Log in

View Full Version : Resurging German Imperialism



Workers-Control-Over-Prod
24th November 2012, 20:04
While CDU Finance Minister Schäuble stated recently in an economic debate that "In the 21 century, we need other forms of global governance (...) if we shall not leave it to the revolutions or disasters", the 'Minister of Defense' is going on campaign to bring the military to the hearts and dining tables of German families in the defence of German "economic interests".


De Maiziere PROMOTES GERMAN MILITARISM

Written by Martin Novak and Peter Schwarz - http://www.wsws.org

Saturday the 24th November 2012 at 07:32 clock

Ironically, in the Dresden Frauenkirche, German Defence Minister Thomas de Maizière campaigned on 1 November for German militarism. The ruins of the destroyed in 1945 during the Allied air raid on Dresden church had served in the German Democratic Republic as a memorial to the war and has been built up after reunification with international donations.

De Maiziere spoke at the "Forum Frauenkirche" about "perceive international responsibility - Germany's role in the world today." The main room of the church was well filled, some few were scattered in the upper galleries. Among the several hundred listeners several dozen uniformed Persons had joined, which, as the presenter announced, had come under the leadership of their brigadier general from the traditional school of the army officer in Dresden.

Before the lecture began, an elderly man took to the altar, and pointed out that the debris of the house would have remembered a few years ago at German megalomania and German militarist crimes. Now, the minister ready here again before the deployment of German soldiers in the world. He referred to the Kunduz massacre in Afghanistan 2009 that had claimed over a hundred civilian casualties, and protested that in this church war propaganda was being operated.

The man was heckled and booed which grew into a whistling concert, so he had to leave the church. His companion said to the audience: "Shame on you!"

De Maiziere used the ecclesiastical part of the event, to underpin its militarist propaganda with Bible verses, quotes Luther and anti-communist prejudices. He appealed to irrationalism, vague fears and "the trust in faith in a world of uncertainty" to campaign for worldwide deployment of the Bundeswehr as "a key instrument of German security policy."

Anti-militarism, which is after the experience of two world wars rooted in broad social classes, he tried to shake, by focusing on hope and faith convened and condemned any kind of certainty as a characteristic of totalitarian regimes.

"Nazism and Communism," said de Maizière, "were characterized by a worldview that had ready an explanation for everything - and suggested security and certainty, and especially for this certainty demanded relentless followers. But on the promise of absolute certainly showed their totalitarian character - and its contempt for the freedom of the individual. After all, what ultimately total certainty is there on earth? What would we have to get all existential questions complete certain? The result would be oppression."

From this appeal to skepticism, ignorance and religious mysticism spanned an arc of defense for global deployment of the Bundeswehr to fight "in a world of uncertainty" for German interests. "We have become more vulnerable: the world trade and global communication networks can be combined with simple and inexpensive means of interfering," he said, pleading for a common foreign and security policy, the "value-bound and vested interests" and that explicitly military means to include.

De Maiziere concluded his contribution with the call to strengthen the army's back. Their use deserve "social status," he said. "We as a society need to take responsibility for those who take over for Germany's security and interests of certain responsibilities." He called for a public debate in order to create "the necessary awareness" and a "social consensus" produce "so that Germany in its role the world needs today is ".

De Maizière appearance in the Church of Our Lady is part of a broader campaign to improve the image of the armed forces and to win over public opinion for a more aggressive militarism. In an article written by the Minister of Defence on 20 November published in the Berliner Zeitung, he speaks so clearly. He calls for "schools, universities, churches and everywhere, where public debate is at" to discuss German security and defense policy.

The article sees De Maizère defend against the charges of foreign newspapers that the Germans were "militant pacifist and moralizing." He advertises openly for the military defense of economic interests and complains: "The economic interests in our country are sometimes regarded as ethically inferior, as an inadequate defense at all." In fact the economic interests relate to a "German, great-interest ': As the most populous country, as the strongest economy Europe, as the second largest exporter in the world, we Germans are dependent on international stability. "

Background of the propaganda offensive de Maizieres is the profound crisis of world capitalism. In light of Euro crisis and international review to take the tension and conflict between the great powers. The ruling class in Germany has come to the conclusion that they can defend their economic interests only if they also militarily again going strong.

Although 6,000 German soldiers are already at twelve different locations on three continents, the government urges to further Bundeswehr missions in Mali and on the Turkish border with Syria. It wants to partake in future wars - be it in Africa, against Syria or against Iran - to be there to share in the division of the spoils.

http://www.wsws.org/de/2012/nov2012/maiz-n24.shtml

Paul Pott
25th November 2012, 06:30
The German ruling class is consciously moving into a new phase in its history. The old NATO subservient West Germany is as history as the East and it is again looking for its place in the sun. We should see this in light of the current crisis of capital, particularly at its weak link in Europe. Germany is making a bid for European hegemony. This is why it has imposed draconian depression conditions on Greece and other countries, to pave the way for its own shock therapy and German neocolonialism. Germany's game here isn't just to dominate a few potentially resource rich countries, but to totally replace New York or London as the center of gravity of European capital. To accomplish this, Germany's neo-junkers will need a new militarism and the political will to intervene to crush rogue neighbors, revolutions, and any other crisis that could threaten the interests of German capital. As a result we will see a postmodern Prussianism obscured by an outer guise of "European unity". It will be interesting to see what reaction the European west will have (Britain and France), mainly to either become an integral part of it or challenge it. The latter will bring Europe to imperialist war once again. If the former, then they will still upset a comfortable balance of power within Pax Americana, and a potentially resurgent Russia might see an opportunity to assert itself over the former Russian Empire/USSR/Warsaw Pact nations.

Even though it's from a conservative perspective, I found this interesting:

http: //nationalinterest.org/article/all-roads-lead-berlin-7622

Blake's Baby
25th November 2012, 17:50
Germany has been making a renewed bid for European hegemony since 1990, or thereabouts. Support for Slovenian then Croatian independence from Yugoslavia, then support for the KLA in Kosovo, was part of Germany's historic 'drive to the Mediterranean' (in this scenario, Austria is Germany's auxiliary... anyone want to dispute that point?). Greece and Serbia are historic allies of France and Russia; so enemies of Germany, which has in turn allied with Turkey, and to a lesser extent (through the KLA) with Albania.

The 'Baghdad Railway' (first mooted in the 1880s, I think, actually begun in the early 20th century - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Railway ) is still a viable option - the drive of German capitalism to the Persian Gulf. Doesn't matter that Britain is no longer the big power in the region, doesn't stop Germany's imperialist ambitions tending that way. Opposition to American interference in Iraq could be seen in this context. The idea of a link, or maybe an 'axis', from the Gulf to Berlin is quite a strong one in German diplomacy (I nearly posted 'realpolitik' there), I think.

Workers-Control-Over-Prod
25th November 2012, 21:55
The German ruling class is consciously moving into a new phase in its history. The old NATO subservient West Germany is as history as the East and it is again looking for its place in the sun. We should see this in light of the current crisis of capital, particularly at its weak link in Europe. Germany is making a bid for European hegemony. This is why it has imposed draconian depression conditions on Greece and other countries, to pave the way for its own shock therapy and German neocolonialism. Germany's game here isn't just to dominate a few potentially resource rich countries, but to totally replace New York or London as the center of gravity of European capital. To accomplish this, Germany's neo-junkers will need a new militarism and the political will to intervene to crush rogue neighbors, revolutions, and any other crisis that could threaten the interests of German capital. As a result we will see a postmodern Prussianism obscured by an outer guise of "European unity". It will be interesting to see what reaction the European west will have (Britain and France), mainly to either become an integral part of it or challenge it. The latter will bring Europe to imperialist war once again. If the former, then they will still upset a comfortable balance of power within Pax Americana, and a potentially resurgent Russia might see an opportunity to assert itself over the former Russian Empire/USSR/Warsaw Pact nations.

Even though it's from a conservative perspective, I found this interesting:

http: //nationalinterest.org/article/all-roads-lead-berlin-7622

There is a lot of talk here of having to create a European Union that is "internationally competitive". Also, a European Army is in the books. The fact that Schäuble was pushing the issue of a "Global" government is quite worrying to me. We just need one country to have a revolution in Europe, then a lot of things will seem possible and a barrier overcome.

TheRedAnarchist23
25th November 2012, 22:16
You mean you only realised Germany was ruling Europe, now?

The european union is controled by Germany, and all countries that are part of it are controled by Germany.

Paul Pott
25th November 2012, 23:15
There is a lot of talk here of having to create a European Union that is "internationally competitive". Also, a European Army is in the books. The fact that Schäuble was pushing the issue of a "Global" government is quite worrying to me. We just need one country to have a revolution in Europe, then a lot of things will seem possible and a barrier overcome.

Europe is already the world's largest economy. It was before World War I too. For that to work in Germany's interest, they will have to keep France and Britain deterred and good members of Europe, and Austria, Poland, Hungary, the Balkans, etc. in Germany's orbit and Ukraine, Belarus, Serbia, the Baltics, the Caucasus, etc. out of Russia's. For Germany's European Union to survive capital's present crisis and stay viable, they will at some point begin a military build up to stimulate the economies of Germany and other EU countries, all while remaining an ally of the US, at least on paper.

A European military could definitely result from this, but it would be a proxy force largely trained, supplied, and advised by the Bundeswehr. It would also be created with the goal of crushing any Athens Spring or anything like that because using the German military would cause a nationalist shitstorm. Leftists need to take that into account when they cheer an increasingly unified Europe, when in actuality our platforms should be anti-imperialist and for Self Determination of nations.

zimmerwald1915
25th November 2012, 23:50
You mean you only realised Germany was ruling Europe, now?

The european union is controled by Germany, and all countries that are part of it are controled by Germany.
The EU isn't quite united enough, whether by force or by fear, to be an imperialist bloc, I should think. While certainly the inter-imperialist tensions among EU states are mobilized against the workers of all those states and more, those same tensions prevent the EU as a whole from acting as a world-political bloc, particularly against American, or Russian, or Chinese imperialism. As Blake's Baby pointed out, Germany's imperial ambitions in particular are set against those of the other big EU powers, including France.

Blake's Baby
26th November 2012, 00:32
Well, to an extent the EU is an attempt to link France's military power to Germany's economic power, as both realise that they're stronger united than at each other's throats (the historical position for around 1,000 years). But sometimes it's hard to get both horses to pul together, as in Yugoslavia in the 1990s, or even over Iraq in 2002/3 - the French nearly sided with the US over the UN resolution, until Chirac changed his mind at the last minute and backed the Berlin-Moscow-Beijing alliance - probably because in France playing the 'anti-American' card is good domestic policy.

So yeah, in short I agree it's unlikely to ever be united enough to be a serious imperialist power to rival America, even though there are some who'd like to see it.

DaringMehring
26th November 2012, 01:21
For a while the EU & others have been free riding on the USA's military, which has secured the world for all capital, including theirs. Whenever the USA "opens up" some new country to the market, like Iraq, their companies get a share of the scraps, despite them spending basically nothing compared to the USA on it. So, the USA has been pressuring the allies to step up and help bear more of the costs. And they are responding.

It's not about German militarism rising to create a new Imperialist power, it is about Germany contributing more resources to defray the costs of US militarism and enable US militarism to continue. Germany is not about to act opposite to the USA. The bourgeoisie of USA and Europe are in a united front of Imperialism.

Blake's Baby
26th November 2012, 15:03
That's not true, the Iraq Wars were the result of German, French and Russian capital having a much greater access to Iraq than the US. The reason Germany completely opposed the Iraq War (Gulf War III) was because it was already in a cosy relationship with Baghdad and didn't want America muscling in on its patch.

In Yugoslavia, US capital was completely unprepared. Germany backed Slovenia and Croatia in their bids for independence, Britain and France backed Serbia (Britain later switched sides) and the US, having been completely wrong-footed, cast about for allies until they settled on the Bosnian Muslims.

Since the end of the Bloc system every power has been jockying for position. It's not all about what the US does, you know.

Yazman
27th November 2012, 12:59
You mean you only realised Germany was ruling Europe, now?

The european union is controled by Germany, and all countries that are part of it are controled by Germany.

This always seems like nationalist fearmongering to me. Besides being one of the primary givers of loans how does Germany control the EU any more than say, France does?

DaringMehring
29th November 2012, 17:54
That's not true, the Iraq Wars were the result of German, French and Russian capital having a much greater access to Iraq than the US. The reason Germany completely opposed the Iraq War (Gulf War III) was because it was already in a cosy relationship with Baghdad and didn't want America muscling in on its patch.

In Yugoslavia, US capital was completely unprepared. Germany backed Slovenia and Croatia in their bids for independence, Britain and France backed Serbia (Britain later switched sides) and the US, having been completely wrong-footed, cast about for allies until they settled on the Bosnian Muslims.

Since the end of the Bloc system every power has been jockying for position. It's not all about what the US does, you know.

What does it mean to even say German and French capital, when the big capitals of the western countries are deeply intertwined? The biggest capitals are all "multi-national."

Different actors may have different interests or priorities in certain regions -- like Serbia, in the backyard of Germany, with historical ties -- but they're all playing for, generally speaking, the same side.

Do you really think Germany would act militarily against USA interests in some area? Via a proxy war or removing a US-friendly regime?

Trick question. You cannot really distinguish US and German interests. They're both the interest of big capital and capitalist accumulation.

Blake's Baby
29th November 2012, 18:27
Yeah you really can. In the wars in Yugoslavia, Germany, France and the US worked against each other. In West Africa in recent years, America, Britain and France worked against each other (Liberia, Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast all having civil wars where the different factions were linked to the neighbouring states, Liberia being the US's proxy, Sierra Leone was Britain's proxy, and Ivory Coast was France's). In Afghanistan the Americans supported the Taliban, the French supported the Northern Alliance.

It's ridiculous to think that the whole of international capital is one great undifferentiated mass. If that were true there'd never be any wars.

LiberationTheologist
29th November 2012, 18:59
Yeah you really can. In the wars in Yugoslavia Germany, France and the US worked against each other.
In West Africa in recent years, America, Britain and France worked against each other (Liberia, Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast all having civil wars where the different factions were linked to the neighbouring states, Liberia being the US's proxy, Sierra Leone was Britain's proxy, and Ivory Coast was France's). In Afghanistan the Americans supported the Taliban, the French supported the Northern Alliance.

It's ridiculous to think that the whole of international capital is one great undifferentiated mass. If that were true there'd never be any wars.

Ya I see what you are saying here -the USA, Germany, France, they are all so divided. They are at each others capitalist competitive throats. Look at all of that division over Yugoslavia. Afghanistan and Iraq and Vietnam. Man so much division. Feel free to retract this post anytime.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ex0xSqWFtNI