Jan Nolte, April 21, 2021, Libya

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/223, pp. 28325-28326.

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Lately, there was for once gladdening news from Libya. A government of national unity has been formed and this shall conduct elections on December 24. It can only be truly hoped that it also succeeds and nothing intervenes. And yes, the diplomatic efforts of the Federal government have had their part therein.

Operation Irini, however, on which we speak today, does not have the potential to make a substantial contribution to the improvement of the situation in Libya; we have distinctly seen it in the last year. We simply have no means of searching ships if the nation of the ship’s flag refuses. Thus no weapons smuggler can be arrested. Operation Irini thus becomes a largely symbolic mission. Could we arrest the weapons smuggler, it would besides work out very asymmetrically, essentially into a party to a conflict.Yet we cannot do it. Operation Irini is a toothless tiger. In addition exists the potential that Operation Irini becomes a pull factor for illegal migration, with all negative accompanying aspects. On that account, we will reject it today.  

The principle which one wants to employ here is the principle of naming and shaming. One wants to name and expose before the world public anyone who brings weapons to Libya. Yet here we again arrive at what I have already addressed: If a ship is not boarded so as to establish that weapons were being smuggled, then naturally there is also no basis for naming a weapons smuggler before the world public. The entire initiative of naming and shaming naturally does not function.

This was nevertheless tested a bit with Erdogan. Because he has refused searches of his ships, one has nevertheless attempted to employ the principle of naming and shaming. Yet let us look at the past year. Does anyone have the impression that Erdogan ate humble pie [kleine Brötchen gebacken] or in any way had been intimidated? I do not have the impression. He has behaved aggressively towards Greece, he has behaved aggressively towards France, and when the EU Commission President was with him, he off-handedly set her in the farthest corner of his sofa and acted not especially abashed.

Thus, this initiative does not function. Despite this, we must naturally remain in Libya; since it is not clear that the peace holds. Khalifa Haftar is not represented in the new government, as he had desired, and the Libyan army announces that weapons from Egypt have been delivered to him. Yet – I have already said it many times – Operation Irini is here not the right tool. Here, one must continue to be active diplomatically, to speak with the actors, not only within Libya; the previous speaker has plainly addressed this. There are states outside Libya which have interests in Libya, which deliver weapons. We finally need, certainly in relation to the weapons deliveries to General Haftar, a means of stopping this, and naturally the mercenaries must be withdrawn from Libya.

For a corresponding diplomatic proceeding, the Federal government also has the support of the AfD. But not for this mission, which is a toothless tiger and in which is contained the potential of developing into a pull factor.

 

[trans: tem]

 

  

Jan Nolte, March 3, 2021, Bundeswehr in the Mediterranean

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/214, pp. 26964-26965.

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Every year we speak here on Operation Sea Guardian, the proponents of this mission expound on the general importance of the fight against terror and arms smuggling and emphasize how important are secure seaways. These general positions normally cannot be contradicted,

           Daniela De Ridder (SPD): Then don’t you do it!

yet do not have much to do with Operation Sea Guardian.

For we speak, ja, every year again anew on the balances of these missions. And it also now appears that we still have seen no terrorists in the Mediterranean,

            Daniela De Ridder (SPD): Ever heard of deterrence?

that in the Operation Sea Guardian area still no arms smuggler has been apprehended, and that the Federal government besides does not have any knowledge of other threats to security in the Operation Sea Guardian area.

For 20 years now we are there in place, if we figure in the predecessor Operation Active Endeavour. Despite that, the Federal government apparently wants to continue to remain there; it appears, as you also do not want to enter into the slightest risk, it will, for all that, still in some way happen. When one hears this and is aware that here in our capital city, in Berlin, clan bosses decide whether there is to be war or peace, and not the police, then one can only wish that one, fine day the Federal government fights criminality here in Germany with the same élan as we now already do outside of Germany.

The explanation for why there are no arms smugglers and no terrorists there, I have plainly also heard from my preceding speaker – she sat here again –, is plainly deterrence; of which all are afraid and on that account none came. That we also have never seen the enemy on whose account we are actually there, may be a sign of how good the mandate is. Yet that cannot be a basis for a member of the Bundestag to vote in favor here. That is certainly completely arbitrary. That would mean that in the future we no more only decide on a mandate because of an enemy who is there, but also because of an enemy who is not there, yet could still perhaps sometime emerge purely hypothetically.

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Such nonsense!

If this theory is to be believed, one please needs to consider: Sea Guardian pertains to ships which, besides those in the Mediterranean, are in transit. We could thus today end Operation Sea Guardian, save ourselves 3 million euros per year, and there are exactly these same ships in the Mediterranean as before, and the bad boys still tremble at the knees on account of our ships – all works wunderbar.

If the text of the motion is read, then one also has the impression that the Federal government itself does not exactly know how they should establish the value of the operation. Of that, there is an example as follows: The contribution to the building-up of capacity in the Mediterranean littoral states. And what does it consist of? We have held general information reports in Algeria, Morocco and Egypt. – Ja, that might be quite nice, but I believe for the building-up of capacity in the Mediterranean littoral states, better concepts nevertheless occur to us; for that, we do not need Operation Sea Guardian.

Also, joint exercises are to be emphasized as a result of Sea Guardian. It can only therein be called to mind: Multinational exercises are entirely top-notch; yet for that, no mandate is needed.

As a result: We do not need Operation Sea Guardian. We can save ourselves 3 million euros per year. With that, we can buy our soldiers good equipment. We as the Alternative für Deutschland do not here today vote in favor.

I now still have 28 seconds: Frau De Ridder, I can in one sentence go into what you have said here – I have it only approximately in memory: In regards the defense of soldiers, you somehow stand on the side of the soldiers. – A hypocrisy before the Lord, really!

           Michael Grosse-Brömer (CDU/CSU): Now you are done!

No longer block the arming of drones, then can the soldiers be protected. It so appears as if in an operational country some tragedy needs to occur so that the SPD sees the political momentum and finally summons up the courage for a decision. Defend our soldiers and don’t duck out!

            Daniela De Ridder (SPD): Your populism is cheap! Cheap!

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

           

 

 

Jan Nolte, May 15, 2020, Jewish Military Ministry

Jan Nolte

Jewish Military Ministry

German Bundestag, May 15, 2020, Plenarprotokoll 19/161, p. 20081

[Jan Nolte is an Alternative für Deutschland Bundestag member from the western German state of Hessen. He is a petty officer in the German navy. He here responds to a draft law proposed by the government for the purpose of establishing a Jewish rabbinate in the Bundeswehr.]

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Jews have always been a part of the German armies. They helped break the power of Napoleon at Waterloo, fought in the Franco-Prussian [Deutsche-Französischen] War which ultimately ended in the founding of the Reich in 1871, and threw themselves into the material battles of the First World War. And even though the criminal regime of the National Socialists had seized control of the German states, a regime which in gruesome ways sinned against the Jews, 150,000 of them fought in the Wehrmacht, many so as to avoid a worse fate for themselves.

Yet even before, there was anti-semitism; that is clear. It was for a very long time in Europe a socially acceptable standard which today is scarcely to be explained. It is therefore good that today in Germany we have 180,000 brave men and women in the Bundeswehr – and some 300 of them are Jews – who defend our free, democratic fundamental order and who stand for a Germany in which no one can any longer be persecuted on account of his religion or his beliefs.

That in the infrastructure planning for the Jewish rabbinate there nevertheless must be consideration given to bulletproof glass shows that we in Germany today are not where we ought to be. On that account also is the return of military rabbis after nearly one hundred years an important signal. To anti-semitism will be opposed a clear message: That the Jews in Germany have our support, that they are strong constituents of the armed forces and of society, and that we will not tolerate attacks upon them.

            (A shout from Helin Evrim Sommer (Linke)).

I hear comment here. Anyone can readily put a question. That is no problem.

            Helin Evrim Sommer (Linke): No, we waive that.

Yet it ought not to stop at such signals. In debates like this, it also must be said that, on account of political correctness, the origins of anti-semitism unfortunately oftentimes have not been completely addressed. Obviously there is right-wing extremist terrorism, besides that of leftist extremism, and it is completely clear that there must be proceedings against that. But the fact is that for 81 percent of the victims of anti-semitism the perpetrator is a Moslem, and of that one does not speak so readily.

            Marcus Grübel (CDU/CSU): The criminal statistics unfortunately do not 

            coincide.

A deeply rooted hatred of Jews often prevails in Moslem societies, and if we seriously intend to fight against anti-semitism and really wish to help, then we first must have the courage to name the complete problem, and not only a portion thereof.     

That a religious military ministry is now to be available to our Jewish soldiers is a proper and important thing. The extreme experiences that a soldier can have during his time in the service requires that he defend not only his body but his soul against injury. The soldier needs someone in whom he can confide and who is also an adviser if – and this also belongs to the reality of being a soldier – he is confronted with the possiblity of his own death.

I dedicate the last part of my speech to Corporal Sergei Motz, the recent anniversary of whose death was May 11. Corporal Motz is the first German soldier killed in action since the Second World War; he fell in Afghanistan and he belongs to the Orthodox Church. In this regard, I wish to direct an appeal to you, Frau Minister –it may sound as if I was pushing on an open door: That perhaps we find as good a solution for the Orthodox soldiers as we here now put forward for the Jewish soldiers.

The AfD will vote in committee for this draft law.

[Translated by Todd Martin]