|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Germany
Red-Green militarism
The German government and the war against Serbia
By Ulrich Rippert
2 April 1999
The ease with which the German SPD-Green coalition government
agreed to the NATO war of aggression against Serbia has surprised
and angered many. Of all governments, it has been a coalition
of social democrats and Greens which has for the first time since
the World War II dispatched German troops into war. How often
have the functionaries of both governing parties repeated the
standpoint shared by all German parties during the last 50 years:
"No more war!"? How often have they called upon their
members to take part in peace demonstrations and denounced the
tradition of German militarism?
And what now?
As the German airforce, together with NATO bombers, began its
first offensive over the Balkans SPD Chancellor Gerhard Schröder
declared in a televised speech: "We had no other choice."
First of all, that is not true. No one has forced the German government
to participate in brutal military aggression against a small country
with less than 10 million inhabitants. Secondly such a statement
is a declaration of political bankruptcy. What is one to think
of a government which itself creates compelling conditions, and
then maintains that these very conditions restrict its room for
manoeuvre. It is evident that this government is incapable, and
therefore capable of absolutely anything. Its opportunism and
lack of principles are almost boundless.
In the same television message Schröder announced that
the parliamentary decision for war was "in agreement with
the will of the vast majority of the German people." This
is also false! The vast majority of the people were never asked
their opinion about this war. If, prior to the national elections
half a year ago, Schröder had even mentioned that his government
was prepared to take part in a war of aggression, ignoring international
law and the German constitution, the result of the election would
have been very different.
"The German government did not make its decision easily,"
said Schröder. In fact the government did not think through
any of the aspects arising from its actions and has behaved in
a completely irresponsible manner. The first night of bombing
was sufficient to refute the main argument for the war. Rather
than diminishing the humanitarian catastrophe, the bombing attacks
only made the situation much worse.
The incredible cynicism of this government is clearest when
one looks at the position of the Greens. Barely voted into government,
this party has moved with record speed to carry out policies diametrically
opposed to what it had promised in the past. All previous declarations
and party decisions have been thrown overboard within the space
of a few months. And this from an organisation which at the time
of its foundation, 20 years ago, accused all other parties of
lacking credibility. The very word "credibility" is
a mockery when used with respect to the Greens today.
On the second day of bombing the conservative newspaper Frankfurter
Allgemeine Zeitung purred with satisfaction: "The great
majority of those in the Green party who are responsible for foreign
policy and security questions have, to a certain extent, made
their peace with war." Later on the paper wrote: "When
Joseph Fischer as foreign minister and vice-chancellor of one
of the biggest NATO countries supports the present offensive,
then he does not have to worry about any opposition from a significant
part of the Bundestag fraction." With the Greens one has
to delineate "between programmatic positions and practical
politics. If Foreign Minister Fischer supports German fighter
planes in the attack on the republic of Yugoslavia, then his position
is in crass contradiction to the program of his party."
Absolutely true!
According to their current Magdeburg Programme, agreed upon
less than 12 month ago, "The Greens will not support military
interventions or any military operations to impose peace".
Just a few weeks ago, on March 7--i.e., after the Rambouillet
conference--the thirteenth regular conference of the Greens in
Erfurt passed a resolution which read: "The Greens fundamentally
oppose an exclusive NATO mandate for military operations, thereby
insuring that the monopoly of force is retained by UNO ".
In future--if there is a future for this party--the Greens should,
when voting on such resolutions, also vote on their expiry date.
Just a few hours after the attack on Serbia, as the German
government discussed the issue, the Green fraction, with one exception,
stood solidly behind the government. Christian Ströbele was
the only Green deputy to call things by their real name, and in
a heated contribution accused the government of carrying out a
war of aggression--only to be greeted with incomprehension and
stern opposition on the part of his own fraction.
The defence speaker for the Greens, Angelika Beer, describing
herself as a "moderate left", repeated the arguments
of the chancellor and Green foreign minister and maintained there
was no other way. She said she had great difficulty herself coming
to this decision, as if to demand respect for the fact that as
a genuine opportunist she did not break easily with her principles.
This is the end of the Greens! The NATO bombs have hit home
in the heart of their party headquarters and done more damage
there than anywhere else. What is the use of a party with its
origins in the peace movement which declares at its first big
test: "There is no alternative to war!"? The
Frankfurter Rundschau, in its edition of last Tuesday,
reports that the regional and national headquarters of the Greens
have been bombarded with letters and e-mails from members and
sympathisers expressing their anger and disgust, some of the messages
beginning with the words: "Never again Green!".
With every new wave of NATO attacks the wave of members resigning
from the Green party is growing as well. Anja Kofbinger, a leading
member of the Berlin organisation, declared that she has spent
the last days persuading depressed members to stay in the party.
And the regional organisation in North Rhine-Westphalia urgently
called upon the national office to establish a "hot line
for wavering members and voters". What's the point, however,
of such a mechanism when one has nothing else to say than to repeat
the propaganda of the war ministry?
The rapid political decline of the Greens is a repulsive and
disgusting spectacle, but at the same time an important political
experience. There has been a fundamental change in social relations
since the late 70s and beginning of the 80s, which often witnessed
anti-war demonstrations and peace marches by hundreds of thousands.
In many countries the employers have dispensed with a policy of
social consensus and workers have taken painful blows. Social-democratic
parties have participated in the destruction of social gains and
the trade unions have agreed to wage cuts. The high point of this
development took place 10 years ago when the Stalinist regimes
took the road of capitalist restoration.
The Greens concluded from this development that any sort of
resistance to the existing social order was doomed to failure
and began to adapt and subordinate their policies in line with
the interests of the market. As long as they were in opposition
they were able to disguise this process behind a few radical phrases.
Upon coming into government, however, the advanced state of decay
of this organisation has become clearer from day to day.
War accelerates all political developments. It deepens the
gulf between the political parties and the political establishment,
who are rapidly moving to the right, and the growing discontent
of a large part of the population. On the first day of the war,
when television teams conducted interviews on the street, treating
it as a sort of football match, a number of reporters were themselves
astonished at the reaction. Elderly men and women spoke, as if
it were yesterday, of the horrors of the Second World War, the
loss of relatives and their lives as widowers, widows and orphans.
Young people also declared themselves to be concerned and deeply
worried by the war.
Up until a short time ago many of them had regarded such a
military operation by the German army to be out of the question.
Following the bitter experiences of two world wars there exist
profound reservations against any form of militarism. The re-establishment
of the German army in the 50s was accompanied by mass demonstrations
and protests, and many can still remember the resistance to the
stationing of nuclear equipped missiles on German territory 20
years ago.
For these reasons, the indifference and superficiality with
which the Red-Green government has addressed all serious questions
and has blundered into war has shocked and angered many. Another
facet of the government has also been demonstrated in this respect.
Gerhard Schröder, Joschka Fischer, Defence Minister Rudolf
Scharping and Co. are part of a generation of politicians which
has assumed power without an apparent political strategy and frequently
conducts policy without the least political conviction. They act
on the basis of immediate considerations and their future strategy
extends, at best, to the next press conference or talk show.
Chancellor Schröder has elevated this type of political
improvisation and dilettantism to the level of programme, when
he declared that what was important was not political content
but presentation. A similar lack of any sort of political imagination
is visible in other countries. The latest development--war in
the Balkans--is patent proof of the dangerous consequences arising
from such a policy.
See Also:
NATO attack on Serbia has
repercussions for Europe as a whole
[31 March 1999]
War dominates the European Union
summit in Berlin
[27 March 1999]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |