The race to succeed German Chancellor Angela Merkel is coming to an end as Armin Laschet has been elected leader of the Christian Democrats (CDU), Merkel’s party.

During the party’s virtual conference, the premier of North-Rhine Westphalia state triumphed over his two rivals.

For now, it is more than likely that he will succeed Merkel when she retires as Germany’s Chancellor in September, after serving 16 years in office.

Laschet has some big boots to fill. Having served as Germany’s Chancellor since 2005, Merkel has helped shape the German political landscape and Germany’s role in the world. The scale of the challenges that she has faced in office have been substantial. These include the 2008 recession, the 2012 eurozone crisis, the 2015 Greek bailout crisis, Brexit, and the coronavirus.

Big Challenges Ahead for Laschet

Merkel has served four terms in office and the key to her success has been positioning herself as a centrist politician. It is rather telling that she influenced the outcome of the CDU’s virtual conference last weekend, as she provided the North-Rhine Westphalia premier with her tacit backing, which proves that she wants her centrist discourse to continue.

As the new leader of the CDU, Laschet has many problems that he must address immediately. Firstly, it would be in his best interest to ensure that there is stability within the cabinet. Leading conservative and former investment banker Friedrich Merz was the favorite to succeed Merkel, and despite his defeat, he has requested the position of economics minister. Yet a spokesman for the German Chancellor confirmed that there were no plans to replace the current Economic Minister, Peter Altmaier, or to reshuffle the cabinet. But Merz still retains considerable influence over his large band of supporters within the CDU, and it will be impossible not to include him in a new lineup without upsetting party unity.

Maintaining Coalition Unity Could Cause Laschet’s Political Death

Beyond the CDU’s internal unity lies the challenge of maintaining unity within Germany’s coalition government. Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, who resigned as Merkel’s successor last year, also promised to preserve Germany’s grand coalition with the Social Democrats, but despite her best intentions, she failed to do so. Perhaps Laschet could deliver a breath of fresh air to the coalition government.

But just because Laschet has succeeded the German Chancellor as party leader does not mean that his path to succeed Merkel in that role is guaranteed. Upcoming regional elections in the states of Rheinland-Pfalz and Baden-Württemberg will become Laschet’s first test of popularity since he became CDU leader, and they will determine whether he is capable of then becoming the next German chancellor. If he fails, it is almost guaranteed that Jens Spahn, the Health Minister, and Markus Söder, the state leader of Bavaria and head of the Christian Social Union, the CDU’s sister party, will attempt to throw him out of his current position.

Who Will Be Germany’s Next Chancellor?

Although the coronavirus has damaged Alternative for Deutschland’s (AfD) support in the opinion polls to around 9 percent in the latest survey, they still remain the largest opposition party with 89 seats. The AfD’s fortunes could go two ways and anything could change in Germany’s political landscape this year. They could attract support from voters disillusioned with the economic damage COVID-19 has caused so far. Equally, the party is divided as its co-leader, Jörg Meuthen, attacked the right-wing of the party during the AfD’s convention last November due to its use of the term “corona dictatorship.” Party divisions could make the AfD unattractive in many voters’ eyes and the CDU/CSU could win over a lot of their voters.

September is fast approaching and the way Laschet deals with the obstacles laid before him will determine whether he could become the next German Chancellor by then. But for now, nothing is certain.

L'articolo What are the Challenges Awaiting Merkel’s Successor Armin Laschet? proviene da InsideOver.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel confirmed that she does not have the support among her country’s state leaders for new restrictions to give Germany’s “soft” lockdown a harder bite. This has led to the postponing any decision until a future meeting between the Chancellor and 16 state premiers next week.

What New Restrictions Did Merkel Want?

According to the Guardian, Merkel had been in favor of people limiting social interactions in private and foregoing any type of party until Christmas Eve.

The plans were also reported to include a seven-day quarantine for citizens, and stricter hygiene requirements at schools, with teachers and students of all year groups asked to wear face masks during lessons.

Germany entered a partial lockdown on November 2, with contacts reduced to a maximum of two households and no more than 10 people, restaurants and bars restricted to takeaway service only, and unnecessary travel discouraged but not prohibited. Schools and nurseries have remained open.

Merkel’s Authority has been Weakened

The Berlin Spectator reported that Bavaria’s First Minister Markus Söder did not sound too optimistic about the Chancellor’s claims that “everything would be fine” regarding COVID-19’s spread. Söder also defended Bavaria’s school rules which make it compulsory for primary school kids in the federal state to wear face coverings.

Söder is reportedly worried that the coronavirus may spread further on New Year’s Eve due to the “wild parties” that many Germans normally hold to celebrate the arrival of the new year.

Other state premiers wanted to “wait and see” whether the so-called “second wave” of the coronavirus slows down before they agree to any new measures.

Merkel Has Become Focused on Economic Recovery

But Merkel has deeper concerns beyond COVID-19. She fears that the virus is crippling Germany’s economic recovery, and that is why she wanted to use her optimism to her advantage during the meeting she held with German state leaders, to sell her latest lockdown measures. She stressed to them that a recovery in Europe’s biggest economy will gather pace once the pandemic is under control, but how long that takes remains yet to be seen.

Bloomberg suggested that Germany’s economy is likely to stagnate at best in the final quarter of this year. The Bundesbank added on Monday that the country’s export sector is suffering from a resurgence of the virus. On balance, it expects the hit to the economy to be smaller than after the lockdown in March and April.

Either way, Merkel’s latest dispute with her state premiers shows the fine line that the Chancellor is treading in trying to slow the virus without stoking political, economic and social tensions.

Merkel is no doubt conscious that she is stepping down next year, and she is possibly worried that the opposition of Germany’s state leaders to her latest lockdown restrictions will hinder her authority during the Chancellor’s final days in office.

The German Government is Treading a Fine Line

A second round of talks with state premiers will now take place on November 25, days before the current restrictions are due to expire. From Merkel’s perspective, this is a meeting that must result in a successful outcome for her, in order to prevent her credibility from being damaged further.

There is no doubt that the Chancellor did not want to spend her final days dealing with the coronavirus, but Germany’s state premiers are right to argue that it makes no sense to impose more lockdown measures without sufficient evidence that there is a second wave.

Lockdowns are arguably more deadly than COVID-19 itself, and there is no data yet to suggest how many people have died as a result of the closure of Germany’s economy. A UK Government report found that Britain’s lockdown may cost 200,000 lives. It would be pertinent to see if Germany is projected to experience a similar outcome.

German politicians now need to ask themselves how can they move beyond this current impasse, because the Chancellor cannot remain stuck in limbo forever.

L'articolo Why did Germany’s Regional Leaders Reject Merkel’s Lockdown Rules? proviene da InsideOver.

Similarities between Germany’s left and the right-wing AfD may seem hard to find, however when it comes to Russia and President Putin, both appear to possess shared ideas and sentiments.

Are the AfD and the Left Really Polar Opposites?

Germany’s right-wing party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) and The Left are easy to distinguish in daily politics. Both sides make sure of it by slandering one another on an almost daily basis by calling each other “Nazis” and “Communists.” And those are just the friendlier exchanges.

The recent assassination attempt on Aleksej Navalny, however, once again displayed how the contours of German politics are blurred when Russia is involved. The latest example of this was provided by the AfD’s foreign policy spokesman Hansjörg Müller. Asked about the Navalny case and Russia’s involvement he stated that the US could have committed the crime because of Nord Stream 2.

Previously, after the MH17 passenger plane was shot down by a Russian rocket over Ukraine, Müller speculated that, from the American perspective, “the wrong plane crashed in the right place at the right time.” He claimed that a Ukrainian fighter aircraft had shot down the passenger plane for the benefit of America. The pattern of blaming the West without evidence was repeated in his comments on the assassination attempt on Navalny.

Blame the West Whenever Possible

As preposterous these accusations may appear, such tactics are the modus operandi of Germany’s left and have been so for decades – after all, the party is the successor of the GDR’s SED: the Stasi party. Their credo? Defend Russia at all costs and blame the West whenever possible.

The Navalny incident is only the tip of the iceberg. Both parties unanimously defended Russia’s annexation of Crimea and demanded a stop to Europe’s sanctions against Russia. Even the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter in London was not condemned. Furthermore, both are on Russia’s side in Syria, too, which includes a negation of the regime’s use of poisonous gas against Syria’s civilian population.

An illiberal understanding of politics often explains the AfD’s affection for Putin’s Russia. The left’s closeness to Russia, on the other hand, is often blamed on the history of the SED. In Eastern socialist biographies, the Soviet empire played a more culturally pleasing role than America, and SED cadres were taught not to anger Moscow. Both parties are the most relevant in the former East German states and they tend to cater to voters that have traditionally had a relationship to Moscow.

Geostrategic Objective: Undermine Germany’s Ties to the West

However, both parties also share a geostrategic goal: undermine Germany’s ties to the West. The AfD seeks to reduce the US’s influence on NATO, while the left seeks to dissolve NATO entirely. Instead, both seek a security alliance with Russia. Müller, for example, advocates in favor of a “transformation” of NATO, a “new security system,” which, naturally, was only “possible with the Russians. ”

Both parties are nonetheless not uncomfortable with their shared ideas and beliefs regarding the Kremlin. The AfD’s leader in the Bundestag and honorary chair Alexander Gauland is not concerned regarding the overlap, and moving away from Russia in order to differentiate oneself from a political opponent is clearly out of the question for both parties. The topic is too important for them and their voters.

However, while the German left remains vastly dependent on East German voters, the AfD still seeks to move the party into a more moderate West German direction.

Whether the proximity to Russia helps the cause can be doubted even though resentment against the US is increasing in Germany. However, skepticism must not be equated with being impervious to facts and reason, particularly regarding Russia’s conduct and meddling in Western affairs. Russia’s malign behavior is not an opinion it’s a fact and it’s reasonable that one expects German political parties on both sides of the aisle to accept reality.

L'articolo The German Left and Right’s Shared Affinity for Russia proviene da InsideOver.

September 12 marked the thirtieth anniversary of one of the most significant moments in modern German history. In the Two Plus Four Agreement, the Four Powers renounced all rights they held in Germany, allowing Germany to reunite and become fully sovereign the following year. However, Germany’s reunification did not occur without European reservations.

The Treaty on Final Settlement

The Treaty on the Final Settlement with respect to Germany – also known as the Two Plus Four Agreement – was signed in Moscow on September 12, 1990. It was an epochal day for Germany. The signatures resulted in nothing less than the end of the occupation of the four victorious powers of the Second World War in Germany but simultaneously overcoming the division of Europe and, thus, the end of the Cold War, whose front line ran right through Germany. 

Ronald Reagan’s military build-up in the US and Gorbachev’s perestroika and glasnost in the Soviet Union had created the conditions for what appeared inconceivable for more than four decades: representatives of the two German states and the four victorious powers sat down at one Table and established a consensus.

Skepticism About German Reunification

Early in 1990, considerable reservations still existed about Germany’s reunification, especially in France and Great Britain, had still existed. The latter became apparent when the Berlin Wall fell in 1989. UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher declared indignantly at a meeting of the heads of government of the European Community in the presence of Helmut Kohl that the Germans had been “beaten twice” but had now returned, nonetheless. 

In February 1990, at the beginning of the Two Plus Four negotiations, she warned again that Germany would dominate Europe in the future. The French President François Mitterand also registered with a particular fear of what was occurring in the neighboring country. However, unlike Thatcher, he never opposed the German reunification ab initio. 

Kohl’s Strong Relationships With Foreign Leaders

However, what worked in Germany’s favor was a significant relationship between Germany’s Chancellor Helmut Kohl (CDU), Gorbachev, and President George H.W. Bush. Particularly Bush has been widely considered as one of the premier architects of Germany’s reunification. 

France, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States decided on the format two-plus-four in Ottawa at the beginning of February 1990. The aim was to regulate “the foreign aspects of German unity, including questions of the security of the neighboring states with both German states”. The first round of negotiations between the six states began in Bonn in May, followed by others in East Berlin and Paris in the summer and finally in Moscow in September.

The decisive issue was the final recognition of the Oder-Neisse border between Germany and Poland, the extensive withdrawal of the Allied forces from Germany, the waiver of the victorious powers of their reservation rights, and the restoration of Germany’s full sovereignty under international law. In addition, the future membership of a united Germany, the strength of its army, and security guarantees for the neighboring states played a role.

The Final Treaty

The treaty ultimately comprised ten articles in which united Germany recognizes its current borders and undertakes not to raise any territorial claims and forego nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons and reduce the Bundeswehr to a maximum of 370,000 soldiers. At the same time, Germany, the GDR, and the Soviet Union agreed to withdraw all Soviet armed forces by the end of 1994.

Finally, Article 7 contains what is probably the most important passage: the termination of all occupation rights and responsibilities of the Allies in Germany that have existed since the end of the war in 1945 and the dissolution of their institutions. The latter enabled East Germany, which belonged to the eastern military alliance “Warsaw Pact,” to become a NATO member in unified Germany, just as the Federal Republic of Germany.

Not Officially a “Peace Treaty”

While the Two Plus Four Agreement is essentially a peace treaty, the governments of both German states avoided this designation at all costs, as the negotiations with all 60 opponents of National Socialist Germany in World War II would have resulted in extensive reparation claims.

After only six months, the foreign ministers of both German states and the four allies signed the agreement on September 12, 1990, in Moscow. The Allies immediately suspended their rights; on October 2, the treaty was also presented to the CSCE states, who took note of it “with great satisfaction.” 

The way to German unity was formally sealed on October 3 – which, to this day, is celebrated as a public holiday.

However, the treaty only came into force six months later on March 15, 1991. The Soviet Union was the last of the six signatory countries to ratify the agreement, just in time for the coup against Gorbachev in the summer and against a volatile mood in the Soviet Union against reunification of Germany. 

This day and the efforts of the parties involved to bring about German reunification will be remembered forever not only in Germany but all over the world.

L'articolo Against All Odds: the Two Plus Four Agreement and Germany’s Reunification proviene da InsideOver.

The German government has openly been contemplating an end to Nord Stream 2 for the first time since its construction. Rightfully so. Alternatives to the pipeline already exist. Most importantly, however, Berlin would finally penalize Russia efficiently.

The Nord Stream 1 Agreement

On September 8, 2005, Germany and Russia sealed the agreement for the pipeline’s construction at the bottom of the Baltic Sea. The agreement between them was finalized under Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who, one year earlier, had called Putin a “lupenreiner Demokrat,” a flawless Democrat. It is a sentence that has not aged well, just as the fact that once Schröder lost the election a few days later to Angela Merkel, he accepted a well-paid position within the Nord Stream Group. To this day, he calls Putin a dear friend and occupies key positions within Russian state-owned companies.

Nord Stream 1 has been in operation since 2012. The construction of a second pipeline was planned quickly afterward, this time under CDU leadership, and today Nord Stream 2 is nearing completion.

German-Russian Friendship?

Although Putin, in his speech in 2001 in the Bundestag, allowed Germans and Russians to dream of a new friendship, Putin was criticized as early as 2005. His authoritarian traits were too prominent. However, German naivety hoped that these traits would change for the better and that Putin could turn towards Europe as a democracy and as a friend of the West.

Of course, it did not happen that way. Putin, a former KGB agent who called the fall of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” waged war in Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, annexed Crimea and rigged elections in Europe and America. Opposition and regime critics died mysteriously domestically, as in other countries, or were poisoned, most recently, Alexej Navalny.

The Navalny Poisoning

At first, even the poisoning of Navalny did not seem to shake the German commitment to Nord Stream 2. Instead, Chancellor Merkel assured that Nord Stream 2 ought to be finished. The government concurred that the Navalny case and the pipeline should be handled separately. Meanwhile, however, the mood has changed. Foreign Minister Heiko Maas was the first top German politician to clarify that the Navalny case could well impact Nord Stream.

The core argument of those who seek to finish building the pipeline has always been that stoppage will harm German interests, as, without Nord Stream 2, Germany’s increasing gas demand would not be covered in the future. Moreover, natural gas for German consumers is said to become more expensive without Nord Stream. And indeed: the drying up of European sources and increasing demand will result in a gas deficit of 120 billion cubic meters within 20 years.

An Alternative to Nord Stream 2

Such a gap needs to be bridged. Hence the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. However, an alternative already exists: liquefied natural gas (LNG). LNG charging stations around the world already exist, including a total of 36 within the EU. Germany is currently building its own. Right now, 40 percent of the gas demand in Europe could already be met with LNG.

Meanwhile, the benefits of Nord Stream remain inconclusive. Proponents of Nord Stream argue that Nord Stream 2 will save consumers billion euros every year. However, different studies indicate that Nord Stream 2 will reduce the gas price by a maximum of five percent in ten years, while others estimate the savings even lower.

With the risk that energy prices would rise by a few percent in a pessimistic scenario, Germany could certainly survive an end of Nord Stream 2 and rely more on liquefied gas, which, unlike the Russian supply, liquified gas comes from all over the world. Germany could freely choose and switch suppliers, and it would be more independent.

Nord Stream is About More Than Just Money

Most importantly, however, Nord Stream is not just about monetary saving, but about security interests. To this day, Putin has remained unimpressed by European sanctions – the Navalny incident has proved that once again. However, losing Europe and particularly Germany as customers could be a message even the Kremlin couldn’t ignore.

Angela Merkel’s two-pronged policy on Russia, of sanctions, on the one hand, and maintenance of the pipeline projects on the other, has failed. For once, Germany ought to not merely pay lip service but make peaceful Russian intentions its sine qua non. Hence, the most recent Russian crime should not be left unanswered, even at the cost of exiting the pipeline project.

L'articolo From Russia with Gas: Why Germany Should Stop Nord Stream 2 proviene da InsideOver.

The controversial reorganization of the migration system in Europe is imminent. Due to its Council Presidency, Germany may even possess more weight than usual. However, a consensus among the member states remains inconceivable.

The Common European Asylum System

The EU is standing on the precipice regarding its Common European Asylum System (CEAS). Negotiations over this new approach have stalled since 2016, as several member states do not concur with the many of the plans CEAS includes.

Germany plays a crucial role in the negotiations, particularly now due to its presidency and Berlin has changed its stance on immigration as of late. Instead of insisting on a mandatory admission quota for all 27 EU countries, as it has for years, Berlin is now also in favor of “flexible solidarity”.

The pending reform is primarily about establishing the most uniform standards possible within the EU to process and assess asylum applications. Besides, there is a fair distribution of refugees, common standards for legal migration, and a coordinated and reinforced deportation policy in the event of illegal migration. Time is of the essence, as for the first time since the 2015 refugee crisis, the number of people coming to the EU and five other European countries has seen an increase over the previous year.

Seven Proposals for EU Asylum Reform

The EU asylum reform comprises seven legislative proposals, 5 of which find consensus among the members.

1. Reform of the Dublin Regulation. It is the most controversial point. The critical question is which country is responsible for examining the asylum application in the event of strong migration movements. According to the previous law, the country where the migrant first sets foot on European soil must take care of it. However, this leads to an utterly unequal burden on the member states.

2. An expansion of the Eurodac regulation identification database to prevent secondary migration and illegal migration better. In addition to fingerprints, facial images will also be stored in the future.

3. Strengthening of the EU’s asylum agency and support the member states in asylum procedures.

4. A new recognition regulation that ought to ensure that asylum seekers have the same chance of asylum under the same conditions. The aim is to achieve uniform protection criteria and greater consistency in terms of recognition rates. In addition, severe penalties for “asylum shopping” should be enforceable.

5. Europe’s Reception Conditions Directive aims to ensure that asylum seekers are received decently and treated equally throughout the EU.

6. Human traffickers should be combated through resettlement programs. Special selection processes are intended to enable legal migration for those in particular need of protection.

7. A new asylum procedure regulation aiming to make asylum procedures more efficient, including harmonized rights for asylum seekers and more severe penalties for abuse. The aim is also a common list of safe third countries. So far, no consent has been reached.

Juncker’s Big Mistake

Besides these points, the services are to be harmonized within the EU — naturally taking into account the respective cost of living. The penalties for illegally escaping from another EU country to Germany — which continues to be the most sought after destination of many asylum seekers because benefits are comparatively high — would also be significantly increased.

The EU Commission, led by Jean-Claude Juncker, had made numerous proposals for a modern European asylum system in recent years. Together with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, however, Juncker made the grave mistake in the spring of 2016 of submitting a proposal to reform the distribution of refugees (Dublin Regulation) without a significant vote, which obliged all member states to admit refugees by way of quota.

Massive resistance came from numerous Eastern, and Central European countries as these did not want Brussels to dictate which and how many refugees they would take in. This dispute continues to this day and continues to weigh heavily on sentiment within the EU.

The Heat is On Von der Leyen

The EU Commission knows how toxic the issue is and has postponed its reform proposals several times since the spring. Ursula Von der Leyen is under massive pressure. In early summer, they received several letters from the EU capitals: Austria and Denmark warned that there should be no “automatic and compulsory distribution” of refugees.

The interior ministers of seven Eastern European countries have also announced: “fierce resistance” to mandatory distribution. In contrast, five southern European countries demanded in a letter that a “compulsory redistribution mechanism” was “essential.” The reason is obvious: the Mediterranean countries are usually the first point of contact for migrants and therefore, according to the Dublin Regulation, have to process the applications and take care of the asylum seekers – which does not seem like a fair way of sharing a burden many European states have never asked for.

Nevertheless, Europe needs to find answers and quickly.

Most importantly, however, Europe also needs to find answers for the growing number of European states and citizens who have learned from 2015 and want better solutions this time around.

L'articolo Europe’s Last Stand on Immigration Reform proviene da InsideOver.

The German Navy is in the process of obtaining five new warships. However, the purchase, despite Germany’s latest aspirations, is not intended to initiate a paradigm shift within the Bundeswehr but is instead about German efficiency – unfortunately.

The Currently Subpar Status of Germany’s Military

Germany’s armed forces are currently in a sorry state. Foreign missions that would require combat operations are out of the question. The troops’ reputation in their own country is practically non-existent, and allies know that German soldiers can, at best, be utilized for basic and routine services abroad.

For the first time last year, the country’s leaders opened a serious discussion making the Bundeswehr fit to face the new challenges in the world, but the majority of the population still does not support the idea, and thus the grand coalition remains divided over the force’s future.

Why the Purchase? Buying New Warships is Cheaper Than Repairing the Old Ones

Accordingly, the new warships are not intended to start a larger German present, but because the acquisition costs of 2.8 billion are cheaper than having ailing ships repeatedly repaired.

The Ministry of Defense has already approved a corresponding motion by Christian Democratic Union (CDU) MP Ingo Gädechens. According to this, further action on the file was currently being coordinated by the ministry.

The Bundeswehr currently possesses five K130 corvettes, which they purchased in 2008 to replace 15 speedboats. The 89-meter-long warships are suitable for use near the coast, such as in the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean. They are currently involved in the UN mission outside Lebanon.

The Navy Steps up to the Plate

Defense politicians in Germany have declared their goal to strengthen the Bundeswehr again after decades of saving. Of the Bundeswehr’s armed forces, the Navy has best managed to comply with this declared will.

At the end of 2016, the advance for five additional K130s arrived. They were appointed in 2017, shortly before the general election. The argument: the Bundeswehr has too few ships to increase the number of foreign deployments and Russia’s growing threat. Another argument at the time was that the second batch of five corvettes could be built faster than larger frigates of the multi-purpose combat ship MKS 180.

Four years later, this is no longer unreservedly true. The old corvettes suffer from “obsolescence”; in other words: their technology is out of date. From 2025, they would have to be overhauled. Even the Federal Audit Office has recommended to the Ministry of Defense several times over the past few years to plan new acquisitions at an early stage instead of continuing to operate old weapon systems for decades.

What is certain is that the old corvettes no longer meet the requirements of international missions, so from 2025, they will probably have to go to the shipyard for weeks or even months to modernize. They would not be available for use for so long.

With the second batch order in 2017, the Bundestag also decided that the Bundeswehr should have ten operational corvettes. If a structurally identical third batch of five corvettes were ordered during this legislative period, the Bundeswehr would always have ten corvettes.

In addition: The repair of the old corvettes would not extend the 30-year service life, because of the wear and tear of the ship’s hull, according to the ministry letter. In 2038, the Bundeswehr would need to replace then. The ships of the third lot to be ordered now, which would be delivered from 2025, could, on the other hand, be used until 2055. The opportunity to order new ships is also favorable because the government has promised the armaments industry with the 130-billion-euro economic stimulus package to promptly give them orders.

The Bundeswehr’s Future

Hence, the desperately needed paradigm shift in Germany’s Bundeswehr to address new and existing geopolitical threats and to address German aspirations in the Indo-Pacific has yet to be initiated. With German financial efficiency alone, Berlin will remain without an influential voice outside of the European Union.

L'articolo Germany’s Navy to Add New Warships – for Financial Purposes proviene da InsideOver.

Berlin is seeking to expand its geopolitical focus across European boundaries and into the Indo-Pacific. The agenda is ambitious: to alter China’s hegemonic aspirations and secure future German prosperity.

Tension in the Indo-Pacific

The Indo-Pacific region is currently witnessing a series of tensions. The increasing relevance of the region due to rapid economic growth and China’s military build-up has made it conceivable that these tensions may turn into severe conflicts in years to come.

Germany, and indeed the European Union, has not yet had a targeted, systematic, and coordinated policy approach for the region. This will now change.

Last Wednesday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet – and thus the government – passed Indo-Pacific guidelines and joined the Indo-Pacific geopolitical club. It is a significant step that could transform Germany’s role in the world, at least if a long-term, materially backed commitment follows the noble declarations of intent.

Maas Gets It

Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas is cognizant of the region’s relevance and rightfully alluded that Germany’s prosperity and geopolitical influence in the coming decades were based on “working together” with the states of the Indo-Pacific. It is a statement that is a testimony for an Indo-Pacific German foreign policy.

According to Maas, the main aim was to work with democratic partners willing to cooperate to enforce international rules against the “law of the strong” in a region with established and emerging powers such as Japan, China, and India and where the shaping of the future’s international order could be decided. Germany seeks to help shape this order.

Maas’s call to leave no room for the “law of strongest” refers primarily to China. In the South China Sea, Beijing claims sovereignty in violation of international law, which threatens to enforce with military means. Moreover, Taiwan also feels increasingly threatened.

Berlin’s Diverging Path from Washington

Washington currently acts as a power-balance. The US is thus the last line of defense for China’s regional hegemony. Considering the ongoing trade war between Beijing and Washington, a real conflict is no longer a fantasy. It is a looming scenario Berlin sees with “great concern,” as Maas stated.

Democratic states in the region such as Australia and India have long been asking for Europe’s commitment against Chinese claims to hegemony and intimidation attempts. Their argument states that the seas’ freedom was also in the interests of Europe and its economy.

The latter seems to have finally been realized by Europe, or at least parts of it. Besides its own agenda Berlin is also committed to pushing for a European strategy for the Indo-Pacific “together with our EU partners, especially France,” Maas said. Maas has long been emphasizing the importance of common philosophy in Europe’s China policy.

Upcoming EU-China Summit

On September 14, the EU-China summit will take place. It will be an important date as Beijing has been attempting to divide Europe to gain more power on the continent. Herein lies a significant crux: the continent is already divided as far as China is concerned.

Great Britain, for example, has established itself as Europe’s hawk. It has excluded the People’s Republic from expanding the super-fast 5G mobile network for fear of espionage. London also quickly suspended the extradition treaty with Hong Kong after China passed the controversial Security Law and offered visas and residence rights to three million Hong Kong citizens.

Other states such as Hungary, Italy, or Greece are hoping for Chinese investments into their respective economies and, therefore, insist on restraint in a European China policy.

Around two-thirds of the world’s sea trade is facilitated via shipping routes in the Indo-Pacific. German trade with Southeast Asia, South Asia, East Asia, Australia, and New Zealand has grown steadily.

Germany’s Future Footprint in the Indo-Pacific

Germany’s Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer had called for Germany to have a military presence pronounced in the region several times but met resistance from her party’s coalition partner SPD. Now, the SPD’s ministers have also agreed to strengthen security policy cooperation with actors in the region.

Germany’s agenda in the Indo-Pacific will include participation in security forums, participation in exercises in the region, joint evacuation planning, the posting of liaison officers, and various maritime presence forms. Moreover, Germany strives for more cooperation in climate change, human rights, free trade, and digitization with the democratic nations in the regions.

Nevertheless: despite the change of course in Germany’s China policy, in the end, it will depend on how united Europe is on the China question as a continent.

L'articolo Germany’s Quest for Relevance in the Indo-Pacific proviene da InsideOver.

Following the poisoning of Russian opposition politician and anti-corruption activist Alexei Navalny, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Wednesday that the Kremlin critic was poisoned with a Soviet-style Novichok nerve agent in an attempt to murder him.

Navalny’s Current Status

Navalny remains in intensive care in a Berlin hospital, but if Merkel’s claims are true, then this is the same nerve agent that was used during the Salisbury killings in 2018.

The German Chancellor said she expects Russian President Vladimir Putin to explain himself and that Germany would consult its NATO allies about how to respond, raising the prospect of new Western sanctions on Moscow, which would cause Russian asset prices to tumble.

Merkel Has Taken a Tough Stance Toward Russia

Considering this is one of many incidents that have occurred since Putin became President of Russia in 2000, Merkel is right to adopt a tough stance toward her Russian counterpart. Western nations must demonstrate that they will not tolerate such behavior and that there will be consequences.

The White House said that the use of Novichok was “completely reprehensible” and that the US would work with its allies to hold Russia accountable.

Britain and France stated that they also oppose the substance being used to poison Putin’s opponents.

Germany is Vulnerable to Russia Because of Nord Stream 2

Despite this, the German Chancellor must remember that her country is vulnerable to Russia for many reasons. There will be pressure on Merkel to cancel a multi-billion pound pipeline with Putin known as Nord Stream 2.

US President Donald Trump has already threatened any nation that complies with the construction of Nord Stream 2 with sanctions, which leaves the German Chancellor in a difficult place as Germany could suffer either way.

Nord Stream 2 is thought to be 94 percent completed and canceling it will have negative economic consequences. The project will cost €9.5 billion, with Moscow state-owned Gazprom providing 50 percent of the funds needed for Nord’s construction.

According to the Daily Express, the German Chancellor is unlikely to cancel Nord Stream 2 over fears of an economic rebuke.

Merkel’s Successor Must Rebuild Relations with the US

The completion of the first Nord Stream pipeline in 2012 left Germany dependent upon Russia for natural resources. Other countries that receive gas from this pipeline include France, which is why Merkel should tread carefully.

One of the first priorities of Merkel’s successor next year must be to rebuild relations with the Trump administration. A paper released by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in July discovered that poor relations between Trump and Merkel have exacerbated Berlin’s sense of exposure to potential dangers from Beijing and Moscow regarding Chinese and Russian interference.

Furthermore, US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper said in July that of a total of 11,900 US personnel that will be leaving Germany under the US President’s proposal to pull nearly 12,000 troops out of the country, 6,400 will be returning to the US, from where they could be used for rotational deployments in eastern Europe and around the globe, while 5,600 will be re-positioned to other NATO states.

Pulling US Troops Out of Germany Could Prove to be a Mistake

Trump may be right to argue that Germany has not been meeting its NATO spending targets, but his decision weakens Germany’s defenses against Putin. There is no reason why Europe’s most successful economy cannot afford to meet its NATO commitments, particularly if poverty-stricken Greece has been meeting its NATO targets since 2006.

If Trump wins in November, Merkel’s successor would be wise to commit Germany to meeting its NATO commitments if they are serious about preventing Moscow from posing a threat to their country.

Though Merkel’s stance toward Putin is welcome, her actions will be limited by external factors that leave Germany exposed to the threat Russia poses to Europe. Sanctions have so far had little effect on Putin’s government. Until they damage the heart of Russia’s economy, the Russian President knows that he can continue to get away with actions like poisoning his opponents — for now.

L'articolo Merkel’s Criticism of Putin over Navalny Poisoning Leaves Her Vulnerable proviene da InsideOver.

Massive crowds of protesters rallied in central Berlin on Saturday, Aug. 29 to protest coronavirus lockdown measures. Police ordered the crowd to disperse for breaking distancing rules and at least 300 arrests have been made.

How Big Was the Protest?

There were only 18,000 protesters present according to Deutsche Welle and 38,000 according to Reuters, although one protester who was at the protest called Andrea, who preferred that her full name not be used, said she estimated there were definitely hundreds of thousands and as many as 500,000 protesters. She believes the mainstream media was deliberately downplaying the amount of support for the protest.

Andrea said she and other protesters walked 8 kilometers around the city center because there were so many people and police had cordoned off the overcrowded central area and blocked a planned parade from taking place.

“At the main demo there was a huge crowd of people around the Brandenburg Gate,” Andrea said. “It was really dramatic because when we came past the embassy of the Americans and the Russians there were people outside who were demanding a peace treaty and a new constitution for Germany. Police came and arrested some of them and the others went away.”

Who Organized the Protests?

As a fairly grassroots protest there were various groups involved, but the main initiator of the protest was a Stuggart-based group called Lateral Thinking 711 which mobilizes followers online via social media like Facebook and Telegram.

The event had protesters from across the political spectrum from right to left and had a common theme of not believing that restrictions on freedom are necessary or valid and that the government is lying about many aspects of coronavirus and the reasons for the lockdown.

Protester: ‘Last Chance for Germany and the World to Remain Free’

Andrea said she attended because she no longer trusts her government to uphold basic democratic freedoms and does not believe the virus is as dangerous as health authorities claim.

“We could end up in authoritarian or even totalitarian surveillance and hygienic state without freedom and humanity. We need free media, but nobody listens, so we demonstrate,” Andrea said. “For me this is the last chance for Germany and the world to remain free, for our children to remain healthy and not get vaccinated, not get forced under a mask, not get quarantined all the time, locked down, not get all our basic economy and basis of living destroyed even further by all these lies the media and politicians tell us. They are all very corrupt.”

“This is the last chance for our freedom. If it doesn’t work out now, we are lost,” she added.

RFK Jr.: Lockdown Part of a Shift Toward a ‘Totalitarian’ World System

Remarks were made by Robert F. Kennedy Jr, the son of the late RFK and nephew of JFK, who stated that a powerful medical lobby wants to force unsafe vaccines on children and citizens and that the demonstration in Berlin was the site of an uprising against the new totalitarianism of worldwide surveillance and tyrannical global government which RFK Jr. terms a “bio-security agenda” run by Bill Gates and powerful political and corporate figures.

“They are in the process of shifting us towards a digital currency, which is the beginning of slavery,” Kennedy told the assembled thousands. “Because if they control your bank account, they control your behavior.”

Kennedy made further remarks that the pandemic is being intentionally used by plutocrats to crush the middle class.

“The pandemic is a crisis of convenience for the elites who are dictating these policies. It gives them the ability to obliterate the middle class, to destroy the institutions of democracy, to shift all of our wealth to a handful of billionaires to make themselves rich by impoverishing the rest of us,” Kennedy stated.

Germany and Coronavirus

Germany has recorded 240,986 cases of coronavirus and 9,289 deaths, many occuring with comorbidities. The country has seen less coronavirus-related fatalities than other European nations of a similar size.

Experts have credited this to Germany’s high testing rate, strong institutional and hospital capacity, rapid response once outbreak occurred and emphasis on preventing elderly patients from contracting the disease.

L'articolo Germans Flood the Streets of Berlin to Protest COVID-19 Restrictions proviene da InsideOver.