Europeans in Uniform

Claim to Power

The strategy developed by the working group of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation parts from the premise of current scenarios of global threats and essential German interests. According to their paper, threats to German interests include the illegal proliferation of nuclear arms ("dirty bombs"), international terrorism and organized crime - particularly piracy - but also include "regional great powers' asserting their claims to power."[1] The paper qualifies safeguarding German national sovereignty and territorial integrity, "maintaining its integration in the Transatlantic Alliance" and "protecting Germany's economic basis to preserve its level of prosperity" as essential German interests. The allegation that German interests include the "protection of human rights," the "reinforcement of international law" and the "global war on poverty" cannot be taken seriously. Berlin is in fact implementing a policy running completely contrary: Germany is supporting numerous countries practicing torture,[2] has violated international law several times [3] and instead of the redistribution of prosperity, is currently imposing brutal austerity measures inside its immediate sphere of influence.[4]

Completely without Restrictions

Faced with global threats, "the differentiation between ‘domestic' and ‘foreign' security" has become "problematic", the paper states. This differentiation has been "along territorial boundaries, i.e. the police being responsible for domestic and the military for operations abroad. However, because "domestic" and "foreign" security are today equally threatened, a "security policy must be developed that is oriented along the boundaries of function, capacity and processes." This is alluding to the tendency that has already become obvious: foreign deployment of police and domestic intervention of the military with their specific priorities. The authors demand that all government ministries apply "security" policy measures. "Whole-of-government thinking" must be firmly established "at all levels of government activity." This, according to the paper, demands "constant coordination of civilian and military instruments" as well as "a clear political line that combines all means at the disposal" - diplomacy, "economic instruments," so-called development aid, "police work" and "finally the military."

The Primacy of "Security"

To implement the "close coordination" in all areas of government activity under the primacy of "security" policy, the Foundation's Working Group calls for the establishment of new "decision-making structures" and proposes an upgrading of the Federal Security Council. Today the Federal Security Council is comprised of the Chancellor, the Head of the Federal Chancellery and seven government ministers.[5] It must coordinate "security" policy, which includes, for example, the authorization of arms exports. The Friedrich Ebert Foundation's working group is now demanding that the Federal Security Council be expanded and include "analyzing and planning capacities." It would thus become a "National Security Council," responsible for "inter-ministerial analysis and planning." The authors propose that the "National Security Council" would be responsible for the elaboration of a "National Security Concept," to serve as a basis upon which individual ministries could elaborate their own political concepts. This would subordinate all policy to the primacy of "security."

An Open Question

In addition, the authors of the paper demand "the implementation of the long-term objective of a European Army." The current budget cuts in the EU-member countries do not spare the military's upgrading measures. It is therefore imperative that the respective national armament projects be closely coordinated. Europe is annually spending 180 to 200 billion Euros on the military. This potential should be coordinated. This would permit the EU to dispose of "security related high technology independent of the USA." This would necessitate the integration of national arms industries (example: EADS). A consolidated common foreign and military policy would in fact "put the US claim to leadership in and for Europe in jeopardy." The "European in uniform" is the "model" for the soldiers of the future EU-Military, according to the Friedrich-Ebert Foundation's working group. In view of the much discussed "EU's democratic deficits," the authors admit that it is an "open question" how "the control over European security policy could be democratically administered."

Fall in Line

The working group, whose members, alongside foundation employees and officials of federal ministries, also include SPD federal MPs,[6] is strongly pleading for placing civilian society under the primacy of "security policy." For example, in reference to opinion polls repeatedly indicating disapproval of the war on Afghanistan, they remark that in Germany, one realizes a certain "culture of restraint." This collides with Berlin's new possibilities ("growth of influence of the country") at the global level. Therefore, it will not suffice to merely grapple with future crises and wars "practically," they must simultaneously be "anchored in the German discourse." In conclusion, the authors explicitly call for "close cooperation" also "with non-government organizations." The aim is the "largest possible integration of non-government actors into a security network."

Voluntary Fire Department

From the realm of information technology, one can get a very concrete idea of what is behind this abstract notice, that all branches of society will be integrated in the state's "security policy." The Social Democrat's working group considers that, to combat cyber threats, it would prove too expensive, to pay sufficient technicians from the computer branch, which is why IT experts will be called upon to organize in the future along the lines of the "voluntary fire department." "They are supposed to meet regularly to discuss the newest trends and possible defense systems, on the one hand, and on the other, be on call to confront a threat alongside the state security and the police." Naturally, as volunteers, and to relieve the national budget, strained by its arms programs - without pay.

[1] Zitate hier und im Folgenden aus: Arbeitskreis Internationale Sicherheitspolitik: Für eine Neuausrichtung deutscher Sicherheitspolitik, Mai 2011
[2] Deutschland unterstützt Folterstaaten und brutale Regime beispielsweise in Zentralasien (Turkmenistan, Usbekistan, Kasachstan), Afrika (Äthiopien) und Lateinamerika (Kolumbien). See also Master Plan, Stütze der Repression, Ein blutiger Meilenstein and Offensiven gegen China (II)
[3] Deutschland hat unter anderem im Jahr 1999 einen illegalen Angriffskrieg gegen Jugoslawien geführt und 2008 unter Bruch des Völkerrechts die Sezession des Kosovo anerkannt. Auch war die Bundesrepublik an diversen Fällen illegaler Verschleppung und Folter beteiligt. Zuletzt billigte die Bundesregierung die Nutzung der UNO zur Führung eines illegalen neokolonialen Angriffskrieges in Cote d'Ivoire. See also Wankendes Gefüge, An den Grenzen des Rechtsstaats and The Right of Might (II)
[4] Deutschland erzwingt gegenwärtig brutale Austeritätsprogramme etwa in Griechenland, die zur Verarmung weiter Teile der Bevölkerung führen. See also From the Crisis, Into the Crisis and Steil abwärts
[5] Dem Bundessicherheitsrat gehören neben der Bundeskanzlerin und dem Kanzleramtschef die Minister für Äußeres, Verteidigung, Inneres, Finanzen, Justiz, Wirtschaft und wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit an.
[6] Dem Arbeitskreis gehören unter anderen der Offizier a.D. und ehemalige Leiter des Planungsstabes im Bundesverteidigungsministerium Franz H. U. Borkenhagen und der Kapitän a.D. und Referent der SPD-Bundestagsfraktion für Sicherheitspolitik Axel Schneider an.