The Assault on Merkel’s War
The WikiLeaks documents are stoking the debate over the withdrawal of German troops from Afghanistan. Now, politicians from Chancellor Merkel’s own party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), are putting pressure on her.
The government’s statement belongs to the sort of speech that Angela Merkel hopes will be soothing to both the public and the parliament. In 2009, when Merkel announced Germany would send troops to foreign shores, she said the life and limb of people in Germany had to be protected from international terrorism. This April she added that this mandate was, beyond any doubt, within constitutional and international law. At that time, four German soldiers had just fallen in action — the 40th through 43rd to die there.
But whether this campaign is justified beyond any doubt — as Merkel has insisted — is now being questioned by a growing number of politicians in light of the WikiLeaks revelations published in Der Spiegel magazine and the New York Times and Guardian newspapers. Increasing pressure is now being exerted on the German government. Even some politicians in Merkel’s own party are calling for a withdrawal from Afghanistan.
“We have to become more concrete when it comes to the matter of withdrawal,” said CDU parliamentarian Wolfgang Börnsen. “The documents clearly show how hopeless the situation in Afghanistan is,” he added. To him, numerous mistakes were made in the way things were done in the engagement: “Civilian interests were neglected too greatly,” said Börnsen. “I feel my critical posture right from the start has since been validated by the developments.”
His Christian Socialist Union (CSU) colleague, Peter Gauweiler, agreed: “German politicians know this war is unwinnable. My CDU colleague Willi Wimmer and I have been saying for years that we shouldn’t be taking part in this operation.” In Gauweiler’s view, bipartisan mistakes have been made: “The attitude of the political class has changed since Kunduz — the parties now acknowledge that they have become victims of their own propaganda.”
Sascha Vogt, Chairman of the Young Socialist faction of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), sharply criticized Germany’s involvement in Afghanistan and expects consequences: “We need a change of strategy that will strengthen civilian reconstruction, and we demand a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan as soon as possible.” In Vogt’s opinion, his own party also needs a change of course, and he said that “we expect that this will be the SPD’s position as well.” He added that former Defense Minister Peter Struck’s statements no longer have relevance to the Afghanistan engagement: “The statement ‘we are defending German interests in the Hindu Kush’ is just so much nonsense,” Vogt said.
Green Party politician Hans-Christian Ströbele also criticized the use of German troops saying, “There should be no further approval of German troops support to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). I hope the Green Party will take this clear stance at this fall’s party conference.”
Ströbele also criticized the government’s information policy. “At first, it was a non-information policy,” Ströbele said. Using parliamentary requests, the Green Party tried repeatedly to get clarification about the operations of “Task Force 373” and “Task Force 47,” which were deployed in the German mandate area in northern Afghanistan. In part, they received sketchy answers: “The German government is deliberately attempting to selectively not understand,” said Ströbele.
SPD defense expert Hans-Peter Bartels leveled the criticism that the nature of the engagement has led to the lack of information. “There is a tendency to avoid operating with regular troops and to cloak what’s happening by using smaller units,” Bartels told the newspaper, and added “that could be a fatal development.” Wolfgang Börnsen, of the CDU, on the other hand, considers himself to be well informed, and that has an impact: “My negative attitude has actually been reinforced by the highly detailed information,” he commented.
Opinions vary as much as the WikiLeaks revelations themselves: “The documents have not caused any change,” insists Free Democratic Party (FDP) defense expert Elke Hoff. The Greens’ Ströbele doesn’t share that view, commenting that the documents have again made clear that the “new strategy is a mistake.” He said that the brutal methods employed by the United States have especially been highlighted. “They do whatever they want,” he added. And SPD member Bartels also criticized the ally that his own former party chief, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, once assured — in another government policy statement — had Germany’s guaranteed unconditional solidarity. “The Americans are trending toward going it alone,” Bartels complained.
German Defense Ministry spokesman Christian Dienst reacted on Wednesday with supreme disinterest, saying that if suspects couldn’t be neutralized any other way targeted killings were in accordance with international law. “The Americans do it that way, too,” he said.
The government’s statement belongs to the sort of speech that Angela Merkel hopes will be soothing to both the public and the parliament. In 2009, when Merkel announced Germany would send troops to foreign shores, she said the life and limb of people in Germany had to be protected from international terrorism. This April she added that this mandate was, beyond any doubt, within constitutional and international law. At that time, four German soldiers had just fallen in action — the 40th through 43rd to die there.
But whether this campaign is justified beyond any doubt — as Merkel has insisted — is now being questioned by a growing number of politicians in light of the WikiLeaks revelations published in Der Spiegel magazine and the New York Times and Guardian newspapers. Increasing pressure is now being exerted on the German government. Even some politicians in Merkel’s own party are calling for a withdrawal from Afghanistan.
“We have to become more concrete when it comes to the matter of withdrawal,” said CDU parliamentarian Wolfgang Börnsen. “The documents clearly show how hopeless the situation in Afghanistan is,” he added. To him, numerous mistakes were made in the way things were done in the engagement: “Civilian interests were neglected too greatly,” said Börnsen. “I feel my critical posture right from the start has since been validated by the developments.”
His Christian Socialist Union (CSU) colleague, Peter Gauweiler, agreed: “German politicians know this war is unwinnable. My CDU colleague Willi Wimmer and I have been saying for years that we shouldn’t be taking part in this operation.” In Gauweiler’s view, bipartisan mistakes have been made: “The attitude of the political class has changed since Kunduz — the parties now acknowledge that they have become victims of their own propaganda.”
Sascha Vogt, Chairman of the Young Socialist faction of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), sharply criticized Germany’s involvement in Afghanistan and expects consequences: “We need a change of strategy that will strengthen civilian reconstruction, and we demand a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan as soon as possible.” In Vogt’s opinion, his own party also needs a change of course, and he said that “we expect that this will be the SPD’s position as well.” He added that former Defense Minister Peter Struck’s statements no longer have relevance to the Afghanistan engagement: “The statement ‘we are defending German interests in the Hindu Kush’ is just so much nonsense,” Vogt said.
Green Party politician Hans-Christian Ströbele also criticized the use of German troops saying, “There should be no further approval of German troops support to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). I hope the Green Party will take this clear stance at this fall’s party conference.”
Ströbele also criticized the government’s information policy. “At first, it was a non-information policy,” Ströbele said. Using parliamentary requests, the Green Party tried repeatedly to get clarification about the operations of “Task Force 373” and “Task Force 47,” which were deployed in the German mandate area in northern Afghanistan. In part, they received sketchy answers: “The German government is deliberately attempting to selectively not understand,” said Ströbele.
SPD defense expert Hans-Peter Bartels leveled the criticism that the nature of the engagement has led to the lack of information. “There is a tendency to avoid operating with regular troops and to cloak what’s happening by using smaller units,” Bartels told the newspaper, and added “that could be a fatal development.” Wolfgang Börnsen, of the CDU, on the other hand, considers himself to be well informed, and that has an impact: “My negative attitude has actually been reinforced by the highly detailed information,” he commented.
Opinions vary as much as the WikiLeaks revelations themselves: “The documents have not caused any change,” insists Free Democratic Party (FDP) defense expert Elke Hoff. The Greens’ Ströbele doesn’t share that view, commenting that the documents have again made clear that the “new strategy is a mistake.” He said that the brutal methods employed by the United States have especially been highlighted. “They do whatever they want,” he added. And SPD member Bartels also criticized the ally that his own former party chief, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, once assured — in another government policy statement — had Germany’s guaranteed unconditional solidarity. “The Americans are trending toward going it alone,” Bartels complained.
German Defense Ministry spokesman Christian Dienst reacted on Wednesday with supreme disinterest, saying that if suspects couldn’t be neutralized any other way targeted killings were in accordance with international law. “The Americans do it that way, too,” he said.