Rüdiger Lucassen, July 8, 2022, A European NATO

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/48, pp. 5106-5107.

Right honorable Frau President. Excellencies. Dear colleagues.

With Sweden and Finland, two European nations join NATO upon which Germany and the alliance can rely. Both countries maintain high value armed forces. Sweden re-activated the defense duty in 2018. Finland has a reservists corps which is superior even to many European regular armies. And quite important: The culture of both of these northern countries guarantees a smooth integration into the alliance.

Germany’s security will profit directly from this expansion. Who today agrees to the reception of Sweden and Finland into NATO acknowledges it for Germany’s security. Sweden and Finland strengthen the northern flank of NATO. The last weeks however have shown where the weakness of the alliance lies: On the southern flank. Turkey has again used the entrance negotiations to extort Europe. Erdogan has thereby once again demonstrated that Turkey will never be a part of Europe.

Ladies and gentlemen, the northern expansion offers the opportunity to finally strengthen the European pillar of NATO. Who does this can bury a still-born like the EU army. For another thing, it is the way to a European NATO along with the way to a greater independence from the U.S.A. That is for Germany and Europe a goal of immense significance. I may remind the Federal government that independence from America during the Trump time was largely in fashion. You should now show that this viewpoint not only had to do with your aversion to Trump but was in fact strategically founded.

A European NATO is a necessity so as to free Europe from the vise grip of the great powers. Sweden and Finland can contribute to that. As a welcoming gift, the Federal government should finally let deeds follow the many words. The goal must be to build up the Bundeswehr as Europe’s army of greatest combat strength and to undertake leadership [die Bundeswehr zur kampfstärksten Armee Europas aufzubauen und Führung zu übernehmen]. Strategic autonomy will not be made a present; one must take it upon oneself.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

Malte Kaufmann, July 7, 2022, CETA

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/47, pp. 4953-4954.

Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Already in the first deliberation on the CETA [Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement] theme – that was on March 18 – I was allowed to refer to that, for example, our French and Italian friends on the average go essentially earlier into retirement and at the same time clearly have more assets than we Germans. Those are facts verified by, among other things, the ECB’s data. And despite that, Germany just recently shouldered over 130 billion euros of the so-called Corona assistance funds of the European Union.

Julia Klöckner (CDU/CSU): What does that now have to do with CETA? Are you in the wrong debate?

In any case, it is a decades-long abuse of German policy not to defend our own interests against the greed of other countries.

            Julia Klöckner (CDU/CSU): Wrong theme!

That applies at the European level exactly so as at other international levels. And exactly here is it called to be just so on the alert in regards CETA. International trade is basically a good idea, since it promotes the sum prosperity of the participant states. And we of the AfD also want that. What we however do not want is the hollowing out of our country’s sovereignty. And plainly, exactly that is to be feared in regards CETA. The February 9^th ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court indicates a certain doubt as to what concerns a further transfer of sovereign rights to CETA’s tribunal and committee system. Namely, the Constitutional Court holds it be conceivable that – I cite – “German officials will be in so far as entirely excluded from possibilities of direct influence so that a personnel and material legitimization of committee activity by means of the co-working of German sovereign authorities would be even so impossible as their responsibility to the citizens”. In clear text: There arises the danger that in the backrooms decisions with wide-ranging consequences for our country will be arranged [ausgekungelt] without Germany being able to take influence, all the same as to what the voters in this country have decided. That is the exact opposite of democracy in the sense of a government [Herrschaft] of the people. That is the government of the backrooms, and that we do not want!

            Verrena Hubertz (SPD): What rubbish!

What we also do not want is that such a free trade agreement can be used for the ideological wrong way of the Greens. We have certainly heard that in the spoken contributions. Yet exactly that is now to be feared when your draft law is looked at. Green ideology through the back door shall now be tricked up and transacted in the free trade agreement. What then remains of residual free trade if here the Greens meddle in this way can each one imagine for himself.

            Sebastian Roloff (SPD): Climate defense sure is annoying!

Yet there is hope. The Constitutional Court itself apparently reckons with an immediate complaint against the CETA assent act – and it will well be known why.

Despite our fundamental affirmation of free international trade, we will not be able to agree to the law put forward in this form, but we will abstain.

Many hearty thanks.

Manuel Höferlin (FDP): How then would you alter the law put forward? Have you once read the law which we decided on? A mere two paragraphs!

 

 

[trans: tem]

           

 

Bernd Schattner, July 7, 2022, Ahrtal Flood

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll, 20/47, pp. 4875-4876. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

It is now almost a year that 133 people died in the flood catastrophe in July 2021 in Rheinland-Pfalz. Hundreds were injured, thousands lost goods and property, many until today are traumatized by the experience.

For us of the AfD, two things were clear from the beginning. We must do everything at the parliamentary level to make clear the proximate circumstances of this catastrophe. And we will commit ourselves with full power so that the required assistance reaches those affected.  

A year after the heavy rains, we know from numerous statements of witnesses and experts that many deaths would have been able to be prevented if the responsible officials had fulfilled their duties. Instead, all representatives of the State government went to sleep while the people in Ahrtal drowned. Following the flood night, the Minister-president as well as the responsible minister acted as if they had known nothing. Unabashed, they spread the legend of the unforeseeability of the catastrophe. Their sole concern was the image of the mother of the country and her government. While fortunately the absent without leave Minister Spiegel, responsible for the flood warnings, is history, Interior Minister Lewentz, responsible for catastrophe prevention, until today continues in office. He still spreads his legend of “local responsibility” for the deadly warning failures on the Ahr.

Ladies and gentlemen, after the first catastrophe now follows the second. After more than a year, the payment of the support assistance drags on. Up to now, less than 1 percent of the means has been paid out. The government’s reason: Who receives which means must be quite precisely tested. Right honorable representatives of this government, this solicitude which you display here and which, in the truest sense of the word, leaves one’s own people standing in the rain, this solicitude I would have desired preferably in another place. Here may be named only the fraud in the billions by means of Corona tests for citizens which did not occur.

There is no lack of money for the reconstruction. Alone for Rheinland-Pfalz, an assistance fund in the sum of 18 billion euros was made available – predominantly from the Bund. Yet this money reaches the affected people not at all. Thus by the end of May, merely 136.4 million euros from the reconstruction assistance was paid out to private households for damages to furnishings and buildings. Even the hitherto transferred means to affected businesses can only be designated as marginal in relation to the resulting total damages. According to a report of the Interior Committee of the Rheinland-Pfalz Landtag of June 7, it was all of 31.3 million euros. That is a sum likewise less than 1 percent of the available money.

Yet also for employees at the end of the month a wicked awakening threatens. The hard case rule for part-time employment money needs to be unconditionally prolonged, since otherwise numerous people will slide into unemployment. The reason for this primarily is that the local operations are still not rebuilt.

Even in regards the public infrastructure, it appears no better: A 4 billion euro need was ascertained for the localities. Up to June 2, just 150.8 million was paid out. If this continues at this tempo, the complete reconstruction of the infrastructure will last a projected 25 years, and thereby be only slightly longer than the building of the BER airport.

Esteemed colleagues, allow me to come to the end of my speech, and here before all thank the numerous volunteer helpers and farmers on the scene. Without their indispensable intervention after the flood, the residents would have essentially stood longer in the mud. Especially the farmers with their heavy excavation equipment were in the first days and weeks the heroes of the region. Many thanks for this help.

That there were not many more victims is thanks to the brave effort of the firemen who, especially on the upper Ahr, saved the lives of countless people. Exemplary is the rescue achievement of the 26 year old fireman [Wehrleiter] in the town named Schuld in which, despite devastating material destruction, not a single resident lost his life. In conclusion, not to remain unmentioned is the 19 year old female fireman who lost her life in her commitment to saving people.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

Alexander Gauland, July 8, 2022, NATO, Sweden and Finland

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/48, p. 5101. 

Frau President. Excellencies. Ladies and gentlemen.

So as to set it straight at the beginning: We also accept the wish of Sweden and Finland to enter NATO. If we do not do this with effervescent joy and enthusiasm, that has nothing to do with the two democratic candidates but exclusively with the circumstances and timing of this step.

In a geopolitical confrontation which has led to a war in Europe, shiftings of balances [Gleichgewichtsverschiebungen], even if they initially have a symbolic character, can intensify conflicts instead of relaxing them. We therefore hold it to be important that particularly Finland, with its long land border with Russia, continues to play its traditional role as translator of Russian sensitivities and desires, as it has done successfully for many years under the former President Kekkonen. And from there we proceed that also in the future no NATO troops and also no atomic weapons will be stationed long-term on the territory of the two countries. This is necessary in the interest of peace. If the entry leads to that the European weight in the future more strongly determines NATO’s policy than the quite otherwise stacked geostrategic interests of the U.S.A., often opposed to European wishes, that would even be an additionally positive effect. I nevertheless need mention that the human rights discounts to the benefit of Turkey in the trilateral declaration of intentions are more than just a drop of bitterness for a community of values as they understand NATO to be, ladies and gentlemen.  

We in the past have recognized the expansion of NATO towards the Russian borders, which was never internally accepted by Russia, as one of the causes of the critical aggravation [Zuspitzung] of our relations with Russia. This estimate remains as before correct. We nevertheless also see that in regards the call on Peter the Great by the Russian President, with which he justifies among other things the Ukraine war, opponents of Peter’s earlier expansion, thus especially Sweden, seek new safeguards and allies.

In Sweden and Finland, the historical memory is long and it unfortunately confirms no recollections of an unclouded friendship with the great neighbor. Certainly, if we take history seriously as a teacher of the present and future,

            Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP): This the righteous say!

we must accept the desire of Finland and Sweden for greater security.

Your decision and our positive reply is Realpolitik in the best sense. There is no occasion for jubilation, ladies and gentlemen, over a realpolitischen welcome.

I am grateful.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tino Chrupalla, June 30, 2022, NATO Strategy

AfD Kompakt, June 30, 2022.

The new NATO strategy drives a wedge into the continent of Europe. It threatens to commit to the present confrontation with Russia on a long-term basis. Who is interested in again bringing Europe together with Russia after the end of the war in the Ukraine may not in the long-term exclude Russia, and make impossible a common security architecture for years if not decades.

Apparently NATO constructs a new, ideological image of the enemy. It thus exceeds the duties of a defensive alliance and manages an ideological instead of a security policy. The allegedly values-guided policy, which resembles the foreign policy of the Greens, does not correspond to Germany’s interests. To make possible long-term peace and prosperity on the continent of Europe, a policy guided by interests is required.

 

[trans: tem]