Tobias Peterka, November 10, 2022, Ukraine War Tribunal

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 60/66, pp. 7679-7680.

Frau President. Right honorable colleagues.

The motion put forward by the CDU ascribes to nothing less that the enforcement of justice and cites nothing less than a judgement of the Nuremberg process. This determined, courageous leap, here well attempted, however clearly falls short, and even immediately in the second paragraph of the text which meekly yields on what is here proposed.  

Yes, put forward is a Russian war of sudden aggression according to articles 1 and 3 of the corresponding definition of the United Nations. No one disputes that and no one wants to sugar-coat that. Yet the so-called security of world peace will now be assigned, according to article 24 of the UN Charter, to the helplessly outdated construct of the Security Council in which Russia possesses a right of veto. We all the more cannot proceed at the much too late established International Criminal Court; since there, China and Russia have, by definition with the U.S.A. as three similar veto powers, withdrawn themselves from trouble. The U.S.A. would even be prepared to liberate its own citizens from the Hague by means of a commando mission.

Thence now this apparent solution of a dilemma by a special tribunal: What of its apparent value shall exactly, legally lead to where? The tribunal for Yugoslavia was at the time validated by the Security Council and thereby found itself entirely within the executive power [Vollzug] of the UN Charter. That will plainly not work here, since Russia is against it. Thus a court beneath the actual level of the UN, sustained by a pair of intermediary powers? Certain actions can be internationally represented if that is wanted, yet to completely ignore fundamental, real factors – that seldom leads to success and always damages one’s own credibility.

Clearly, this special tribunal would initially not directly and substantially affect us as do the economic sanctions. Yet wherefore then have we in the West lauded and spread with gusto the principle of world law? Would it not be much more honest to deliberate the elaboration of war crimes in the Ukraine directly before national courts? Naturally in regards to both warring parties. The cooperation problem then would not be pettier and, all the same, not all perpetrators would be in custody.

One thing however is definitely presumptuous: To believe we could, by means of a tribunal decision, direct the president of an atomic power. The only two instances of who would be in a position to direct Putin are the Russian oligarchs and the Russian people. Whether these consider doing that is however their decision alone.

The presently proposed special tribunal would be a nice-looking covering

            Vice-president Aydan Özoğuz: Please come to a conclusion, Herr colleague.

without effective content, the proverbial Potemkin village. We should not erect that. We should preferably leave that to others.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

 

  

 

Petr Bystron, November 10, 2022, Germany and China

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 60/66, p. 7578.

Right honorable Herr President. Dear colleagues.

The CDU/CSU has now suddenly discovered the term “sovereignty” and feels that the German sovereignty is threatened by China. Quite honestly, I ask myself: What is the cause of that? We in Germany for 50 years have the best of relations with China. It was German Foreign Minister Walter Scheel who was the first to travel to China, a year before Kissinger, and took up diplomatic relations with China. We have profited from that. Nothing of that has changed other than that the U.S.A. now has chosen China for its enemy. And now here you are in the wake of the Americans and want to build up China as a threat.     

Herr Wadephul, you have even interjected: Hamburg, critical infrastructure! How laughable is this argument! Here, China wants to purchase not even 25 percent of one terminal – not of a harbor but of one terminal – and you puff that up into a threat to the sovereignty of Germany! COSCO has participations in ten such harbors in Europe: 100 percent in Greece, in the Netherlands, in Belgium, in Spain over 51 percent. Is the sovereignty of these countries in any way threatened? Of course not! That is complete nonsense, what you have told here!

            Andreas Beck (AfD): Keiner klatscht!

We are an export nation. We produce goods which we export to all the world. And we need goods which we must import. China is our largest trade partner; you know that exactly as well as do we.  

Our German firms besides do the same: Hapag-Lloyd has ten participations in harbors in the entire world, Fraport in ten airports in the entire world; in an airport in Shanghai even with 50 percent. We need the trade, we need the exchange of goods, and that which we claim for ourselves in foreign countries we must also make possible for our partners here in Germany.

Besides, it is your colleagues in the CDU and the CSU who rejoice over China’s investments in Germany. It is, for one, Hendrik Wüst, CDU Minister-president in Nordrhein-Westphalen, who praises the cooperation in the area of the Silk Road. Your CSU colleague has certainly praised the KUKA investments. And if you look at the results: KUKA last year celebrated the second-best year in its history. That is the result of good cooperation between China and Germany.  

            Gyde Jensen (FDP): Yes, that makes Xi Jinping happy!

Let us remain at Duisburg. The railroad terminal there, a junction of the Silk Road, is highly praised. In that regard, there is great competition. The Chinese are investing 100 billion dollars in the Silk Road infrastructure. The Poles say: We would gladly have this junction in Poland. – In Germany, of course, the railway infrastructure is already so decayed that no secure transport is possible. That, dear Herr Wadephul, is the fault of your CDU colleagues, your transportation ministers from Wissmann to Andi Scheuer of the CSU.

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): There is still lacking “16 years”.

The best example is the Transrapid, a German leading technology which we wanted to construct here in Germany. Your colleague Wissmann and the Bavarian Minister-president

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): Now we are even in the ‘90s!

–  2008 that was, since you have buried it. Instead, the technology was sold to China. The Transrapid now runs in Shanghai, and the successor to this train, built by the Chinese, runs at 620 kilometers per hour.  

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): What has that to do with strategic sovereignty?

All of us here could thus go from Munich to Berlin in an hour and we need not bother with the continual delays of the Deutschen Bahn or the Berlin-Brandenburg disaster airport.

Dear colleagues, the Chinese are not the greatest threat for Germany, the greatest threat for Germany is you, the politicians, who in the last years have driven this country into the wall.

Thank you.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

Beatrix von Storch, November 9, 2022, Anti-semitism

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/65, pp. 7406-7407.

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen.

Who speaks of anti-semitism in the year 2022 cannot be silent on the most dangerous anti-semitic movement in western Europe, the BDS movement. Which has a key function. It is the dirty link between the leftist and Moslem anti-semitism of intellectuals, artists, of Greta Thunberg and Claudia Roth, and the violence-prone Moslem anti-semitism of Hezbollah and Hamas.

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): That is unbelievable!

            Saskia Esken (SPD): Herr President!

The title of this discussion is “…To Remember Means to Act”. So let us remember: The Bundestag has passed one resolution for BDS and one against anti-semitism, all without any measurable effect.  

            Saskia Esken (SPD): Herr President!

The anti-semitism resolution demands legal consequences for foreigners, hence deportation for anti-semitism. That has not happened a single time.

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): That is unworthy! Honestly!

The BDS resolution says that the BDS movement is to receive no more space and no financial means. Culture Minister Claudia Roth in her vote declaration of 17 May 2019 expressly rejected that. As long as Germany is afforded such a Culture Minister, the fight against anti-semitism is a farce; in the best case a farce, rather actually a mockery of the victims.

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): That is unbelievable! You mock the victims! You!

Let us come to the action. If one wants to achieve something against the Judenhass, one should take a peek at the country which is the only one in which Jews feel safe since Merkel’s refugee crisis of 2015,

Filiz Polat (Green): You are nevertheless the extended arm of the anti-semitic                    conspiracy here in the Bundestag!

feel less assailed than before Merkel’s refugee crisis. That is Hungary. The European Union in its second large inquiry in 2018 questioned 16,000 Jews in western Europe. The result is clear: The portion of Jews who, for example, have fear of violent attacks in Hungary was halved to under 30 percent between 2012 and 2018. In Germany in the same time frame this quota increased to over 60 percent. According to an inquiry of the European Union, over 60 percent of Jews have fear of attacks. The portion of Jews who were in fact victims of attack has in Hungary receded to 17 percent and in Germany climbed by approximately one-third to almost 30 percent – almost 30 percent of all Jews in Germany are victims of attacks. Rabbi Slomo Köves said that Hungary’s good example should be made use of by the entire EU. Merkel’s colorful country is ever more dangerous for Jews, and Orban’s decidedly Catholic Hungary is for Jews ever more safe. Or, as in December 2017 the left-liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz headlined – I cite word for word: “Hungary is Keeping Jews Safe by Keeping Muslims Out” – end citation.

Instead of slandering Hans-Georg Maaßen, our leftist climate terrorists around Lisa Neubauer should devote themselves to the anti-semitism in their climate sect. “Climate Intifada from Hamburg to Gaza”, that was the battle cry. One certainly need not know more. These Green climate spinners are ideologically lost, extremist, and also anti-semitic. We should stick them all in some hollow tree stump where they can disturb no one and can no longer kill.

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): Shame on you!

“To Remember” and “To Act” hang over this debate today. You are in the government and could act, yet you will again do nothing. When the AfD governs, we will deport Judenhass and Islamists and allow no more in,

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): The AfD will never govern!

we will close the mosques of hatred, ban the BDS movement and thwart the foreign financing of mosques. And where the AfD governs, the cry of the muezzin in our cities will grow silent.

Many thanks.

            Sebastian Hartmann (SPD): Shame on you!

            (Cries from the Linke: Nazi speech!) 

 

[trans: tem]