Armin-Paulus
Hampel
INF
Treaty
German
Bundestag, June 27, 2019, Plenarprotokoll 19/107, pp. 13275-13276
[Armin-Paulus
Hampel is an Alternative für Deutschland Bundestag member from the western
German state of Lower Saxony and was a television journalist. He is the AfD's foreign affairs spokesman in the Bundestag.]
Herr
President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear guests in the German
Bundestag.
Herr
Kiesewetter, from midnight, it becomes a simple bit after all.
Timon Gremmels (SPD): Agreed. It really is midnight
and you are the
next speaker.That was an own goal!
Peter Bleser (CDU/CSU): Own goal!
Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU/CSU): You
are into your time!
Just
remain entirely at ease concerning the hour.
And
you suppress a pair of things which you have left unmentioned. Perhaps some
more of you ought to have been at the economic forum at Saint Petersburg a few
weeks ago. There was a great panel discussion with UN Secretary Guterres, the Chinese
President Xi and the Russian President Putin. There you could have heard both
Herr Xi and Herr Putin speak of a strategic partnership of the two countries,
Russia and China. Had you paid attention, it would have rung a bell for you.
Herr Xi had even called Herr Putin his “dear friend Herr Vladimir Putin”. The
Russian president on the other hand did not do that.
There,
it was about trade agreements and trade relations between Russia and China. What
will you actually do once this strategic partnership develops into a military
relationship? Since then what do you do when, in regards strategic weapons, the
Russians and Chinese come so closely into contact or understanding that we no
longer have any influence there, Herr Kiesewetter? What do we do then?
With
your sanctions policy, you do the exact opposite. That was perceptible in Saint
Petersburg. Consequently, for years you drive the Russians into the arms of the
Chinese. German foreign policy cannot be more stupid, Herr Kisewetter. That is
thereby the salient point.
Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU/CSU): You visit the war
criminal Assad, and you visit Crimea. You commit a violation of international
law and you mis-use the diplomatic passport. It is the AfD that mis-uses the
diplomatic passport!
Listen
rather for once!
Because
we must deal reasonably with the realities in Europe, we have proposed the
following – we have not proposed a one-page treaty; you must simply read
through the proposal. We have advanced that it must be in the German interest
and the European interest to maintain a Europe free of intermediate range
missiles.
Ulli Nissen (SPD): A bit softer
please.
I
want to see who in this house votes against that – I hear no contradiction. That
is just fine, you have moreover learned something.
We
wish now to get at what we also say to our American friends, that we do not
always have common interests. America has a big bathtub 5,000 nautical miles
long between itself and Europe; we are distant only a couple of hundred
kilometers. Therefore, it must be in the European interest that these weapons
simply be not at hand in our territories, on our European continent.
We must
do what I have today urged upon the colleagues of the FDP. We must negotiate in
the spirit of the great foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, which always
again is held up as an example. We must finally return to Realpolitik and present to ourselves problems as they really are,
and not allow ourselves to dream of the situation.
The
understanding with Russia is not directed against America – just the opposite:
we have therefore pleaded to include the American friends – but in the European
interest.
There
are presently no intermediate range missiles in Europe, and we wish to maintain
this state of affairs. We particularly know that it is a quite lengthy process
before China and others – besides Israel – will assent to an international
agreement – I agree with you, Herr Kiesewetter, that it would be desirable.We
also know that before we arrive at a result here, years, if not decades, will
elapse.
We
want to use the intervening time and come to an agreement with Russia. We want
Europe to conclude a treaty with Russia whereby this continent becomes a zone
free of atomic weapons. What is properly opposed to that?
Marcus Faber (FDP): It involves
Iran!
Who
challenges us? Who threatens us when we in common conclude that with one another?
And our American friends must agree because it would be a sensible [sinnvoll] decision. To that, I see no
contradiction and I also generally see no rupture with American interests.
I
believe that this proposal which we have made for the interval, until we have
negotiated a corresponding treaty with the other powers, is sensible. You all –
we have often enough said it – particularly know that when we speak thereon
that it concerns China, Pakistan, India, Iran and Israel and we have a long way
ahead of us to arrive at an international treaty.
Let
us span this time in common with the Russians. Let us end the sanctions policy.
Let us set ourselves on a course by which we will not have the Russians on the
side of the Chinese in a few years.
…
Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU/CSU):
Legalized violation of international law!
[Translated
by Todd Martin]
