Opinion against the LEFT and its important peace policy positions continues. But it comes not only in the form of a new "red socks campaign" from the CDU, but (among other things as a reaction to it) also from the SPD and the Greens. Tobias Pflüger of the LEFT has now responded to the demands for the "NATO commitment" by Olaf Scholz or Annalena Baerbock. The peace movement no longer has the influence necessary to avert future dangers. Therefore, the Alliance Greens and the SPD can demand without significant public protest that the LEFT must make a 'commitment' to NATO if it is to be included in the government.
Olaf Scholz's statement on the coalition question amounts to an irrefutable determination:
"It is clear and certain that the security we need can only succeed in the alliance of NATO. Therefore, everyone who seeks government responsibility in Germany must have it clear for themselves that there is a strong and committed cooperation in NATO”
The alliance-green candidate for chancellor Annalena Baerbock sharpens this position even more ultimately. With reference to the "reliability in foreign policy" required by her, she calls for a commitment to NATO; quote:
"If you cannot ensure a government's ability to act in foreign policy, there is no basis for government”
The TAZ has satirically processed the demand for such a 'NATO confession'-which Olaf Scholz has increased with the demand that it must come "from the heart" – by parallelizing it with the Christian creed; quote:
"I believe in the North Atlantic Treaty, suffered from the fall of the Soviet Union, ... descended into the realm of disarmament, risen from the dead after 9/11” .
But the subject is far too serious to be satirized. Tobias Pflüger, spokesman for defence policy of the LEFT, commented on the demand for confession on Deutschlandfunk on Tuesday:
"It is the case that *Olaf Scholz * demands confessions from the left. And if he wants to have confessions, let him go to church”
From the outset, NATO has stood for a dangerous and manipulative policy, which has led to dangerous tensions, violations of international law and wars in recent decades and which is responsible for a large contribution to the ecological threats to the future.
The founding of NATO was already based on a Des information, which could immediately catch the eye of the critical contemporary: the military and politicians involved from the USA and Western European states declared the Soviet Union a danger, which had to be prevented by the founding of NATO from expanding its sphere of power, for example by an attack on Finland, Turkey or Greece.
What made this founding narrative forgotten was the fact that, on the one hand, the war of extermination of Nazi Germany on the principle of "scorched earth" had left the European part of the Soviet Union massively destroyed. And on the other hand, the Soviet Union had to bear the largest blood toll of all states in the liberation of Europe from fascism: with about 27 million victims, about half of all the dead of the Second World War were Soviet. It is obvious that a few years after 1945, everything was to be expected, but not an attack by the Red Army on a state of the NATO territory, which was staked out in 1949.
As a result of the anti-communist heated founding propaganda of the NATO forces, the Western armament was always justified with the doctrine of deterrence against danger from the East, although the figures never showed this. Currently, there is a mismatch of arms spending between Russia and NATO in the ratio of about 1 to 15. NATO's share of world arms spending has been about 50% for decades.
NATO's goal of spending two percent of total economic output on the military sector is based on the disinformation that the armaments of its chosen adversaries, especially Russia, are forcing it. Currently, the figures show that NATO countries officially burn more than $ 114 million per hour for military purposes. Humanity in the 21st century cannot afford this waste and destruction in the face of ecological catastrophe.
Added to this is the fact that NATO includes the nuclear first strike as an option in case of conflict. Even a limited nuclear war would result in a so-called 'nuclear winter' by scientists due to the immense amount of fly ash in the atmosphere, which would deprive the entire human race of its livelihood.
Former U.S. Nuclear Force Commander-in-Chief Lee Butler warns of the risks of nuclear armament and the insanity of so-called ‘atomic balance’:
"Nuclear deterrence is a game of chance that will eventually be lost."
The US and NATO are currently increasing the risk of a final war by replacing older nuclear drop bombs in Belgium, Italy and West Germany, among others, with the further developed attack system B 61-12, which NATO experts classify as more usable.
The expansion of the Büchel air base in the Eifel near Koblenz, which was planned for this purpose alone, has officially cost taxpayers more than a quarter of a billion euros, plus 30 US nuclear bombers with a purchase price of almost 70 million each, which are purchased for nuclear war alone.
In connection with nuclear armament, large parts of the peace movement of the 1980s had a clear assessment of NATO, as can be traced by the quote of the then parliamentary speaker of the Greens in the Bundestag:
"Petra Kelly ... criticizes Brandt ...: If on the one hand he says 'no' to new weapons, but on the other hand 'yes' to NATO, then that is absurd."
In the early days of the Greens, the connection between ecology and peace was common property. The ecologically harmful effects of military operations without direct war operations are intolerable by the combustion exhaust gases alone. The current Tornado – type atomic bombers of the Luftwaffe emit 12,000 kg of CO2 per hour of flight-this corresponds to the CO2footprint of a German citizen per year.
The US has enforced that the military's climate footprint is not taken into account in the climate negotiations.
In any case, NATO's dealings with the UN are incendiary, since the transatlantic Alliance is the alliance of states from whose territory – not only since the end of the Cold War – most and the most massive violations of international law have emanated, be it, for example, the Balkan War, the war in Iraq, Libya, Syria or the mixing of the anti-terrorist war 'Operation Enduring Freedom' with the ISAF mandate in Afghanistan.
In times of mutually aggravating ecological and military threats to the future, which are further exacerbated by the tendential disintegration of the international order, it is a survival requirement for humanity in the global context that it acts based on a legal order that applies to all. The Injustice of the Fittest is another Ascension command with which the military and the world's largest military power Nato increase the danger that humanity will disappear from planet Earth. That is why the critical nuclear scientists have set their watch to 100 seconds before zero hour as a warning of the man-made demise of civilization.
The peace movement and forces supporting it would be crazy to make a profession of faith for NATO – that is, for the danger of its premature death.
As the first steps at the parliamentary level at the beginning of the 20th century. Tobias Pflüger gives concrete points in the 14th legislative period that must currently be in the foreground of a peace ecological policy – Quote: "It is necessary that there is a change of policy also on these points”: no maneuvers that escalate tensions like ‘Defender 2020’, spending the NATO target of two percent of total economic output on the military sector, leads to spending in the wrong areas and not, for example, in health, education and ecology, an end to the nuclear participation of our country in the NATO nuclear strategy, instead signing the UN Combat Air Systems, which, including drone swarms and artificial intelligence, makes the great war in Europe of the 21st century more likely. Weapons are made for their use, not to burn money for their acquisition and readiness. Deterrence is a risk that eventually gets hot. Moreover, civilization cannot afford this waste of resources and biosphere degradation in the 21st century.
You can find the sources [here] (/static/downloads/the-same-for-each-choice.txt "Sources").