Roland Hartwig, April 22, 2021, Europe and Ukraine

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/224, pp. 28489-28490.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. Dear guests in the gallery. Dear viewers.

Many times, a glance in the past shows us the way in the future. Until the 20th Century, a cultural unity existed within the European continent. We were the scientific, cultural, political and economic center of the world.

            Manuel Sarrazin (Greens): Who is “we”?

The unity of the European culture shattered with the First World War and the October Revolution in Russia. The Second World War brought the definite descent of Europe.

            Manuel Sarrazin (Greens): And then you came!

In the year 1900, the portion of Europeans in the world population still lay at 25 percent, today it contributes less than 10 percent and it continually sinks further.

In economics and research we meanwhile have fallen far behind the United States and Asia. And we have lost influence politically. In Europe, west of the former Iron Curtain, a rapid decay of the European culture is to be lamented.

            Nils Schmid (SPD): What?

Today’s current affairs hour is a symptom of this downfall.

For eight years we have an armed conflict in the middle of Europe which for many has become the norm and with which we occupy ourselves again today only because it threatens to escalate.The Federal government almost always has an unbalanced, ideologically colored view of this world; Herr State Minister Roth has again today delivered to us a very impressive example of that. The one-sided reference to Russian troop movements in the title of the current affairs hour drawn up by the coalition delegations is an example of that. From the government and from the media  there is as good as nothing to be heard of the present NATO troop movements of around 30,000 soldiers.

We live today in a climate of political correctness and of repressive tolerance. Your tolerance, ladies and gentlemen, nevertheless ends immediately when others – like us – do not follow your opinion.Today’s debate again proves this and, before all things, your polemical heckling [Zwischenrufe] proves this. What does not correspond to the decreed Zeitgeist in Germany will be ostracized, oppressed and attacked.

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): You sound like Heike Hänsel!

That pertains to the relations with our own citizens exactly so as to those with our European neighbors: The Poles, the Hungarians, the Russians.

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): Exactly!

Here will be created quite purposeful caricatures out of which then arise images of enemies. You then let it appear to be legitimate to compel others to your own will with sanctions. And if that does not help, then in Germany it is believed necessary to forbid and to externally display military strength.

            Johann David Wadephul (CDU/CSU): Now you are speaking of Russia!

It was once otherwise, and we of the AfD delegation are working so that it will again be otherwise.

Europe was once united in its national variety and not separated in its distinctions. There was a positive curiosity about these distinctions; for all that, they make up the richness of our continent. Europe was once more than a common market and a military bridgehead of the U.S.A. It was a spiritual project [geistiger Entwurf] which united the European peoples on a basis of their common heritage and development, founded on the fundamentals of democracy first developed in Greece, Roman law, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment which again, alas, are threatened to be lost, and the Germans’ love of freedom. This love of freedom unites us with the countries of eastern Europe which stand up for their independence against many challenges, and now against a centralized European Union.

            Johann David Wadephul (CDU/CSU): Good to hear!

We want a Europe of fatherlands and the reconstruction of the centralized Union into a European economic community as it existed successfully for decades. The problem: Besides the loss of the idea of the state is also to be decried the increasing loss of the European idea. As a consequence, 30 years after the fall of the Wall, the European space remains partitioned into two camps opposed to one another.

            Peter Beyer (CDU/CSU): Mein Gott!

It is especially dramatic that this line of separation now runs through Ukraine. The origins of Russia lie in Kiev. The peoples of both countries are closely bound to one another by innumerable familial ties.

            Alexander Gauland (AfD): Ja!

Here, what belongs together is violently separated. We may in absolutely no case follow the voices of those who now want to demolish the last bridges and to further spin the spiral of military escalation.

Europe will not again arise from the rubble of a third great war. We therefore urgently require a new start in Europe with the inclusion of Russia. In the long term, there will be security in Europe only with, and not against, Russia.

Many thanks.

            Manuel Sarrazin (Greens): You have said nothing of the Super League, Herr                            Hartwig. Hermann der Cherusker, he was a good guy!

 

[trans: tem]

 

           

 

           

 

 

 

Jörn König, April 22, 2021, Telecommunications Law

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/224, pp. 28402-28403.

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear viewers in the galleries and at the screens.

The government has put forward a draft law which shall modernize telecommunications. As I said twelve months ago at the first reading: “It is going forward, but by pussy-footing.” For the first time might services and performance factors be described with a functional assessment [Ansatz] and not alone with, verbatim, “a technical assessment”. The Federal government thereby limps behind the market by only some ten years. For the market long since implemented the functional description. How otherwise shall technology-open be described than by what was wanted in performance?  

Yet some positives. My suggestion to describe as more functional and more technology-open the term “networks with high capacity”: Yes, this suggestion was implemented. There is not only fibre optic. Unfortunately, there are however again no concrete statements on broadband and availability in the draft law. The real music thus plays further in the appendices to the law and in the general decrees and determinations of the Federal network agency.

As already mentioned, there is among some colleagues a preference for fibre optic. Yet simply inquire of various of the larger savings banks. Many have again pulled out the self-same Fiber- to-the-Desk because no Power-over-Ethernet was possible. That is the practical experience. With this fixation on one technology, you remind me of Erich Honecker, who also thought that with one, single technology he had achieved the final breakthrough; he was thinking at that time of the 1 megabit chip. The finale appeared fully otherwise. The freedom came and we too require freedom in the area of technology and telecommunications.

The Chancellor also wanted no freedom and therefore in the years 2010, 2012, 2017, thus three times, declared IT and broadband to be an executive matter – thus again one of an attempted state breakthrough in technology. What however has really happened this time? In the year 1999, Siemens Mobile received a large contract from China for the construction of a mobile phone network. Today, we here in Germany are considering whether we want to deliver ourselves over to a Chinese state concern, Huawei, so as to receive a modern mobile phone network. We have for long warned of it. Of Siemens Mobile, there is already for long no more talk. In the construction of broadband in Europe, we are in place 25, Herr Lämmel, behind economic powers like Slovenia and Latvia. What a testament of poverty for the world’s fourth largest economy!

Right honorable Federal government, it pains me that I must say to you: Kindly leave this, this you certainly cannot do.

What we need, among other things, is a defined reliability [Ausfallsicherheit]; for, since the conversion to IP telephony, the end customers’ telephones are automatically dead with a failure of electricity. The earlier, the better, and herein we again need that the telephony functions even during an electricity failure.

            Gustav Herzog (SPD): The AfD is for the dial phone!

Not everyone has a mobile phone. Believe me, with this energy transformation, electricity failures are guaranteed. In paragraph 2 of the draft law, where it concerns emergency provisions, need be laid down reliability or availability. The penalties, when a public network operator violates the emergency provision duties of §§183 ff., of one million euros maximum are much too little. That is peanuts for such businesses.  

To the draft law were associated a total of five motions. We will, in reference to the issues, vote against, vote for, reject and abstain. Prepare to be surprised. This draft law however in its present form, we reject. It is too little and much too late.

And again, dear Federal government: Your balance in threefold executive matters:

First: Place 25 in broadband construction.

Second: There is no longer a domestic telecommunications manufacturer.

Third: There exists a real danger of becoming dependent on Chinese technology.

Fourth: We are already today technologically dependent on the U.S.A.

You simply cannot do it. It could be thought that you are systematically destroying the infrastructure and capability of Germany.

Many thanks.

 

 

[trans: tem]

 

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]

 

  

Martin Reichardt, April 23, 2021, Family Policy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/225, pp. 28664-28665. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

With Wednesday’s debate on the infection defense law, the AfD has documented that we are the only delegation which stands for the people’s freedom and self-responsibility in Germany. We are the only ones who want to defend our children from forced testing and obligatory masks. We are also the only party which stands for the traditional family of father, mother and children. This is not regressive, as we could hear recently in the public broadcasting, but most profoundly modern and a pledge for Germany’s future.

The AfD wants a real paradigm change in family policy.

            Grigorious Aggelidis (FDP): Back to the Kaiser Reich!

We want to place families at the center. Families in Germany need to again be valued; for they are the contributors [Leistungsträger] of our society. With the children, they are growing Germany’s future. Each morning they get to work; they thereby pay taxes and duties over-proportionately. We need to say to these fathers and mothers: You are the foundation of our statecraft.

The consequences of the demographic catastrophe become ever more obvious. For half a century Germany realizes one of the lowest birth rates worldwide. Instead of conducting an activist family policy, the government sets up mass immigration. 2 million people in the last six years have immigrated by means of the asylum system. This failed demographic policy of our government has cost billions of euros – money which is lacking for our families; money which might have been applied to a sustained promotion of families.

The AfD therefore demands that the Federal government introduce a family splitting: A splitting by which the number of children is yielded in the income tax and which will also relieve the single parent; a splitting by which an average family with three children simply pays no more corresponding taxes. For we also require a strong middle-class and middle-class families which again dare say yes to children and families.

Families with one or two children should also profit and we therefore want a family splitting and a child benefit [Kindergeld]. We need strong middle-class families which can again afford their own four walls. Of the 30 to 40 year olds, only every fourth lives in his own dwelling.

Sebastian Brehm (CDU/CSU): You have rejected the new home child benefit [Baukindergeld]!

And why? Because the insatiable state digs deep into the pockets of these people! The families are the milk cow of the nation.

…

Beyond that, we of the AfD wanted in this legislative period to relieve families as a whole, in that we have demanded an added value tax privilege of 7 percent on children’s products. And this has been rejected here by all delegations.

            Sebastian Brehm (CDU/CSU): Just not financed.

In 1988, the experts’ council for family questions demanded a family splitting. It demanded  family starter loans whereby families can better manage the early phase and be supported. None of these demands have been implemented in the last 30 years. Invariable only is the structural disregard for the social relations vis-à-vis families in Germany, and that is sad.

With our motions [Drucksachen 19/28763, 28795] for the introduction of a baby welcome loan and an interest-free child credit and for family splitting, we want to reduce this structural disregard vis-à-vis families. They should be at the center of all political management. I am happy with the family-friendly consultations in committee.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]