extensive measures is to be taken from the German government’s ‘Special Fund’, which was set up for the massive arms build-up. The costs here are estimated at just under 15 billion euros. As the vdää notes, these costly schemes are taking shape despite the fact that civilian hospitals in the Federal Republic have for years been described as “unaffordable”. Indeed, “drastic cuts are being demanded as part of the current hospital reform programme”.[15] The money is available for war, but not for civilian healthcare.

[1] Patrizia Kramliczek: Zwischen Frieden und Krieg: Was bedeutet „Spannungsfall“? br.de 22.10.2025.

[2] Pierre Thielbörger: Notstandsverfassung. bpb.de.

[3] See: Kriegstüchtige Geheimdienste.

[4] Jakob Hartung: Ein Schritt, der alles verändern könnte. t-online.de 01.10.2025.

[5] Thomas Sigmund: Deutschland schwebt zwischen Krieg und Frieden. handelsblatt.com 27.09.2025.

[6] Patrizia Kramliczek: Zwischen Frieden und Krieg: Was bedeutet „Spannungsfall“? br.de 22.10.2025.

[7] Jakob Hartung: Ein Schritt, der alles verändern könnte. t-online.de 01.10.2025.

[8] See: Hamburg im Krieg.

[9] See: Das Mindset für den Krieg.

[10] Dietmar Neuerer: CDU-Politiker fordert Ausrufung des Spannungsfalls. handelsblatt.com 29.09.2025.

[11] Maischberger. daserste.de 12.11.2025.

[12] See: „Krieg geht alle an“.

[13] Missachtung der ärztlichen Berufsordnung im Kriegsfall geplant. vdaeae.de 29.10.2025.

[14] Deutsches Krankenhaus Institut: Investitionsbedarfe zur Herstellung der Resilienz deutscher Krankenhäuser. Endbericht für die Deutsche Krankenhausgesellschaft e.V. Düsseldorf, 28.10.2025.

[15] Oberirdisch: Bettenabbau und Krankenhausschließungen, unterirdisch: Milliardeninvestitionen. vdaeae.de 03.11.2025.