Another Special Path for Germany?

Germany Will Be a Target in the Coming Nuclear War!

by Helga Zepp-LaRouche

[Print version of this article]

Sept. 1—The following statement was circulated by the Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität at the nationwide demonstrations in Germany Sept. 1 for “Anti-War Day,” marking the date in 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland. The EIR translation is by Daniel Platt. Subheads have been added.

After one red line after another has been crossed in the war over Ukraine, and long-range weapons are now being used deep in Russian territory (of which it was recently said that they will lead to World War III), NATO is now fully at war with Russia—at least since the Ukrainian advance into the Kursk region.

The Kursk operation was carried out with the full support of NATO and the United States, with their training standards, satellite and aerial reconnaissance, as well as command and control structures at the most modern level.

While the Ukrainian troops are being wiped out on the front in the Donbass, the only brigade that is trained and equipped at the top NATO level has been sent to the Kursk region. Was this to use the conquered areas for bargaining power in future peace talks?

The opposite is the case: the invasion has taken the option of negotiation off the table.

The Italian military analyst Gianandrea Gaiani described the Ukrainian advance to Kursk as a smaller-scale repeat of the Wehrmacht’s Ardennes Offensive. Ukrainian troops have attempted to advance into Russian territory with a brigade trained to NATO standards, despite massive losses in the Donbass. However, it was in Kursk that the Wehrmacht launched its last major offensive in the east in the Summer of 1943 under the name “Operation Citadel”—the largest tank battle in history. In total, one million soldiers lost their lives, with the Soviet soldiers suffering the greatest losses, with 800,000 dead. In total, 27 million Soviet citizens lost their lives in World War II, and that is why the “Great Patriotic War,” as it is called in Russia, is still a vivid memory for the entire population today. The fact that German tanks are again taking part in the Kursk invasion today is likely to trigger the most violent reactions in Russia.

But history comes to mind in another way: Another “German” special path is emerging that has already shocked our European neighbors and the world.

A Nuclear Suicide Strategy

On August 20, the New York Times reported that President Biden had already signed a new secret nuclear strategy in March, instructing the U.S. armed forces to prepare for a coming simultaneous confrontation with Russia, China and North Korea. This secret nuclear strategy was, obviously, also the basis for the U.S.’s participation in the NATO summit in Washington during July 9-11. At the end of the NATO summit, Chancellor Scholz surprised the world by announcing that the U.S. had decided to station American medium-range missiles in Germany as of 2026, and that this was a “good decision.” Note that this was not a joint decision by NATO or by Germany and the U.S., but by the U.S. alone, unilaterally.

Now, the renowned security expert Wolfgang Richter reports, in a statement issued by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation entitled “Stationing of U.S. Medium-Range Missiles in Germany: Conceptual Background and Consequences for European Security,” that although there were secret bilateral government consultations on the matter in the run-up to the summit, it was not a joint alliance decision, and the joint statement of the summit does not take a position on it. The question of stationing appears not to have been widely discussed within the alliance.

Unlike NATO’s rearmament decision in 1979, the statement was not preceded by an intensive alliance discussion in which Germany could have represented its national interests. At that time, the decision was supported by four other alliance partners; today it only affects Germany, but it still has significant effects on the security situation of all. Smaller states could feel overwhelmed, which could become politically explosive and split the alliance. It is also unclear who would have command over the use of the missiles. If this were only in the hands of the U.S.A., Germany would have surrendered its fate to the strategic interests of the U.S.A. in the event of a conflict.

Once the missiles are stationed, the entire European security structure will, of course, be affected, without the citizens of Italy, Slovakia, France or the Netherlands having a say. And how can Germany’s sovereignty be trampled on like that? It is incomprehensible that Olaf Scholz has agreed to this new German special path!—without debate in the Bundestag, without discussion in public!

In the summary conclusions, Wolfgang Richter writes:

The expected Russian counter-stationing of nuclear-capable missiles will expose Germany to an increased risk. The foreseeable escalation of tensions with Russia will change Germany’s security situation and seriously increase the nuclear risk for Germany in the event of a conflict.

It is also strange that a decision of such significance for Germany’s security was announced as an executive act without being discussed in detail beforehand in the German Bundestag and with the German public. This does not follow from the National Security Strategy of 2022. The intensification of the confrontation in Europe and the increase in Germany’s nuclear risk require a broad and inclusive national discussion.

This discussion must begin immediately, because in view of the current escalation, in which British politicians, think tanks and the media in particular are playing with nuclear fire more loudly every day, it is by no means certain that the strategic crisis will not get out of hand long before 2026.

The ‘No Red Line’ Delusion

The most dangerous self-deception is the narrative spread by the hawks, that there are no red lines in the confrontation with Russia. After all, they have delivered everything from helmets to Leopard tanks to cruise missiles and F-16s, without Putin making good on his threats, they say.

This overlooks the fact that the “special military operation” itself was already the answer to the crossing of several red lines. The well-known security expert Dmitri Trenin writes:

The U.S.A. has come to the conclusion that Russia would rather capitulate than launch a nuclear strike. This will “unleash” the NATO countries and wipe away all “red lines.” The West is fighting Russia as if it did not have nuclear weapons....

However, NATO’s constant escalation of the war increases the likelihood that Moscow will abandon the restraint it has shown from the beginning and start striking targets in the territories of the NATO states most actively involved in the war.

This, of course, affects a whole range of targets in Germany. At the same time, Russian government officials are also warning against the illusion that the expansion of the war, including nuclear war, will remain limited to Europe. The Kremlin has issued clear warnings that the price of attacks on Russia could be the sacrifice of U.S. statehood.

All experts who do not support the NATO narrative warn that we have never been so close to the Third—nuclear and thus final—World War as we are today. At the beginning of the 1980s, when the medium-range missile crisis had also reduced the warning time before the launch of the SS-20 and Pershing II missiles to just a few minutes, many hundreds of thousands of people were on the streets because they knew how close the world was to total destruction. Today, when the situation is much more dangerous, because all disarmament and arms control treaties have long since gone down the drain, the majority of the population is sleepwalking toward the abyss beyond which there is only nothingness. Humanity and everything it has ever produced are threatened with extinction.

In the coming weeks and months, we must shake people up and take to the streets by the millions to clearly and unambiguously declare our desire for peace. We must remind politicians of the peace mandate of the Grundgesetz (Germany’s Basic Law) and vote out of office all those who violate the Basic Law in this sense.

At the same time, we need a comprehensive, inclusive national debate about Germany’s real security interests, which cannot consist of Germany being wiped out in an emergency.

We need a new global security and development architecture that, in the tradition of the Peace of Westphalia, takes into account the interests of all nations in the world.

We in Germany have a special responsibility to bring the experience of two world wars on our soil into the international debate, and to realize the vision for peace in the world in keeping with the tradition of our great humanist poets, composers and philosophers, which puts war as a means of resolving conflicts aside forever.