German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/115, pp. 14195-14196.
Her President. Ladies and gentlemen.
The CDU delegation
Johann
David Wadephul (CDU/CSU): CDU/CSU!
thus wants the upcoming NATO summit to lead to success. A laudable intention, if it would then serve the interests of Germany and the German citizens.
The Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany in Article 24, paragraph 2, specifies that the Bund may arrange for the guaranty of peace in a system of mutual, collective security and can willingly agree to restrictions of its sovereign rights. A look at the AfD’s program of principles shows that we also regard Germany’s membership in NATO as a central element of our security strategy.
We nevertheless understand NATO as a purely defensive alliance in regards the alliance territories according to the NATO treaty and basically reject interventions outside these territories. The recent experiences with foreign missions should here be a strong warning for us. Alliance solidarity alone cannot replace vital national interest for a mission of armed forces outside the treaty territories. We therefore also reject the globalization of NATO in the direction of the Indo-Pacific, especially the meddling in Chinese affairs regarding Taiwan.
Wolfgang Hellmich (SPD): Where does it meddle there?
The Federal government should instead strengthen its diplomatic efforts for a peaceful solution of the Taiwan question.
We support the endeavor for a fair burden-sharing in NATO
Ulrich
Lechte (FDP): Against freedom and democracy obviously!
and thereby also the so-called two percent goal. The strengthening of the European pillar of NATO is in the German interest so as to strengthen the weight and say of Europeans and also that of Germany vis-à-vis the dominant leading power, the U.S.A. Nevertheless, these additional fiscal means need in fact to be invested in armament and the Bundeswehr’s sustainable capability. It unfortunately is a fact that in the last 15 months the already reduced mission readiness of the German armed forces, as a result of donations to the Ukraine, has still further worsened. This is unacceptable.
We welcome the membership of Finland and also soon that of Sweden in NATO because this will increase Germany’s security. On that account, we reject the acceptance of the Ukraine into NATO because that would mean not more security but less security.
We also welcome that the NATO-Russia basic document of 1997 will not be seen as obsolete, despite the Russian aggression. In can in the long-term form a nexus for a new security structure which needs to be based on the principle of common security in Europe. Yet foremost must be sought practical ways for a rapid ending of the Russian war of aggression against the Ukraine. For that are to be used, in my opinion, NATO’s communication channels to Russia, as they were maintained for the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War.
We are critical in regards the announced long-term stationing of a German brigade of approximately 4,000 soldiers in Lithuania; colleague Wadephul has more precisely expressed that. This decision was certainly knit together quicktime with a hot needle. The question presents itself, At whose pressure was this done? From our viewpoint, the existing rotation solution for deterrence is fully sufficient.
On the whole, we reject the motion put forward by the Union on account of the offensive character of the overall approach for NATO, although we thoroughly share in some of the points in regards the strengthening of the Bundeswehr. NATO needs to again concentrate itself on the its core duty according to the NATO treaty: On the defense of the alliance territories.
I thank you for your attention.
[trans: tem]
