Michael Espendiller, March 18, 2025, Debt and Defense Spending

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/214, pp. 27767-27768. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear viewers in the hall, on YouTube, and on X. 

The election fraudster Friedrich Merz, today in common with SPD and Greens, is having determined in six days as much new debt as the entire Federal Republic of Germany in total took up from 1950 until 2009, thus in 59 years. It will be, in ten years time, between 1.6 and 1.8 trillion euros. Most already surmise that with this money everything possible will happen, yet in the end it will not arrive at the citizens. 

On this there prevails a widespread consensus that the so-called infrastructure special debts are to be refused because infrastructure belongs to the regular state orders which the state has to finance from its current income. Yet there persists the erroneous belief that in the case of the Bundeswehr it would be different. I want for my delegation to here again clarify: Defense expenditures also need be defrayed from the regular budget if we want to economize efficiently and responsibly. 

All economists agree that Germany needs fundamental structural reform, that we need to rein in the bureaucracy and initiate a growth impulse. And all are agreed that in that regard it does not help to simply pour more money over the problem, as has been done without success in the past years. Why should it be different in regards the Bundeswehr? 

I have attended in the last three years as reporter for section 14 the regular expenditures in the defense area as well as the “Special Funds Bundeswehr”, and I can say to you: Our problem here is not primarily the money. Of that, the Defense Ministry now has so much that it routinely affords itself money squandering. Did you know, for example, that we spend each year 654 million euros for the so-called property security [Liegenschaften]? What is that? That is the cost for the private security services which guard [bewachen] our barracks, because that is evidently no longer to be expected of our soldiers. And we yearly pay from the Federal budget around 180,000 soldiers, the fewest of whom are on active duty. It is not known what they do all day long, yet the guarding of our barracks is apparently not a part of it. 

Or let us go the the procurement theme. In regards procurement projects also we routinely pay too much, for one thing because our government simply negotiates poorly, for another because the Federal Ministry of Defense’s requirements are set completely wrong. An example is the infantry’s heavy weapons carrier. Here, we procure the Boxer from Rheinmetall which shall replace the weapons carrier system Wiesel 2 which has been in service for around 30 years. So far, so good. Actually, the Boxer could quite easily be purchased in Germany, because it is also produced by us. Only, Rheinmetall was unfortunately at the time of the order fully booked in its  German production. One would thus need to wait somewhat longer. That besides would have been fully justifiable. But no, the Russians who lose the last two years in the Ukraine, are, ja, next week in Berlin. Thus Pistorius decided to purchase the Boxer at Rheinmetall Australia and from there have it flown in. The result: The originally planned 2 billion euros for the project does not suffice. The finance requirement climbs around 700 million euros to 2.7 billion euros. 

            Alice Weidel (AfD): Madness! Anyone can figure that!

And the flight from Australia is besides not climate neutral. 

I have only four minutes speaking time, yet I could recount for hours additional examples. 

An evaluation in the Federal Ministry of Defense does not routinely occur, neither for the use of funds and for the procurement, nor for our military doctrine. 

            Henning Otte (CDU/CSU): Who then wrote your speech for you?

The Bundeswehr needs to correspond in structure and character to the altered demands of our time. Yet at the Bendlerblock is ever still a mindset of 50 years ago. And we do not change that when we now write into the Basic Law in the defense area an indebtedness possibility completely without upper limit. 

Also in the military area it remains as in the sentence: Germany has an expenditure problem and not an income problem. We will at some time look back on this day and ascertain that it did not bring us much other than debts and inflation. 

Thanks for the attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, March 18, 2025, Democracy and Debt

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/214, pp. 27752-27754. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

It is now three months since Chancellor Scholz put the confidence question. The starting point was the debts policy in which the Ampel coalition fell apart. The citizens were on one side assured that there can be no further so, on the other side were political processes paralyzed. To the 20^th German Bundestag, this one here, was denied that it still can reach decisions of significance; since there should be new elections and first of all the new parliament and the new Federal government should bear the responsibility for Germany’s future. All who wish to recall, know how many motions were referred back to the committees by the Praesidium. Nothing should be possible. 

The vote on the migration crisis offered an intermezzo. Here, the CDU/CSU, somewhat disconnected, sought to draw to its side the leading theme of the Bundestag election. In the result, Friedrich Merz anxiously retreated and vowed an improvement; since “Firewall Merz” assured: With the Alternative für Deutschland can no one cooperate. 

And then came the great quake of the February 23 Bundestag election. Now was clear: The majorities were quite clearly shifted, and suddenly everything was different. The outgoing Bundestag was to be made use of so as to reinforce the future Federal government, and indeed because only you have the majorities here – even though today the majority of the newly elected members is here, and today an organizing sitting would have been able to take place. The fearful Chancellor candidate Friedrich Merz stands now at mid-point. Where is actually – and the question needs be allowed – Olaf Scholz? 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): He sits there!

This one of course still conducts as per the Basic Law the official business. Ladies and gentlemen, what a drama you require of the citizens and our voters! 

The highest good of politicians, valued colleagues, if credibility. With these embarrassing actions, valued Herr Merz, you have completely lost yours. The voters feel themselves defrauded by you, and that rightly. Are you actually sure that you will ever become Chancellor? Since that is your sole objective. You therefore bargain with the holders of the old majorities. For you, it is certainly not about the future of Germany. For you, it’s about your Chancellorship. And for you every means is proper so as to not become the next failed Chancellor candidate of your party. 

That you have no backbone, Herr Merz, we felt in the election campaign, and we all know that. But that you in the meantime are completely invertebrate, you will here prove with this vote. 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Like a North Sea crab!

You play politics and promise everyone almost anything, and that seemingly appears to be simple: When 50 billion does not suffice, it is simply 100 billion euros which you place at the disposal of the failed governing party, the Greens. The problem nevertheless is: You finance your power option to be Chancellor by means of debts at the cost of future generations, at the cost of our children and grandchildren, and then in the end perhaps send them to war. “Special funds” you name this new kind of state indebtedness. It is amusing that during the election campaign Chancellor Scholz named this exactly so in a political talk show. Now he moreover does what he can do best: 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Simply nothing!

He is silent, and simply lets everything thus happen. 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Has forgotten who is Chancellor!

The instrument of an inflationary special fund is abused so as to force through targeted investments. It would thus be important to ascertain the precise need so that this money does not simply come to nothing, or is lost through expensive consultant contracts. 

The positions in the Federal ministries continually grow for years. Yet no Federal minister appears to have found in the past decades the right people who understand their subject. On the one side to speak of de-bureaucratization, on the other to massively build up exactly that: Whom does that serve other than officials and the parties who are behind it? Why is the Federal Chancellor’s Office enlarged, and why after the Bundestag elections will be quickly created attractive posts for former political co-workers and fellow travelers? That, Frau Paus here could briefly explain. 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Where is Frau Paus?

The theme of credibility I already mentioned. 

You make of the state a by-word for plunder. And that is the real emergency situation in this country. And do you really think to thereby still have the backing of the citizens? In your parallel world, scarcely anyone still errs. No longer does one understand for whom you actually do politics – that really harms the democracy, Frau Haßelmann. All in fact may count yourselves fortunate that we of the Alternative für Deutschland as political competitors have taken trouble for a fabulously high election participation. 

Let us look for once at the problem child of national defense. Can this by the present Bundeswehr actually still be secured? Of course it cannot. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Yet you don’t want that!

The principal cause is the Bundeswehr’s current build-up itself. For example, the surplus bureaucratization in procurement procedures. Encampments were closed, the venues sold, depots closed, material sold or donated to foreign countries. In which places do you then want to begin to invest? 

To secure the votes of proponents, you conduct the immediate re-introduction of the defense duty [Wehrpflicht] in the field. The CSU even wants to implement this by year’s end. In which district recruiting offices, which no longer exist, do you actually want to muster the soldiers? 

You see valued colleagues, this important theme for Germany will be made for a still not Chancellor Merz a sticking point for his majorities. 

With Donald Trump, you all now suddenly think the sole foreign partner has been lost. Tja, plainly one should not be so one-sidedly oriented, Herr Merz. Now of course will be painfully led before your eyes that the Americans now place in the foreground their own interests – what a surprise! And I ask you: What then actually are our interests? How shall the German and European security be guaranteed? Where then remains the European security architecture? Why do you never speak of your perspective of a peaceful Europe from a German viewpoint? You think now you can call upon the Ukraine war as a legitimization for a new partition of the European continent. Yet we need no new friend-foe imagery, as you today have briefly sketched it, Herr Merz. And a so-called war capability [Kriegstüchtigkeit] we also do not need. It belongs to another epoch. We need long-lasting peace on the entire continent of Europe. This signal must go into the world. The old continent must find and negotiate its interests, and stand united behind them. And thereby may Germany play a decisive role.   

The world looks on perplexed for quite a while at the German drift [Treiben]. This helpless stumbling must finally have an end. No one trusts a country which does not trust itself, and develops no plan for the future; this applies to the citizens even so as to foreign partners and our own economy. 

The core brands of German industry were incorporated in the automobile industry – as were the skilled trades and the Mittelstand. For that, we were known and esteemed throughout the world. The latest news of elimination of positions at Audi and VW, of the emigrations and insolvencies, are presently of little encouragement. To get underway, you now want massive infrastructure projects. Again the question: Which then and where? What are your priorities, and which firms will actually counter-finance [gegenfinanzieren] this by means of taxes and duties, by the creation of workplaces and training places? 

Ladies and gentlemen, here, without a plan, the state debt shall be driven to heaven. I can again only imagine the subvention package with which you want to attract business with expensive tax money. That, we all already know – Herr Habeck – from the past: 600 million euros for Northvolt in Schleswig-Holstein, 10 billion euros for Intel. It is, ja, also easier to always print more money than to examine the finances in a business-like way. Since one thing for years has simply not been touched: We really need an honest audit. And had the CDU still a profile, a DNA, as Herr Merz always nicely says, it would pursue that. Your former Finance Minster Worlfgang Schäuble stood for investing only that money which was covered by the state budget. And for what do you stand, Herr Merz? You have meanwhile let yourself be implanted with the SPD’s mRNA. 

We have a tax income at record heights. And with that do not come out right. Why actually not? You want to sell to the German taxpayer your un-economy as an “investment plan”. Yet special funds are and remain special debts, to which we even so little agree as every businessman who with such a behavior would give himself over directly into insolvency. 

I give you a short accounting example: One trillion euros of debts which you today want to issue,  special debts with a present interest rate of 2.9 percent, means in ten years 100 billion euros of interest. 100 billion euros of interest! 

And it’s interesting how important for you this time the science is. Are the economists and business experts less qualified than the vaccination doctors of the Corona time? 

What’s with the climate neutrality? This strategic goal I might and must not evaluate. Yet you want to write it into the Basic Law, and have it implemented until 2045. So presumptuous is not even the EU. And that is saying something. Herr Söder besides thinks it is no state goal, even if it is anchored in the Basic Law. And that is an interesting reading of the Basic Law. 

Valued colleagues, you’ve now finally overstrained the bow. You make yourselves and this parliament ultimately unworthy of belief, and that, we will not let stand. The CDU’s few voters in my constituency of Görlitz now well ask me: Herr Chrupalla, when actually are the new elections? 

I appeal to all colleagues, especially of the CSU/CSU delegation – many of you are directly elected, have contacts with the citizens, businessmen, associations: Follow your experiences and the freedom of your mandate. Vote against this draft law and thereby for our Basic Law and for Germany! 

Many thanks.

[trans: tem]

Peter Boehringer, March 13, 2025, Debt Brake and War Budget

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/213, pp. 27710-27711. 

Frau President. 

“I would find it…most highly problematic if the 20^th German Bundestag, which has an almost completely lost democratic legitimacy,…reached in its last days such fundamental decisions.” 

These are not my words, but of colleague Frei of the CDU, not of today – today, he said something different – but of a good ten days ago. That is approximately the shelf-life of CDU promises. 

We thus today as the 20^th German Bundestag are then still allowed to act only if, fully surprising, an existential and unavoidable decision for our nation is pending. Which however is not so. This morning here already could the 21^st Bundestag sit. It is simply anti-democratic that Herrn Merz and Klingbeil, disregarding the 21^st Bundestag, want to have the Basic Law changed with majorities of the old, outgoing Bundestag.   

We speak today of hundreds of billions of euros of special debts. We speak even of the long-term undermining of the regular order of a unified Federal budget with a clear debts upper limit. Over one trillion euros as additional state debt shall be taken up. Upon every net taxpayer shall be inflicted debts calculated at more than 60,000 euros if these amounts are issued, which will only last a few years – perhaps pretty much like this coalition’s time in office. 

Debts are, despite the propaganda, never investments in a good future and also never, Frau Dröge, in the state interest. On the contrary: The interest and thus tax burden take design options from future generations. Naturally the debts intoxication leads to high inflation under which primarily the little man suffers. You devour in advance one trillion euros for which others need later starve. In this regard, the recognition of the debt brake is even in the Union’s election program: 

            “We adhere to the debt brake…Today’s debts are tomorrow’s tax increases.” 

And Herr Merz said in the election campaign: 

“The debt brake defends…the tax payments of the young generation. Shall we today expend their money? We take in 1,000 billion euros in taxes…and with that we should make do.” 

Herr Merz, you commit, even before entry into office, the quickest and greatest election fraud in German history. Nothing, simply nothing in today’s situation is surprising. The problems exist for decades. Supposedly, the money will now be expended exclusively and rapidly for infrastructure and the Bundeswehr. Investments in these areas under black-red chancellors in the last 35 years – the fat years – were never sufficiently undertaken; otherwise, there would not generally be giant, structural deficits: Who should believe that this time, for the first time, it will be different? 

In addition, the 2022 100 billion euros of special debts were in part mis-appropriated [zweckfremdet] for the Ukraine. Mis-appropriation now also threatens with the new regulation whereby such defense expenditures may be under taken without regard to the debt limits of the Basic Law. Note well: Open at the top and without time limitation. That is unbelievable. 

Besides, today in Article 87a of the Basic Law, of which all of you here formulate lies, is that debt-financed military support would be one time only. That is in the Basic Law. The truth is: You conceal, with the debt mountains created today, the giant budget problems which you in any case would have had. The truth is: This coalition could not draw up its first of all budgets in the summer of 2025 in conformity with the constitution, if you did not today approve a giant gulp from the bottle of future tax payments. You want to create an enormous ancillary budget which nearly doubles the money available for your dubious purposes. You obtain the means to govern authoritatively for four years, cost what it will. So too could Laurel and Hardy govern [Sie erschleichen sich die Mittel, um vier Jahre durchzuregieren, koste es, was es wolle. So könnten auch Dick und Doof regieren]. 

In a real Cold War, the GDR, for 40 years until 1991, could bring in Federal defense spending of a sum of two percent and more of GDP, quite without special debts. The Bundeswehr has no budget problem, but a management and strategy deficit. Yet who with negligent frankness talks up enmities and war, can naturally no longer pocket a peace dividend. 

The future indebtedness relations, ladies and gentlemen, were earlier only in times of war and pre-war. The war capacity demanded by Pistorious, Merz and von der Leyen shall be completed by a war financing without a war. That is irresponsible – not only fiscally. 

“Who is against debt is for Russian panzers in Germany.” That is the perfidious argument – from Frau Haßelmann – which brands every critical budget member as a traitor. That is a quite wicked level. Do not make an enemy of both East and West! Invest in diplomacy! We will then need billions less for the military. And it is not initially clear what then shall be the defense policy ideas behind the new, unlimited armaments spending: An EU army, or perhaps a NATO with the U.S.A. or without the U.S.A.? It’s all open. Yet there is not unlimited money in a machine which does not even have a basic plan. We will give you here no 13-figure blank check. The way to the war economy goes without us. 

Your chancellorship, Herr Merz, leads, before its beginning, without any emergency, to a crisis of democracy. In case this delegitimizing coup against the 21^st German Bundestag and against the people’s will ascertained by the Bundestag election is in fact forced through, then is actually just the question: Where is the Constitution Defense when it is needed? 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Matthais Moosdorf, January 29, 2025, Ukraine and Corruption

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/209, pp. 27149-27150. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

With the election of Donald Trump, the Western leading powers began to set policy aright. The Trump Administration’s most recent Ukraine peace plan is – with the exception of EU membership – identical with the peace motion of the AfD. For that very reason, the new U.S. government supports our party’s position of reason and rejects your war delusion. It was of course recognized by the AfD since 2022 that weapons deliveries without negotiations prolong the war, exact countless human lives on both sides, and can produce only an ancillary peace diplomacy. 

Since 2022, according to available numbers, the Ukraine has received from around 40 countries a total of 424 billion euros in promised weapons and financial assistance. In the year 2017, Ukrainian economic experts estimated that the Ukraine’s corruption level was comparable with that of Uganda. 

            Marcus Faber (FDP): Worse even than Russia!

In 2019, Transparency International believed that, in regards armaments expenditures, some 30 percent of the budget disappeared into unknown channels. And today the country stands there in this ranking somewhat like Algeria, 

            Marcus Faber (FDP): Radio Moscow!

yet clearly behind states like Ethiopia or Burkina Faso. A counselor of the Ukrainian president explained in 2023 that money would be pilfered without penalty, and the officials – cite – “steal as if there were no tomorrow”. 

According to one study of the Ukrainian agency for corruption in the year 2023, 88 percent of the population and 81 percent of business held the corruption to be the most considerable problem in the Ukraine. The three most corrupt areas are the customs service, the military, and public procurement. 

Agnieszka Brugger (Greens): The Ukraine in regards the anti-corruption campaign has gone up according to Transparency International, despite the war. Did you realize that, or do you just recite the talking points from Moscow? 

In March 2024, 70 percent of the Ukrainians were of the opinion that their government profits from the war and increasingly sinks into corruption. From January 2023 to June 2024, the perception of increasing corruption rose from 15 to 49 percent nationwide. 

            Sebastian Schäfer (Greens): Then how much do you make from Moscow                                each month? 

Jörg Nünnberger (SPD): How would it be if you consider the Ukrainian war victims? The civilians who each day were killed?

Interpol warned already in June 2022 that delivered weapons arrive in the hands of organized crime. And the New York Times reported that the whereabouts of around 60 percent of the goods deficiently delivered to the Ukraine is so far unexplained. All of this is no Putin lie; 

            Marcus Faber (FDP): No, that’s simply Radio Moscow!

since the U.S.A. is now investigating the whereabouts of 100 billion euros of Ukraine aid. Under the guidance of Robert Gates, over 200 researchers are thereby engaged. Storch explained it’s about theft, fraud and corruption. 

            Marcus Faber (FDP): Of which you know! 

The Pentagon reported 63 percent of the military aid has disappeared without a trace. 63 percent! 

            Carolin Bachmann (AfD): Listen! Shame on you!

Germany is the second largest bilateral aid donor to the Ukraine after the U.S.A. Our support is more than double so high as that from France and Italy together. In 2024, it was again double in comparison to 2023. Yet the EU control council set up in June 2024 has so far named merely three members as independent experts for an audit. A great interest in transparency thus obviously does not exist. 

The AfD demands of the Federal government, following the U.S. model, to finally set up a staff of at least 50 members which examines the entire German Ukraine assistance of almost 40 billion euros, and finally uncovers and prosecutes corruption. Your motion for an additional three billion euros we of course reject. 

And besides: The change of times begins now! 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, December 16, 2024, Economy, Immigration, War

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/205, pp. 26517-26519. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable Herr Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

Six full weeks have gone by since your failed government at last fell apart, Herr Scholz. Six weeks of delays, maneuvering, of the petty assignment of guilt as we have heard today, of sweet-talking and of denial of reality, until this Bundestag can finally vote on whether to withdraw from you the confidence which you have already long since lost amongst the people. 

Just for three years was your government in office. The damage which you in this time have inflicted, the Germans have to bear for decades: The automobile industry, thanks to gigantic false investments, in free fall, the machinery industry in decline, the chemical industry in flight from exploding energy costs, the electricity supply ruined, much too expensive, and from dark doldrum to dark doldrum on the edge of blackout, 

            Saskia Esken (SPD): Oah!

the country flooded by migrants summoned to appear, who despise those encountered, the domestic security in collapse, the social system over-strained, while the tax burden and inflation rob the citizens of purchasing power and prosperity and smothers them. 

Yet when the German citizens remonstrate, they are stalked by the internet spies and reporting offices of a tax-funded NGO Stasi. And a political class, as panicked as over-sensitive, abuses the justice system so as to silence rebellious citizens following one of its own lèse-majesté articles with criminal sentences, money fines and house searches. 

That is your work, even if the Union in 16 years of Merkel achieved a powerful preparation. The time presses. The clearing away after two decades of the governments’ damage to Germany cannot wait. Six weeks are already wasted thanks to your delaying tactics, Herr Scholz. You ought to have immediately put the confidence question. 

And a further two months pass in the country until the notified date of the advanced Bundestag election. Yet the crisis does not wait: Neither the economic, financial and energy crisis in our own country, nor the escalating war danger in the Ukraine and the consequences of upheaval in the Near and Middle East. 

The change of power in Syria – of which nothing was spoken today – has from the German viewpoint two consequences: 

First, Syrian war refugees, who asserted to be fleeing from the Assad regime, who now celebrate on German streets in the tens of thousands the liberation of Syria, and march under Islamist war songs through Christmas markets and through our pedestrian zones, need to immediately return to the homeland. 

Second, needs be prevented that new streams of refugees, still in the shadow of the asylum storm of 2015, again bring into the country unrecognized, battle-ready soldiers, Islamists and djihadis. Required is an immediate stop of the reception, the naturalization and family re-unification of Syrians, and the preparation of return options. You however – you do this – belabor return options. Frau Faeser lets naturalization continue, and Frau Baerbock simply continues the visa issuance for the reunion of families. 

The election of Donald Trump as President of the U.S.A. opened a realistic opportunity of endng the death of hundreds of thousands in the Ukraine by means of a diplomatic settlement. What do you do? Instead of seeking the line to Washington and Moscow, where the key to peace lies, you and the wannabe Chancellor Merz make a pilgrimage to Kiev, and toss still more good money after that already burned. You play with the escalation danger. Frau Baerbock fantasizes of a mission of German troops in the Ukraine, while Herr Merz wants to risk a Third World War with the delivery of Taurus cruise missiles. It is nothing other. So as to for once perhaps explain it to you of the Union, because you somehow do not understand: German rockets in the Ukraine which can reach Moscow, including the dispatch of German soldiers for the servicing, makes Germany a direct war party and a target of threatening atomic war. The historic experience of the 20^th Century should be warning enough to never again draw Germany and Europe into a war. That is our historic responsibility. 

            Gunther Krichbaum (CDU/CSU): Written down from Moscow!

Who chooses the fate of Germany in the hands of Friedrich Merz, he chooses war, right honorable ladies and gentlemen. And he chooses not only war, but he also chooses Robert Habeck – we heard it today – he receives a further so, the continuation of the Green politics of patronization, of de-industrialization, of impoverishment, of economic incompetence and the politically desired energy emergency. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): Yet you want out of the EU!

The worst wrong decisions of the last year – combustion engine ban, atomic withdrawal, heating Diktat, open borders – this Bundestag would have been able to immediately taken back. The majorities for that would have been possible after the end of the coalition. That also would have been a very strong signal of hope for the citizens, for the economy and the Mittelstand. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): You should not speak on the economy!

You, Herr Merz and the Union, have prevented that. With the rubble of the the failed Ampel, you have formed an undemocratic scheming circle so as to interdict this parliament and to prevent that initiatives for a correction of the red-green chaos politics can be undertaken. The CDU has thus, in the worst and most serious crisis of this country, paralyzed this parliament – so much for your understanding of democracy and your problem-solving competence. The leftist dogma of the firewall, the exclusion of millions of voters, is more important to you than Germany’s welfare. If it is up to you, the citizens have no choice: When they vote for the CDU, they again receive a Green government. And you will be able to implement nothing of what you here today have demanded. That belongs to the truth! 

            Friedrich Merz (CSU/CSU): Just you wait!

You can even imagine that Economy Destruction Minister Robert Habeck becomes Economy Minister. Thus the man who with chicanery, manipulation and obviously false statements forced through the final nuclear power withdrawal, who destroys the German energy supply, who ruins the Mittelstand and drives the industry out of the country. The man who with his incompetence ruins this country. 

A black-green coalition of war-obsessed and leftist destroyers of Germany is the last thing that Germany needs. Germany needs a new beginning: Freedom and a free entrepreneurship, 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): Don’t you mouth that!

instead of climate socialism, an advantageous and secure energy supply instead of a transformation planned economy. And before all, we need reason instead of ideology, 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): Thus says the righteous!

and a politics in the German interest instead of war-mongering. And this new beginning will only be with the AfD. 

I am grateful. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, December 16, 2024, Confidence in Government

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/205, pp. 26525-26526. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

Following the elections for the 20^th German Bundestag, was very quickly clear that a government of SPD, FDP, Bundnis 90/Greens will yield no policy in the interest of Germany, and we were more than confirmed in that. 

In regards the decision of conscience of the now to follow vote on the Chancellor’s confidence question, numerous origins of the Ampel government’s failure need to be considered. 

Herr Chancellor, to express confidence in you would be counter to the interests of the economy and the citizens. This coalition wanted to combine programs which are simply incompatible. Thus were entirely obvious compromises in statutory form carried through which only served the Ampel’s stability. In that regard, the future of German industry was never at the central point. As a result are over 20,000 business insolvencies in the year 2024. Germany declines economically, and international investors, due to the enormous tax burden, still come only when robust state promotion means are promised. 

Along with the one-sided and aggressive climate policy, there remains from this Ampel only a state becoming ever larger, more interventionist and more restrictive of innovation, which devours the citizens’ taxes. Consent for restrictions was expensively purchased with promises and gifts of money, as the heating law only too well demonstrated. 

In that regard, the Free Democrats have committed the truly greatest betrayal of their voters. Who, for a securing of power, so far distances himself from his program, needs also show no tenacity in regards resignation. That is not only too late, Herr Lindner, but simply unbelievable, just as you are as a person. That, Herr Mützenich has today wonderfully summarized. 

Yet now we also need be so honest and say that politics is a long-term business. Every Federal government knowingly takes up the inheritance of its preceding or penultimate government. Accordingly, it’s simply just ridiculous when the CDU/CSU again shows no humility and not once develops its own ideas. You copy AfD demands: Solve the migration question by border controls and deportations, re-name Bürgergeld in a new basic security, abolish the supply chain due diligence law, reduce the business taxes. Herr Merz, the question is: With whom do you want to actually implement all that? With whom do you want to actually do all that? 

            Friedrich Merz (CDU/CSU): With you, certainly not. Certainly not with you! 

That, you did not say today in your unsympathetic speech, Herr Merz.

            Friedrich Merz (CDU/CSU): With you not! 

So as to make our country competitive again, of course need be developed the infrastructures which were neglected for decades: Structural, personal, and of course also financial. In that regard, it’s also about efficiency. Finally look at what you expended for particular posts. For years already, I call [anmahne] for an audit and it would have been your duty as Finance Minister, Herr Lindner, to finally realize that. We of course may no longer fleece those who create value in Germany. And we need not do it if the Federal government finally had come or would come to decisions with a future. 

A successful state provides an infrastructure – streets, railways, schools, hospitals, etc. – in which firms gladly settle and create workplaces and also can expand. If however these firms are alienated by ever more bureaucratic demands and expensive energy, they will go to another country, as we, ja, presently see. 

Herr Chancellor, I nevertheless hold one thing of yours to be good: Your Nein to a delivery of Taurus cruise missiles. For the war-lovers of the FDP, the CDU, the Greens, you were hesitant; for me in this case prudent. It is really not to be imagined if a Friedrich Merz had decided in your place. 

            Hermann Gröhe (CDU/CSU): Radio Moscow!

We would have been drawn much deeper into war. For there is, ja, peace in every cemetery. There we can, with a CDU/CSU-led government under Friedrich Merz, then visit our children. 

            Alexander Dobrindt (CDU/CSU): That is unbelievable!

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, we finally need a politics in German and European interest. And that is only with a Chancellor candidate Alice Weidel and with the Alternative für Deutschland. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Petr Bystron, November 26, 2024, Ukraine War

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2024)11-26(2-0018-0000.) 

Frau President. 

More weapons to the Ukraine – you do it for whom, actually? The colleague has just said it: The majority of Ukrainians want negotiations, want finally peace – and for that they will even renounce territory. This is now a current poll from the Ukraine. Ten million Ukrainians have voted with the feet. They have already left the country. Among which are 500,000 men of military service age, who do not want to die most miserably. An additional 500,000 certainly could no longer vote, since they are dead. Is that not enough for you? 

Even Zelenskyi now says he wants negotiations and a diplomatic solution. That is precisely what we demand for two years. All of you have insulted for two long years those who demanded this as Moscow’s agents, as Putin’s agents. So, is now Zelenskyi Putin’s agent? Of course not. He has only noted that the war is over. Trump has won the elections. There is an end to further weapons deliveries. You here want in all seriousness to further escalate and draw us all into a third world war – just before the war’s end? 

Here actually the question needs be asked: Whose interests do you at all represent? Not those of the Ukrainian people. Here, you only represent the weapons lobby, NATO and the secret services, since they conduct the war against Russia. Who now feel themselves already in a war against Russia legitimated by no one. No parliament at any time has voted for that. The people in the Ukraine do not want the war. Most Europeans do not want the war. So stop drawing us into the war. It is over. 

 

[trans: tem]

René Aust, November 14, 2024, European Defense

EU Parliament, Brussels, P10 CRE-PROV(2024)11-14(2-0018-0000). 

Frau President. 

In the past decades, the European Union has neglected to coordinate the member states’ security policy so that a maximum standard is guaranteed for our citizens. Whether it be the defense of the air space, the ending of mass migration or the protection of our raw material or commercial routes on the world seas, we are generally dependent on the structures of the United States of America. In none of these areas are we currently in the position to independently defend our security interests. 

Yet the EU itself is guilty of this dependence. It invests much money in ideological projects – from gender questions to climate protection – it worries about all possible things, but does not correctly worry about what is important. It is therefore necessary to dismantle [zurückzubauen] the European Union: Fewer competences, fewer duties, fewer expenditures. The European level should concentrate on fewer, yet decisive, duties for all; one of which would be a coordinated defense and security policy at the European level; for example, fewer weapons systems instead of 150 in the European Union today, few of which are comprehensively compatible for the armies. 

Yet it needs be clear: More security policy cooperation does not mean the creation of a common European army. It would be a nightmare if the EU bureaucrats and Frau von der Leyen were allowed to decide on the mission of German, French, Polish and other European soldiers. The further distant from the citizens are the decisions over war and  peace, the greater is the danger that decision makers thoughtlessly undertake a war – and nothing is further from normal life, from we citizens, than Ursula von der Leyen. To summarize: We say yes to more cooperation in defense and security questions, but a clear Nein to any phantasms of a European army. 

 

[trans: tem]

Joachim Wundrak, September 27, 2024, Bundeswehr, Iraq and the U.S.A.

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/189, pp. 24644-24645. 

Frau President. Frau Defense Commissioner. Herr Minister. Ladies and gentlemen.   

Again the Federal government puts forward a motion for the prolongation of a mandate which presents an inadmissible mingling of the U.S.-led operation Inherent Resolve for the combatting the “Islamic State” on one side and the NATO Iraq mission for advising and training the Iraqi armed forces on the other. As in previous years, we reject the presented draft mandate. 

First, since 2019 the IS has been militarily defeated. The further and long-term containment [Eindämmung] of IS is the duty of the sovereign states of Syria and Iraq. The continuing presence of foreign armed forces in Syria, without the agreement of Syria and without a UN mandate, merely on the basis of an explanation of the right to self-defense according to Article 51 of the UN Charter, is to be increasingly evaluated as counter to international law. This applies in especial measure to the presence of NATO partners U.S.A. and Turkey, as also the German Bundestag’s experts indicate. 

The Federal government has shown itself to be thoroughly aware of this problematic and thus two years ago withdrew from the mandate the mission of German aircraft in Syrian airspace. Yet support of violations of Syrian airspace by the allies with German contributions of air refueling and radar surveillance is also in our view illegal. 

The U.S.A. continues to maintain around two dozen support points with nearly 1,000 soldiers in Syria, against the will of the government in Damascus and for the withholding of the output of Syria’s rich oil fields. 

And the Iraqi government – we have just heard it – has since 2020 raised an objection to the presence of 2,500 American soldiers in its country. The Iraqi Defense Minister Thabat Al-Abbas has now publicly announced that the Iraqi and U.S. governments have agreed to a step-wise withdrawal of U.S. troops and their allies. The withdrawal of the soldiers of the U.S.-led counter Daesh coalition shall follow in two stages. The coalition wants to give up by September 2025 its support points in Bagdad and other parts of Iraq. By September 2026, the coalition shall also leave the autonomous Kurdish area in northern Iraq. This plan is still not confirmed by the U.S. government, yet nevertheless indicates the direction of the foreseeable development. 

What the withdrawal of U.S. armed forces along with allies from Iraq announced by the Iraqi government means for the continued presence of NATO in Iraq presently remains unclear. Nevertheless, the abrupt and chaotic termination of the missions in Afghanistan and Mali should be a warning for Germany and the Bundeswehr. For the signals in the Near and Middle East are stormy. An involvement of NATO and thus also of the Bundeswehr in armed conflict in Iraq is not acceptable. The constitutional core duty of the Bundeswehr is the defense of the country. And Germany is defended neither in the Hindukush nor in Iraq. The NATO mission outside of the alliance area we fundamentally reject. NATO should be consistently directed defensively [Die NATO sollte konsequent defensiv ausgerichtet werden]. 

For the named reasons, we therefore reject the presented motion. 

I thank you for your attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

Matthias Moosdorf, September 11, 2024, Foreign Office

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/184, p. 23905. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

It would be difficult to find differing highpoints in the Ampel’s comprehensive failures. Nothing however exceeds the incompetence of the German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock. Never before has the Republic lost so quickly and so much in reputation and influence. 

You have managed to trample underfoot German interests, to bend the law and deliver over your Ministry to a green nepotism business. Open-handed gifts of passports, even to presumed terrorists: Does that actually belong to a feminist foreign policy, or is it merely normal, Green, anti-German policy? Who demands of embassies and consulates to agree to visa applications despite incomplete or obviously falsified papers, would long since no more be minister in a country with a functioning fourth estate. 

The embarrassing return of the Benin Bronzes, the routine failure of flight readiness, the much too late and poorly organized departure of Germans from Israel, consolidates the picture of an amateurish office. With rhetorical slapstick, 360 degree turns, the “Bacon of Hope” in South Africa, panzer wars in the 19^th Century, or the SPD as the inventor of the social market economy, you moreover daily send signals of a lack of education in the land of Dichter und Denker. Your blot at the European Council, “We are fighting a war against Russia”, unleashed an outcry precisely because your Chancellor took care not to make us a warring party. 

Bruno Hönel (Greens): How was it with your delegation chairman and the German poets? Do you want to tell me what that was about?

Thank God no one anymore takes you seriously! 

Foreign countries look with increasing alienation at Germany; our diplomatic relations with the most important neighbors have been destroyed. In that regard, ntv says: 

“The relations with China and Turkey are…clearly stressed; important developing countries…are alienated.”

Our

“values-led Twitter diplomacy…along with an instruction and confrontation potential, leads to that ever more of the world’s doors are closed to you. When then they…are used, as presently in the case of Qatar/Hamas, Germany has scarcely anymore possibilities of influence.” 

Deborah Düring (Greens): Say for once, you also sit in the committee! Do you actually listen? Or another to you?

And ntv further says: 

            “Not Realpolitik, but attitude and media effect”

are at Baerbock’s central point. Instead of substance, make-up and stumbling. 

            Deborah Düring (Greens): Oh! 

Bruno Hönel (Greens): Does anything substantial come here, Herr Moosdorf?

Dear colleagues, the former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Melnyk has this week demanded of Olaf Scholz to make way for peace talks with Putin. That was and is the position of the AfD from the beginning: Diplomacy, de-escalation, the search for a settlement of interests and an understanding. And that applies for all parts of this world. 

            Boris Mijatović (Greens): That is noted, ja, in your speeches!

Germany thereby of course requires no further NATO expansion to all the world, no additional color revolutions, no compulsion of woke nonsense in countries which – in a picture of the Minister’s – are “hundreds of thousands of kilometers” distant from us. 

            Boris Mijatović (Greens): Hundreds of thousands!

The immediate limitation of illegal migration, the comprehensive deportation of all those obliged to depart, a return to a definition of German interests: That, we require. Away with the sanctions which harm only us! Back to peace and sovereignty for the nations of Europe! You who are not capable of that, who disdain Germany and sell its assets dirt cheap, should finally make free the way, you and your unspeakable dilettante government. Please finally resign! 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Peter Boehringer, September 13, 2024, Delayed Bankruptcy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/186, p. 24196. 

Frau President. 

Following this week’s debates, it is increasingly confirmed: The government attempts everything to drag itself through to the autumn of 2025. And furthermore, no clarity is created for the central questions of the draft budget. 

How perchance should one deal with the giant gaps in the two fully distinct military estimates? For one with the regular costs for a Bundeswehr for the defense of Germany: Legitimate expenditures, yet even today and first of all, quite unclearly financed in the finance planning time frame. For another with the expenditures for misguided foreign missions, primarily for the Ukraine war which in addition is not our war. Billions in costs for direct and indirect German participation in war, concealed by an EU peace facility, a 50 billion EU Ukraine facility and in a Federal budget by the so-called post-procurement [Nachbeschaffung] of material, which however means nothing other than the physical donation of Bundeswehr material for use at a foreign front. German weapons will be given to Zalenskyi and then post-procured; that is in x places in the budget: Pro forma for the Bundeswehr. Here, the Bundeswehr is misused as a transshipment warehouse for an unfortunate and lost war which needs to be solved diplomatically. 

Then your sustainability budget for 2024. That the Ampel on account of the fully “unexpected” worsened business cycle still brings in the autumn of the current year a sustainability budget is a novelty in the history of budgets. Thereby will now be obtained the indebtedness margin, increased 11 billion euros by purely technical formula, ten months after the issuance of the original budget. That is not serious, particularly as the Ampel embezzles transaction proceeds from the sale of the Bund’s silverware – over 4.1 billion euros –, simply illegal in the accounting, so that then the debt brake will no longer be observed for the fifth year in a row. 

Colleague Bury plainly said something correct, and for another reason is this budget again not constitutional. 

The Ampel here besides profits from the evil fruits of its own policy. Since of course the origins of the worsened economic activity were the years-long oppressive and fraudulent Corona preventive measures, the world’s dumbest energy policy, and the omnipresent, false incentive which you set above all with the planned economy CO₂ religion. Only that allowed you, on the basis of the somewhat questionable debts logic of Article 115 of the Basic Law, to today also obtain an extra 11 billion. 

There still continues to be some billions in risks in the budget which you yourselves have created. The risk of still further excess EEG compensations due to the planned economic guaranty price, the risk of a further exploding citizens’ wage [Bürgergeld], the risk of an abolition of the solidarity surtax, soon to be prescribed by the Constitutional Court, of course also the risk of a dramatically broken down economy. In the auto industry, that risk is already a reality. In July 2024, an orders breakdown of minus 29 percent vis-à-vis the previous year was to be written down; in regards E-autos, even a minus 69 percent in comparison with the previous year’s month. 

The Ampel apparently just plans precisely until the election date in September 2025. With you, it is therein clear, even if you deny it, that at the precise point after September 2025 there will be no more money. Any new Finance Minister will need to immediately order a budget embargo. Or then the Ampel or a successor perhaps proclaims yet again an emergency situation, so as to be able to conceal and compensate their own self-made budget emergency yet again by means of an ostensible external catastrophe? That is not academic. The coalition’s speakers in this week have explicitly not denied a new budget emergency on the basis of – cite Habeck – a historical struggle in the Ukraine. Whenever those governing trouble themselves over the pathos of endurance and historical dimensions, it becomes dangerous and expensive for the citizens. 

Yet then Herr Habeck also says what for an Economy Minister is a legendary sentence: The “Budget is not the center of the world”. Indecent numbers are thus to the Economy Minister all the same, – unbelievable! – all the same to him also is presence at this budget debate. 

The Ampel in any case is from the summer of 2025 no longer interested in the entire misery; Germany unfortunately still needs to be interested. In business, delayed bankruptcy is a criminal act; in this government, a common practice. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Alexander Gauland, July 4, 2024, NATO, Russia and Ukraine

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/181, pp. 23422-23423. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Yes, NATO is a success story. It has bestowed peace and security on its members for 75 years. And yes, we need NATO still today. With the Gorch Fock, Germany’s trade and seaways are not secured. Germany is not in the position to defend itself. NATO guarantees us protection and security. 

This should nevertheless not prevent us from putting a couple of questions. The collapse of the Warsaw Pact had offered the possibility involving an all-European security system with Russia. The opportunity was wasted. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): By whom, then?

Instead – and honesty is in order to state this – we sought to drive Russia in a weak phase out of Mitteleuropa. That might have been a geostrategic aim of the U.S.A. – it did not serve European peace. 

Ladies and gentlemen, in this house it is fairly senseless to recall that in the reunification negotiations declarations had been delivered – I name now only one – like that of the British Foreign Minister Douglas Hurd, which maintained – cite:

“There was no plan in NATO to admit in any form the countries of eastern and middle Europe into NATO.” 

I could continue the list with James Baker and with our former Foreign Minister Genscher – I know, the CDU contests this and ever again was heard, all of that is not right. 

            Joe Weingarten (SPD): You can stop! The remittance from Moscow comes!

Therefore I have also used this citation. 

I of course also know that the Warsaw Pact then still existed and corresponding developments lay in the future. Yet the question needs be allowed whether it would not have been smarter to include Russia in the changes taking place. 

President Bärbel Bas: Herr Dr. Gauland, do you allow an interim question or                            an interim remark?

No, I do not now allow that. 

The present war in the Ukraine has a long, previous history, and which also – and not in the least measure – has to do with the eastern expansion of the alliance. It is therefore important in this moment to recall: NATO is a European Atlantic alliance of defense. The Ukraine is not a part of NATO, just as little as, for that matter, Taiwan. 

            Joe Weingarten (SPD): Er tut mal für sein Geld!

NATO is thus not responsible for the integrity [Unversehrheit] of non-member states nor does it have duties to fulfill in the Indo-Pacific area. And, ladies and gentlemen, it is also no ideological bulwark of democrats against autocrats. 

We should always keep in view – and for this too is honesty in order – that the world’s largest democracy, India, does not share our viewpoint on the Ukraine conflict. In the world of Ranke’s Die Grossen Mächte, NATO is insurance coverage for Germany, and it is very good for that. It should not be an ideological spearhead in a fight against Russia, if we want to live in a peaceful world. 

I am grateful. 

 

[trans: tem]

Joachim Wundrak, June 13, 2024, Arms Exports to Israel

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/175, p. 22716. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. A special greeting first of all to our guests from Thüringen in the gallery. 

But to the matter. The motion put forward demands stopping German armaments exports to Israel and imposing a weapons embargo against Israel. Israel has been accused of committing violations of humanitarian international law and of human dignity by its type of war conduct against Hamas in the Gaza strip. 

In that regard is to be called to mind and retained that Hamas and Iran deny Israel’s right to exist and routinely call for the annihilation of Israel – as in the act committed by the brutal massacre of October 7 of the past year, and by a perfidious plan of Hamas, namely, to force the Arab world into a war against Israel on the basis of an expected high number of Palestinian victims as a result of a harsh Israeli reaction. This perfidious plan of the Hamas leadership in a first stage has unfortunately unfolded. The high numbers of Palestinian victims and the extensive destruction of infrastructure in the Gaza strip are tolerable only with difficulty. The developing humanitarian crisis in Gaza has shaken the world. 

In the course of this war against Hamas, Israel has raised up against itself many critics due to its harsh and uncompromising way of proceeding, as the proposed motion rightly describes. And the protective power, the U.S.A., has increasingly criticized the Israeli government and demanded that international law be observed and disproportionate war conduct be avoided. Finally, the U.S.A. has evidently even imposed a delivery stop for one type of munition, namely heavy bombs, so as to compel a moderation on the Israeli war leadership. To what extent the Federal Government [of Germany] has joined in this delivery stop of specified weapons or munitions has not been publicly communicated. 

With the Security Council decision, reached a few days ago, for a three-stage armistice plan, to which Israel agreed, there since long is now hope in a rapid end of the death and the destruction. We may nevertheless not ignore that Israel is existentially threatened also on its northern border. Hezbollah, armed to the teeth, presents an incomparably higher threat for Israel than does Hamas. 

Israel remains reliant on its military strength which is dependent on German armaments exports. We therefore reject the proposed motion. 

I thank you for your attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, June 26, 2024, EU and NATO

German Bundestag, June 26, 2024, Plenarprotokoll 20/177, pp. 22860-22861. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

We need security and cooperation on the continent of Europe. To create and maintain peace –  that will be the duty of the coming years and decades. For that, cooperative structures and alliances are required which delineate and represent the interests of the members. It is precisely these interests which are changing. 

It is the national interests which the peoples formulate vis-à-vis their state and inter-state actors. The maintenance and observance of these interests are the foundation for a successful and trustworthy cooperation at bilateral and multilateral levels. Only when the citizens are called upon, and feel themselves attended to, will they accept the institutions and the actors behind them. That is the reason for the slap, Herr Scholz, which you received at the European election; for that is precisely your problem. 

We are thus well into the midst of themes of today’s debate on the European Union and the North Atlantic pact. Both institutions should cooperate and guarantee security, freedom and prosperity in Europe. For both institutions in the time of their formation, there were counter-proposals on the other side, thus in the East. These presented a counter-proposal, but also a counterweight. 

In the time of the Cold War was placed right in the middle mutual deterrence – and by means of nuclear weapons. Today we need to re-evaluate whether these measures of force still present a promising and, before all, a negotiable [vermittelbar] strategy for pacification of conflicts. I think that is at least questionable. 

What nevertheless still remains for us, and what we should much more vigorously use, are the possibilities of diplomacy. Exchange, understanding and the willingness of individuals to understand, as well as opposed interests, will decide on war and peace. He who stops negotiating has already lost. For months, we of the AfD delegation seek to recruit for diplomacy and negotiations. Why do you not, as Chancellor and as Federal government, actively push this forward, Herr Scholz? Even today in your speech was there little of this to be heard. 

As a result, valued colleagues, both institutions – the EU and NATO – in their present form need to ask themselves the warranted question of their right to exist [Daseinberechtigung]. For quite a while, this question could be suppressed. The current security and economic policy problems in Europe however demand a discussion of precisely this problematic. 

The war still continuing in the Ukraine shows how urgently Europe needs a military alliance – no question – which represents, before all, our interests. In this difficult time becomes clear who with foresight formulates and represents our interests. A NATO in its present form can unfortunately no longer do this. Yet we are part of this alliance. Why does not the Federal government use this present status to pursue German interests? Why do not the partners help us  to bring about a clarification of the terror attack on our critical energy infrastructure? That would be the first demand that should be directed to authentic partners and friends – as we name them. That would besides, Herr Scholz, increase the credibility of which you always speak. Instead, the Ampel promotes the arming of Europe. In that regard, not a word on the NATO headquarters for the Ukraine in the middle of Germany, neither from Herr Scholz nor from you, Herr Merz. Thus is asked: To whom in that regard did you give the acknowledgement [Bekenntnis]? Exactly: To those who still have not withdrawn their nuclear weapons from Germany. You thereby fasten us still more to the maintenance of their military outposts. Better use the EU Council presidency of Viktor Orbán, and invite all warring parties to peace negotiations in Germany. That would be a sign of sovereignty. 

And in this connection: We need a Bundeswehr which can defend our country. You have bullied from the Bundestag a special fund – that is, special debts – in the sum of 100 billion euros. Much was promised, but nothing much has been realized. Quite the opposite: You prefer to demand the delivery of weapons in a war zone. Yet German weapons may serve the self-defense, not the support of foreign wars. 

The citizens were once made to believe that our freedom can be defended in the Hindu Kush. With which results? Destruction, suffering and a flow of migration which primarily endangered Germany’s domestic security. In that regard, you were often guilty of resolute action. The goal needs to be the immediate stop of uncontrolled immigration. Secure borders and consistent refusals are thereby indispensable. Simply look at the criminal statistics. There you see which problems we have with immigrants direct from Afghanistan. And we need no trivialization of the facts, as Federal Interior Minister Frau Faeser does almost weekly. The consistent deportation of culpable persons must be a consensus even so as for the rejected asylum applicants, ladies and gentlemen. 

The basic prerequisite for that is maintaining diplomatic relations with these countries; whether or not you wanted to recognize the governments is quite another matter. Yet so long as you apportion governments into first, second and additional classes, you will thereby run into scant success. As a result, you will again be disembarked, or left standing in the airplane. That is meanwhile the disastrous picture of Germany in the world which you leave behind. We are meanwhile simply ridiculed in foreign countries. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): On account of you!

Those are the present facts of your foreign policy. 

Year after year, you manage a sell-out of German interests. Your short-sighted policy disarranges growing bilateral relations and even divides the European Union without which you could not implement your policy in Germany; keyword: “Heating law”, or also the so-called climate policy. 

With the EU’s assistance, NATO’s security interests shall be implemented through the backdoor in the Ukraine and in Moldavia. I ever again say it: The European Union is not the extended arm of NATO, and is never allowed to become it. With all understanding for the individual interests, an escalation of the conflict and a prolongation of the war cannot be excluded. That applies to avoiding it. 

All of these are your duties. We would support you in that regard. You have the responsibility for Germany and its citizens. Finally do justice to this! 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, June 6, 2024, Immigration, Economy and War

German Bundestag, June 6, 2024, Plenarprotokoll 20/172, pp. 22137-22139. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable Herr Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

The foregoing speeches completely by-pass the core of the problem. The Mannheim knifeman ought not to be here. The bloodbath on the Mannheim market place brings to public awareness the decline of security in public areas and the murderous consequences of an irresponsible migration policy. 

The German state can no longer fulfill its obligation to protect the citizens and their rights. First, an Islamist attacker killed a young, on-duty, German police officer. A young father of a family could yet live, Herr Stürzenberger might not lie seriously wounded in hospital, if the authorities had fulfilled their duties and immediately deported the Afghan knifeman to his home after his illegal entry. 

The Mannheim police murderer, who came to Germany over ten years ago as an ostensibly unaccompanied minor and despite rejected asylum demands remained in the country all the years at cost to the taxpayers, is a prime example of the migration policy failures of this government and the CDU/CSU-led preceding government. It is a product of the politically willed loss of control over our borders. It is the product of the millions of tolerated abuses of the asylum system for illegal immigration into our country. It is the result of a fully out of control, pretend  asylum. And it is no single instance. He is one of many assailants and violent criminals who have come to our country as supposed refugees. 

The result is in the criminal statistics: Forty percent of suspects are foreign citizens – three times more than their portion of the entire population. In regards the exploding crimes of violence, the portion of foreigners is four times higher. Asylum seekers from the countries of origin of Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Turkey, are over-proportionately charged with a high criminality;  that is a fact. Since 2021, the number of knife attacks has increased by a third. There were almost 15,000 knife attacks last year, almost 40 per day. And in that regard, much of the knife crime  included in the State statistics, falls under the table. In the past year alone was registered the horror number of 761 gang rapes. That is more than two of these horrific crimes every day in our country, 111 in the City of Berlin alone. 

Half of the suspects are foreign citizens. How many suspects with a German passport have a migration background is still not recorded. Double and multiple citizenship counts in the criminal statistics as German. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): Yes, they also are German. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): They are German!

That shows that even the horror numbers of the police criminal statistics are still considerably distorted. 

From the collapse of the domestic security can there be only one reasonable consequence, and that is a fundamental migration change, and indeed immediately. In clear text: Law and statute need to be consistently applied. The borders must be closed. Illegal entry must be prevented. Those without residency rights, primarily criminals and Islamist fanatics, must be deported, and certainly also to Afghanistan. 

Yet you do not think of ending your fatal policy. You do the opposite and naturalize in quick processes precisely these Afghans, Syrians, Iraqis and Turks. While citizens and colleagues still mourn the murdered police officer, and already you again speak of facilitating the immigration from Islamic countries and let in still more migrants from Afghanistan, you put off the victims, the traumatized relatives and terrorized citizens with empty phrases. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): You are instrumentalizing the victims! 

– That the interruptions come straight out of your delegation, from the Greens, does not surprise me.

You relativize the threat and, with unbearable trivialization, place religious fanatics on a level with drunken howlers, as your party chairman Ricarda Lang has done. You abuse the resources of the security authorities so as to proceed against oppositionists instead of addressing the greatest and most urgent danger for our domestic security: The imported Islamist extremism and its extreme left assailants. That is not only irresponsible, but cynical. Your hypocrisy is deadly. Your ideology of open borders and the unrestricted, uncontrolled mass immigration is based on illusion and lies which cost human lives. 

Your migration policy does not defend those politically persecuted, but criminals and asylum cheaters. You play with the lives and health of the citizens. You take from them their right to freedom and security in the public space. And with reprisals, tricks and defamation, you threaten those who remonstrate and name the abuses by name. That is also shown by the devious knife attack on our common council candidate Heinrich Koch in Mannheim. 

You leave in the lurch police officers who, with suppressed rage over your irresponsibility, must take the heat and, before all, are ready with their lives to stand up for the defense of law and freedom, like the murdered Rouven Laur. Yet you rob the citizens not only of their domestic security, you also take from them the economic and financial security and hard-earned prosperity. Inflation, rising charges and energy prices politically driven to the heights by a green transformation force the working population into a spiral of cold expropriation. And Habeck, the De-Industrialization Minister, drives the productive industry out of the country. Businesses weekly report massive elimination of positions, and displacement of production to foreign countries or insolvencies. The attraction of Germany as a business venue rapidly declines. The exodus of the flagship BASF is only one of countless alarm signals. The number of business closures in the past year has climbed to a gigantic 176,000 and strikes the productive core of our economy. 

You expend untold billions on the illusion of being able in a few decades to influence the climate; yet for the securing against real dangers in the here and now there is no money. German tax money goes to all the world, the flood and catastrophe protection in our own country is neglected and skimped to ruin; that belongs to the truth. And then you run in rubber boots to photo ops and promise state aid to those affected by the flood catastrophe. In Ahrtal, they are still waiting, after more than two years, for your state aid. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Where then is your protection concept?

While you destroy the economic foundation of our prosperity and allow the domestic security to erode, you sleepwalk to the edge of a Third World War. The war in the Ukraine goes into its third year. A military victory of the Ukraine is illusionary. The Ukraine cannot win this war; that belongs to the truth. The search for a diplomatic solution is in this situation the order of the hour. There must be a diplomatic solution, and not the endless prolongation of death as a result of your weapons deliveries. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): The AfD recommends capitulation!

Retired General Harald Kujat, the Bundeswehr’s former Inspector-general and chairman of the NATO military committee, expressed the fear that the Ukraine War could become the ur-catastophe of the 21^st Century. 

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP): The Alternative für Deutschland is the ur-catastrophe! 

            Markus Frohnmaier (AfD): Frau Zimmermann, when then do you volunteer?

And I am of this opinion. The irresponsible escalation rhetoric of the agitators in this government coalition and from the ranks of the Union has contributed an essential part to this danger, and daily the amnesiac situation is intensified. 

            President Bärbel Bas: Please come to a conclusion, Frau Weidel.

Yet we know that at the end of any war is the peace. Thus why prolong the bloodshed and suffering which increase the immense danger of a major war? Commit yourselves instead finally for peace negotiations, and bring the parties to the table, 

            President Bärbel Bas: Frau Weidel, come to a conclusion.

so as to end the dying and before all to avoid the danger of a Third World War. 

I am grateful. 

            Dorothee Bär: That was for TikTok!

 

[trans: tem]