Berengar Elsner von Gronow, May 19, 2021, Defense Report – Procurement

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/229, pp. 29290-29291.

Today I may for the fourth time speak following the Defense Commissioner’s report, and yearly greets the groundhog. Was that already a reason for interjected bleating?

The report ever again concerns itself with the same themes and similar content, without really being able to recognize more than gradual changes or – and one must be able to expect this – improvements. The Defense Commissioner’s reports, for example, for years deal with the theme of procurement. Since tomorrow I will speak in this connection with our soldiers, let me in an exemplary way concentrate on it here.

As did previously her predecessor, the Defense Commissioner attests that for the Bundeswehr is required more flexibility, more awareness of responsibility, and clearer decisions structures. Frau Minister, you predecessor already took up this theme with the inclusion of legions of consultants. We then needed to prepare and re-work this in the scope of a protracted investigating committee. Today we must confirm that under you this theme unfortunately has still not essentially improved and will not up to the end of the legislative period. What then comes could be still worse.

The Bundeswehr still has in use major equipment the life cycle of which is actually long exceeded and which urgently needs to be replaced with modern systems, those which do not arrive or much too late, as for example the naval long-range reconnaissance or the heavy transport helicopter. Much too frequently, the Bundeswehr needs to pursue a compulsory deficiency management, as in regards the Puma or the armed types of the A400M.

In her report, the Defense Commissioner also states that in the Bundeswehr the need may be great for armed drones and regrets that, after ten years, policy is still discussing this theme, even though a fact-based and transparent debate has already long since taken place. I can only agree that it is nevertheless your SPD which forbids the urgently required protection of our soldiers.

Let us also speak of a lack of protection in connection with our alliance obligations, especially in regards the VJTF [Very High Readiness Joint Task Force]. After the year 2012, as the thereto well drawn up Army air defense was without real necessity dissolved and the remainder with little sense transferred to the Luftwaffe, there opened up a considerable capability gap in the protection of armored and non-armored forces. How then, for instance in a scenario of an alliance defense of the Baltic states, shall be guaranteed the protection of German forces which in case of ground movement therein will be attacked from the air?

Instead of seeking pragmatic initiatives for the solution, like the transfer of the capabilities from the Luftwaffe back to the Army, along with reconstruction of the service branch out of the available strength of personnel and material, plus a completion with modern follow-on systems, the Luftwaffe and the Army indulge in competence wranglings and bombastic definitions. Beyond that, the last available air defense tanks, along with accessories and munitions, are sold to a third state outside of NATO. These shall be lessons from the year 2014?

That in such a scenario armed drones would also be thoroughly helpful is for anyone comprehensible and clear. Lately, the conflict between Azerbaidjan and Armenia has now shown how badly stand army units without air defense, here especially against drones, and without their own armed drones. Endless, academically-led discussions on the ethics of arming drones are unrealistic and proceed at the cost of our soldiers.

In conclusion for this report: For me, there is lacking words of warning concerning the future of our armed forces. In the area of the evident economic consequences of the lockdowns and the budgetary cuts proceeding therefrom, I would have wished a clear statement that the so urgently required procurement measures need nevertheless be realized. And where that does not go, we need to be honest and admit that. Better an end without fear than a fear without end.

Frau Minister, please finally do right by the responsibility entrusted to you, assert yourself in cabinet, and make our armed forces functional and effective for the defense of the country and the alliance.

Hearty thanks.

 

 

[trans: tem]

 

Peter Boehringer, May 20, 2021, European Stability Mechanism

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/230, pp. 29402-29403.

Herr President. Honored colleagues.

Despite its volume of billions and despite the big words just heard, the ESM [European Stability Mechanism] is long since no more the central support pillar of the euro rescue. There is meanwhile an 800 billion “Next Generation EU” program on the basis of an illegal EU indebtedness capacity. Meanwhile there is the ECB [European Central Bank]’s gigantic loan purchases as well as its likewise gigantic TLTRO [Targeted Longer-term Refinancing Operations] – many billions each day.

The EU’s fiscal year budget today comprises over 400 billion euros. The Target balances lie at over 1,000 billion euros and the ECB balance was alone in 2020/2021 expanded a grotesque 3,000 billion euros. Against that, today’s outstanding ESM credit of over 90 billion euros is almost negligible, and I am with such words being circumspect in regards these great magnitudes.

By means of its aggressive purchase policy, the ECB lowers to the null point the returns in the so-called free capital market. This planned-economy interest Diktat has extensive effects. It leads to a mis-allocation of capital, endangers the purchasing power of savings assets and old-age provisions, it promotes the over-indebtedness and zombie-fication of businesses and increases risks of insolvency. Zero interest causes a formation of bubbles in all asset markets and leads to a redistribution from poor to rich.

The fans of the EU scarcely appreciate this madness at the cost of the German citizen, even though it certainly befalls the socially weak for whom nevertheless only the AfD intercedes.

            Christian Petry (SPD): You yourself do not believe that!

The EU and ECB have broken practically all of their contractual agreements. In that regard, the stability criteria of Masstricht were once Germany’s condition of entry into the euro system. By means of green loan purchases, the ECB is conducting a distinct economic policy. It thereby acts counter to treaty and mandate.

Meanwhile the billions in common liabilities are irresponsible and illegal on account of Article 125, AEUV [Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union], and contradict the market economy principle of Article 119, AEUV. After over ten years of the destructive, long-term euro rescue, it is time to strive for a change in the European money system, in which each state will again be given back its monetary policy sovereignty.

            Christian Petry (SPD): Baloney! 

Germany must prepare a plan for an exit from the euro system, inclusive of the ESM – even when you scream against it. The planned reform of the ESM nevertheless shows you all have striven to walk in the opposite way into more centralism and planned economy. The principal goal of the reform deliberated today is to give to the ESM additional surveillance competences, as well as to create a kind of European monetary fund, and with the aid of a supranational organization in the name of the EU conclusively control democratically legitimated national budgets.

            Eckhardt Rehberg (CDU/CSU): Idiocy!

The ESM alterations are a further step in keeping artificially alive a currency dysfunctional for ten years by means of an expansion of the competences of its central planning organ. Other than the AfD, this appears to no longer disturb anyone, not even the FDP. You analyze and enhance preferably in the fine print, because it in secret fully shares the course of the EU socialists, as was most recently shown when the FDP voted in favor of the dam break of EU indebtedness.

            Bettina Stark-Watzinger (FDP): Boring!

The euro was introduced with promises. Prosperity was promised us, yet we had prosperity. Peace was promised us, yet we had peace. It was said that the euro would be a stable currency, yet we had the world’s most stable currency. A withdrawal from euro and ESM would make possible the re-animation of a European economic community with its stable system of a flexible ECU [European Currency Unit] exchange rate. That would have almost only advantages for Germany. The substantial increases in purchasing power would be especially to the good of lower-income classes as well as of recipients of social aid and pensions. In case Germany on the contrary remains in the euro, the divide between poor and rich will open ever further. Do we want that?

Thank you for your attention.

            Lothar Binding (SPD-Heidelberg): Previously, that was quite otherwise!

 

[trans: tem]

 

Martin Reichardt, May 21, 2021, All-day School

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/231, pp. 29712-29713.

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Frau Giffey, on account of her doctorate work, has now finally resigned. That was long overdue. Frau Lambrecht, if you show the same elan in family policy as Frau Giffey in the last months – which you can do gladly – then you have not much to do.

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): So offensive!

Not only on account of her plagiarism is it right that Frau Giffey has resigned, but because it was she who permitted that the policy in the Corona phase made the children sick, ladies and gentlemen. We today are speaking on all-day attendance of children, and that is already a disdain, considering the present situation of our children. I thus now come, in the conditions of the scope of this discussion, to what needs be said.

Not this law but the recommendation of a mass vaccination of children as a basis for the restitution of human rights and education was Frau Giffey’s last, official act. She wants to send our children to a fully unnecessary, final battle against the Corona virus. That is a disgrace, ladies and gentlemen.

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): This vocabulary is a disgrace!

Children who neither are instigators of the pandemic nor commonly infect others shall first recover their rights, and thereby also the all-day attendance, if they have been immunized with a vaccine which has an emergency authorization.

            Sönke Rix (SPD): That is just not right! You are lying!

My delegation decisively says to that: No! Hands off our children! Our children are not your test rabbits, ladies and gentlemen.

            Bettina Margarethe Wiesmann (CDU/CSU): Abysmal!

Yet precisely that want all delegations here other than mine, and against all scientific studies.

What we however precisely do know is the following: Children have no use for this vaccine. Only the pharma lobbyists and Herr Spahn have a use for this vaccine, ladies and gentlemen.

            Ekin Deligöz (Greens): Theme!

There are no studies which appraise the long-term damages. This shall first come in four years. Who, against this background, propagandizes for a mass vaccination of children should be ashamed of himself.

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Do you know the theme of the debate?

When you board an aircraft which has an emergency authorization and so take a flight, then that is your amusement. But when children are required to fly in such aircraft, then that is a scandal, ladies and gentlemen.

What happens with the children who have not been vaccinated? Are they not allowed on class trips? Are they not allowed in the swimming pool?

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Deal with the theme!

Are they not allowed to make use of all-day attendance, as is now already happening with the children who do not let themselves be tested? Ladies and gentlemen, what then shall become of this? Will these children also be excluded and be designated as socially harmful? That is the question we have here before us.

            Silke Launert (SPD): Unspeakable!

Need unteachable parents thereby reckon that their children will be taken away? Since once you have implemented children’s right in the Basic Law, then you can declare vaccination to be a children’s right and then you can enforce this vaccination against the will of the parents. That we do not want, ladies and gentlemen.

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Incitement! Incitement! Incitement! Nothing else!

A Germany in which politics makes the children sick is one in which meanwhile much, much too much, is possible.

            Sönke Rix (SPD): You are here inciting with un-truths!

The departed Minister Giffey declared herself in favor of vaccinating children and youths as quickly as possible. She said: We owe it to the children and youth. – I say to you: No, we do not. We owe to our children – with and without vaccination and tests – open schools, common games and free air to breathe, ladies and gentlemen. We owe them to be at hand, warmth and care. We owe them a life without fear and a return of their basic rights, and that as quickly as possible, ladies and gentlemen.

We also owe it to them – and this the Social Democrats should write behind the ears – that we do not abuse the trust of our children and youths. We owe that to them, and not a useless, dangerous vaccination, ladies and gentlemen.

            Sönke Rix (SPD): You are spreading hatred and incitement!

 

[trans: tem]