Are there bigger idiots than the Greens?

To strengthen the “contribution “of the Bundeswehr” against the climate crisis” was demanded in a Green motion. However, a truly climate-relevant step in this context would be a decision on radical disarmament, which frees up funds that are urgently needed for ecology, health, social affairs, infrastructure and culture.

If a process of betrayal is not imposed on one’s own origins and on one’s own vision and vice versa, then it develops – it becomes at the same time a farce and a tragedy prone to become a catastrophe. A motion of the Green Group in the Bundestag of 3. En juillet 2020 makes this phenomenon clear: the title of the motion would actually be something for a satire broadcast, if it would not express such catastrophic developments. It reads:

Strengthening the Bundeswehr’s contribution to the climate crisis - significantly reducing CO2 emissions from the Armed Forces and recording them consistently.

The military is thus contributing to the solution of the climate crisis, and this is now to be strengthened. A Eurofighter burns about 3,500 kg of fuel per hour of flight, producing about 11 tons of CO2. Depending on the terrain, a tank consumes about 500 litres of fuel per 100 km. In view of such fossil consumption data, it is still important to bear in mind the financial scale at stake here: according to official data, the military sector consumes about 50 billion euros in the federal budget.

With about 80 million inhabitants, every person in Germany pays around 650 euros per year for NATO and the German Armed Forces, from newborn to old. For a small family of four this is 2600 euros per year, 50 euros per week. The consumption of resources and fossil combustion gases, as well as the withdrawal of these funds from areas that are useful for people and nature, such as basic services and services of general interest, is immense. In their application to the Bundestag, the Greens propose, among other things, the following measures relating to climate protection in the military sector: For the Bundeswehr …

  • submit a strategy to reduce CO2 emissions within the Bundeswehr in full;

  • to work within NATO for a general reduction of the CO2 emissions of the armed forces;

  • when purchasing … the entire cross-sectional vehicle fleet of the Bundeswehr to consistently rely on drive technologies that minimize CO2 emissions;

  • to give greater weight to CO2 emissions in all procurement decisions and, where possible, to prioritise;

• Do not conduct weapons and ammunition tests in or near sensitive and climate - relevant ecosystems; …”

The Greens justify this in their motion so:

The Bundeswehr must all … to take possible steps and make their contribution to coping with the climate crisis and to contribute to meeting the Paris climate goals.

On the other hand, the peace movement and parts of the ecology movement – and certainly still a few Greens – know that the really climate-relevant step of the Bundestag in this context is a decision on radical disarmament, which frees up funds that are urgently needed for ecology, health, social affairs, infrastructure and culture. Humanity has a future only in peace. And military uses up and suffocates lives even without a declaration of war. Peace policy is environmental and human protection.

The Greens are systematically continuing their path away from averting ecological disaster. They had emerged in 1980 from parts of the peace movement and the anti-nuclear movement. In the book Fighting for Hope’ by Petra Kelly, then best known co-founder of the Greens, wrote Nobel Prize winner in Literature Heinrich Böll:

Just a few words about the most insane of all systems: the armament system, which reveals its absurdity every day anew. After all, we do not want to be utopian, idealistic, as unrealistic as the politicians who constantly talk about disarmament, who declare it a success if they only upgrade a small percentage less. … How much of technical intelligence and physical genius is invested and ultimately wasted on new weapon systems, which then only exist as a kind of higher and very expensive toy. Applied they mean death and annihilation, not applied they stare with almost metaphysical stupidity into the sky or squat in bunkers. And if someone tells us that we have to see all this without emotion – then let us look at the sentimentally beaming eyes of the military and the ministerials, if they do … the very latest machinery is presented in order to awaken their desirability, for weapons of all categories are indeed about a little bit of that vulgar matter which is called money. Don’t the politicians notice that they expect too much absurdity from us, when they walk with happy glittering eyes on airfields and in front of government leaders fronts … there the flags flutter, music sounds -… what a great international deception.”

The absurdity rises to new heights if the military and war are to turn green. Heinrich Böll’s positioning in terms of content is important to remember where the Greens come from. It is not for nothing that the party-affiliated foundation is called the Heinrich Böll Foundation, and recently its co-chairman Ellen Ueberschär co-authored a statement recommending that representatives from politics, science and the military of European NATO states significantly increase their potential for conventional defense. The US should also underpin its nuclear strategy, which Germany supports through nuclear participation.

Also a green legitimized nuclear war leads over the nuclear winter into a final catastrophe for mankind. In the 1980s, Dorothee Sölle, founder of the Political Night Prayers, accompanied the Peace and Anti-Nuclear movement; she began her speech at the first peace demonstration with more than three hundred thousand times participation with a powerful image that still expresses today the commonality of the Peace and ecology movement:

Upgrade kills even without war. When a river overturns, it means that the amount of poison that a life context still endures becomes too much, destruction takes over, the fish die, the plants follow them, the water stinks. When a river overturns, it is actually no longer a river, but a dump. And if a country overturns? When the pollutants and toxins become so prevalent that life is suffocated that people despair of the possibility of living here, when they look around for emigration or break themselves, when they drift around like fish in the stinking broth? If a river is ecologically polluted, it overturns. If a country is militarily polluted and prepares to die, then the country overturns. This is exactly what we experience.

This background of the founding of the Green Party as a party must be remembered by the ecology and peace movement if they want to win over and inspire Green politicians for their original goals-to save lives-anew, which in many cases can still be more promising than with many of their conservative coalition partners.

However, their basic program is already a long way from this starting position. In the choice of words it still reminds of the beginnings of the Greens, example: “A strong foreign and security policy is feminist.“If you look closely, the picture changes quickly: the Greens see the Bundeswehr as “a necessary means of state and international security policy.”

Based on this understanding of security, it is no longer very far to a NATO assessment that turns the reality of this military alliance on its head: On 3 April 2019, the Greens/Alliance 90 submitted a motion to the Bundestag debate on the occasion of 70 years of NATO, in which they support NATO unabashedly:

For European security, NATO remains … the central actor alongside the EU, the … Security of Europe …

Among other things, they ignore the fact that NATO is the international alliance of states from whose territory most and the most massive crimes of international law have been committed, not only since the end of the Cold War in 1991. The disintegration of the region between Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Mali would not occur without NATO interventions and wars, which largely broke and broke international law.

Without the imperial war policy of NATO states, the world refugee catastrophes would not have the extent to be deplored by now. They are the worst since the Second World War. The security policy so called by the military proves to be the smooth opposite of security – for the people on the ground and for the world as a whole.

All of this is blotted out by the Greens on their way to renewed participation in a federal government, after the first federal government co-sponsored by the Greens had decided and defended NATO’s war of aggression against the former Yugoslavia, which the West dismantled and thereby destabilized in the long term.