The Bundeswehr, it is said, has “withdrawn” from Afghanistan. What sounds so nice means: The war in Afghanistan is lost, the Americans have ordered a withdrawal, hence the previously uninformed German troops are practically on the run.
After the loss of a war and the escape of the troops, the question of guilt, costs and benefits of this war should be discussed. From the beginning the German war game was gratuituous, senseless, militarily useless and could only be explained as a colony doing its duty according to the order of the ruling colonial power.
Political and military consequences should also be drawn from the disaster in Afghanistan:
- It was nonsensical to “defend Germany’s freedom in the Hindu Kush” (Peter Struck), and merely undertaken to show loyalty to the USA, who risked this adventure themselves and ordered their satellites to join them. The decision to go to war in Afghanistan was made by the United States alone, as was the withdrawal. We only took part “out of solidarity”.
The reference to the duty of assistance in Art. 5 of the NATO treaty is now proving to have a catch to it: Wherever the USA starts war, they can mobilise the solidarity of its NATO vassals, NATO has become an accessory to American foreign and military policy; it does not represent the vassals’ interests, but only those of the leading power USA. This can become even more dangerous in future than it was in Afghanistan, if NATO Secretary Stoltenberg is not stopped in his US-ordered incitement against Russia. The fact that the USA describes Russia and China as enemies against itself and thus against NATO may be the preparation of a new war also for the vassals. Had Putin not reacted judiciously on several occasions, NATO would already have been at war in Ukraine. China is in fact a competitor to the USA, but not an enemy of Europe. The new NATO war orientation corresponds to the world power politics of the dollar empire, but not to European or even German interests. Too much loyalty or vassalage could plunge us into new military adventures here.
First insight: German politics must not allow war and peace to be determined by third parties. We have to pursue an independent foreign and military policy geared towards our own interests.
- In Afghanistan it was never clear what goal the Bundeswehr had there, what was the purpose of its deployment there and what plan this was supposed to serve. The bottom line is that it guarded the CIA’s drug fields, led a regional shadowy existence and was only an alibi of German participation in American world power plans.
This is not a reproach to the Bundeswehr; it has been abused by its own US-dependent politicians who today will no longer know of the reasons why they sent the German Bundeswehr to Afghanistan in the first place, why they caused billions of dollars in costs, why they sacrificed the lives of German soldiers and why they kept playing at war against the will of our people.
Just as our troops rushed headlong and haphazardly to war on American orders, they have now fled with the loss of 59 soldiers and a prodigious quantity of military equipment, and they are still bringing tens of thousands of fighters from Afghanistan, who do not want to fall into the hands of the victors.
Second insight: the carelessness with which the federal government and the Bundestag decided to participate in this war and to extend it must end. No war may be waged from German soil. Ultimately, our troops should protect our country (its borders) instead of engaging in US international adventures.
Donald Trump and Emanuel Macron have rightly disputed the sense NATO makes today. We are no longer threatened in Europe, we have peace treaties with one another including cooperation, and we should give up an attack alliance with military world power behaviour (NATO).
- The flight of American and German troops from Afghanistan could signal a military turning point in world politics. Even with the help of its satellites, the US was no longer able to conquer a small country like Afghanistan. As in Vietnam – despite its technical superiority – it lost another war.
It would therefore be advisable for its satellites to remain militarily cautious towards the newly declared enemy China, so as not to be involved in the war policy and bear the costs of another US military defeat. •
(Translation Current Concerns)