The quasi-colonialist reclusive regime could yet again pitch Germans against their neighbors.
In 1988, the year before German re-unification came up, a then friend of mine, a dedicated CIA influence agent, US citizen told me about covert US preparation of re-unification: „In Germany, we are buying anybody with legs!“ He conducted his personal poll of friends: Would Germans be obedient after regaining their national unity? My diplomatic answer ran: „Germans will never forget, who helped them to win back their home country as a whole. But the stability of the friendship towards the US will depend on whether or not correct and fair democratic policies will continue.“
Not only did fair and correct policies not survive the downfall of the Soviet Union: Washington’s policies look nowadays as if somebody had torn the veil from a truly ugly face of imperialism and a seemingly indefatigable obsession with criminal international behavior. But this explanation appears based on an openly eurocentrist perspective: Closer looks to Washington’s policies towards non-European countries show a different and by far less beautiful picture. Washington has habitually and globally broken international law, especially so since 1913; after WW2 all US administrations made fun of the UN Charter more often than not by interfering wherever they felt it worth while – and in fact showed restraint only in case of a challenge by a seriously and sufficiently strong opposing power. This is a very unhappy situation, since meeting American citizens and getting to know them personally and privately is generally a highly rewarding and joyful experience.
Germany has a very special and equally divided experience with our big US master. The Nuremberg trial show after WW2 was a brilliant cover-up of British and US-based intrigue and provocation, including the well-orchestrated destruction of peace in the thirties. One of their victims was unwitting German resistance member Adam von Trott zu Solz, whose visits with British and US friends to muster support for an honorable peaceful settlement with Germany were rendered fruitless by a secret counter-campaign portraying this young hero as a Nazi agent. Adam, great uncle of the author’s wife, was the first anti-Hitler coup affiliate to be killed by the Nazis: by hanging from a steel hook, his death struggle filmed upon Hitler’s personal order. BBC broadcastings in 1944 gave away Adam’s friends to Nazi prosecution. When the author’s family was handed back their villa in Bremen, which had been handed over to US command in May 1945 as its temporary residence, my grandfather found iron rings cemented into the cellar walls, where US personnel had tortured their German captives.
Germany’s fate cannot be separated from our US relations – but the very same holds for our Russian relations. We just aren’t a sovereign country, free to live our neighborly friendship with Russia as we please. We opened our borders to a wave of millions of would-be refugees willy-nilly, part of well-orchestrated implementation of what Harvard professor Kelly M. Greenhill in her much-appraised book called a “weapon of mass migration”. We have to obediently trample on our Turkish NATO partner, a history-honored bi-national connection, once its recently restrengthened leader choses not to bow to US pressure and purchase a Russian S400 air defense system to bolster Turkey’s security without cementing dependence on Washington’s equipment and political orders attached.
How much political space for maneuvering was lost over the last 50 years may be judged from the following: In the tenure of German chancellor Willy Brandt, the revolutionary détente policy of 1969 was introduced by his decidedly pro-Russian foreign policy advisor: Prof. Egon Bahr, whose advice in western dealing with the actual Crimea question (“acceptance without approval”) was not even heeded by his own party – SPD: crazy! Even the self-styled Left shows difficulties here. Prof. Bahr told me in one of our exclusively one-on-one meetings: “When I met with the White House security guys and spoke to the State Department, the people wanted to question the new German strategy. I cut them off by telling them: ‘I haven’t come here for discussion – I just wish to INFORM you!’” Nowadays, except for foolish extravaganza like a struggle on tariffs and trade, with the EU retaliating quite unanimously, Chancellor Merkel’s government is traditionally ready to envisage more troops for global deployment directly after the idea has come up somewhere in Washington. The German army (Bundeswehr) since Merkel’s inauguration as German chancellor in 2005 started preparing for international missions or additional troop deployments in ongoing missions even before parliament had the chance to read a cabinet decision to quarrel about. In 2007, this author was freelancing as special troop coach at the Koblenz-based “Center for Interior Leadership” in Afghan matters as preparations started for the Congo adventure. And recently even a raise in the defense budget is not being excluded any more, not to mention NATO’s misguided military exercises and fully armed German permanent patrol flights along the Russian border plus the full set of breaks and transgressions of literally each and every one of NATO’s written commitments to Russia. It was Chancellor Merkel, who personally killed the idea of visa-free travel to and from Russia: This author founded and headed the German-Russian Forum’s “Visa Working Group” in 2013, until Merkel denied us even a single inch of progress in the matter, while at the very same time Albania was tacitly granted what we wanted to enjoy with our dear Russian friends.
But who, in fact, is pushing all of these developments contradicting true German and European interests? Why was Obama denied a speech at Berlin’s Brandenburg gate in the time of his first election campaign in 2008? Why were German sanctions against Iran during Obama’s presidency at times harsher than the parallel US procedures? Why is this actual US president obviously unable to pull through his long envisaged meeting with his Russian colleague – not to mention the original idea of an invitation to Washington? What makes German mainstream media complain about “treason” and “abandoning NATO interests”, when the acting US President openly and publicly envisages improved relations with Russia? And why, to top it all, can’t we improve our relations with Russia at a time, when we are obviously not only allowed but pushed to contradict and work against President Trump?
It is the sad fact, that all western leaders are not masters of their people’s fates. The curse of German foreign policy, not only in our relations with the USA, but with Russia as well, lies with this devastating power game behind all curtains. Part of the blood-stained theatre show today is trouble and chaos in transatlantic relations – while at the same time we are quite obviously not only not allowed improved relations to our European neighbor Russia, who shares her priority position of importance equally with France and should be as close to us – but pushed to increase tensions and deteriorate bilateral links. This author holds, that, unless Germans get rid of this quasi-colonialist reclusive regime, hopefully with support from Russia and others, we may well face the third world war within roughly one century pitching us against our Russian brothers and sisters. Yet again.
The fight against this completely unnecessary development is worth every effort and every sacrifice – including that of this author’s life.