Germany in the grip of Anglo-Saxon war policies?

by Karl Müller

In 2014, one hundred years after the start of the First World War, the two Scottish authors Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor pubished a book about the causes of the First World War which was edited in the German language only a few months later: “Hidden History – The Secret Origins of the First World War”. (“Verborgene Geschichte. Wie eine geheime Elite die Menschheit in den Ersten Weltkrieg stürzte.”) This work contains more than 400 pages and is very interesting for everyone who would like to know more about the pre-history of the war. It does not follow the lines of official historiography.

“The dead deserve the truth”

“After a century of propaganda, lies and brainwashing about the First World War, cognitive dissonance renders us uncomfortable to bear the truth that it was a small socially advantaged group of self-styled English race patriots, backed by powerful industrialists and financiers in Britain and the United States, who caused the First World War. The determination of this London-based Secret Elite to destroy Germany and take control of the world was ultimately responsible for the deaths of millions of honourable young men who were betrayed and sacrificed in a mindless, bloody slaughter to further a dishonourable cause. Today, tens of thousands of war memorials in villages, towns and cities across the world bear witness to the great lie that binds them to a myth. They are remembered in empty roll calls erected to conceal the war’s true purpose. What they deserve is the truth, and we must not fail them in that duty.”

Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor: Hidden History – The Secret Origins of the First World War, e-book pos. 7515.

What deceptions are we facing?

From today’s perspective, the authors’ portrayal of the ways in which the “secret elite” – as they call and also precisely name the respective group of persons – proceeded to reach their goals, is even more interesting. The question arises whether we are today confronted with similar mechanisms, namely that the citizens as well as many who are holding responsible positions in politics and society, are deliberately being left in the dark,  deceived and confused about the actual schemes. And what role do unscrupulous forces play who are acting in the background,  playing their games,  using their ideologies while pursuing their interests?
And whether – essentially – it is all about purposefully planning and preparing a great war once more, while opposing forces are being corrupted or out-manoeuvred and marginalised. And whether it is actually intended to drag Germany into that future war step by step.

“The USA about to quit Europe”?

“The USA about to quit Europe? “was the title of an interview, published by the Basler Zeitung on 30 July.  In this interview, Stephan Walt, Professor for International Relations at the Harvard Kennedy School of the Harvard University, criticised the US foreign policy of the past 30 years, including that of the current president Donald Trump. He demanded the US forces’  retreat from Europe. Simultaneously he advised: “We should continue to strive for a close connection with Europe politically and diplomatically.” And he goes on: “The Europe of today is politically stable and well-off, it is capable of organising its own defence. The European states have failed to do that for much too long.” And: “By using the financial means, which the USA could spare this way, they could concentrate on Asia – a process, that was already under way during the Obama administration.” And finally: “In regard to Russia the USA need to pursue a new path of agreement, because otherwise we will be driving the Russians even closer towards China.” … A true message of peace?

To what extent is the “threat” to be taken seriously?

Some days later on 10 August the same newspaper claimed that Richard Grenell, US-Ambassador to Germany had “threatened” to withdraw US troupes from Germany. “Expecting US- tax-payers to go on financing more than 50,000 Americans in Germany while those Germans have always used their trade surplus for home affairs is indeed an offence.” The US-Ambassador to Poland had seconded: “Poland has always fulfilled its obligation to pay NATO two per cent of its GDP, whereas Germany hasn’t. We would be pleased if the US-troupes came to Poland.” Is it now Germany’s turn to be pleased?

Germany is indispensable for US-wars

Note how the same article explains further down: “However, the Pentagon’s analyses might reach the conclusion that a comprehensive retreat from Germany would become expensive primarily for one country – for the USA.” The argument: “Above all, this is due to the nature of the institutions which the US-Army is operating in Germany; these are among others a whole series of headquarters and logistic-centres, significant for the USA’s deployments and defence strategies widely exceeding Germany. Among them are the two regional United States Commands for Europe and Africa in the Stuttgart area,  as well as the US Marine Corps Infantry Command for Europe and Africa in Böblingen. The US base Ramstein is not only one of the greatest outside the USA and the headquarters of the US-Air Force for Europe, but it is also the most important ordnance hub for operations in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Africa, particularly significant for the piloting of drone operations.” Moreover the newspaper informs the public about the greatest US military hospital as well as the greatest US-ammunition depot outside the United States, both situated in Germany, and so on and so on.
And the article goes on: “Up to 2023 the USA are planning to invest another two billion dollars only in their bases in Rheinland Pfalz. Ramstein and Landstuhl have already been rebuilt and modernized for some billion dollars and cannot be substituted in the short and long term.” And further down: “According to Pentagon planning an additional number of 1,500 soldiers are to be deployed to Germany by September 2020.” And the article closes with the message: “It can be assumed that Ambassador Grenell is well informed about all these facts. However, he is as well aware of the mechanisms of the media, the reflexes of politics, and the art of provocation.”…. Is this really a situation in which Germany may quietly settle back?
Karl-Heinz Kamp, President of the German Federal Academy of Security Policy in Berlin hurried to align himself closely with US-policy in his guest contribution to the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” from 13 August: ” Next to the USA, Germany is NATO’s most potent nation economically. However, it is not willing to fulfil its treaty obligations and spend two percent of its GDP on defence. Ever and again it is conjuring up new excuses. That way it helps to stake NATO’s reliability.”….

Did van der Leyen declare war on Russia?

Hardly anybody took a closer look, when Ursula von der Leyen, denouncing her post as German Minister of Defence at the ceremony of the Great Tattoo, wished for the song “Wind of Change” composed and written by the German band Scorpions in 1989. On 16 August  the newspaper “Die Welt” wrote: “With shining eyes the former Minister listened to the song.” Hardly anybody knows that the song’s lyrics begin with Moskva and hint at the looming end of the Soviet Union. The article just mentions some statements of the music group itself, who call their song a “peace song”.
However, the end of the Soviet Union was also the prelude to a unipolar world dominated by the USA. “The end of history”– and the idea of the neo-liberal world’s final victory.
It meant an era of prolonged illegal Anglo-Saxon and NATO wars against international law. The The Soviet Union’s successor states – as prominent voices proclaimed during the nineties – were no longer to play a part in world politics but were to serve US interests. Most Russians keep the years of the Jelzin reign in bad memory. In the aftermath Russia tried to free itself from the unwanted embrace. But during thirty years after 1989 we have been facing numerous attempts to bring about a “regime change” in today’s Russia. Is this the “Wind of Change”?

Ursula von der Leyens “Wind of Change”

I follow the Moskva
And down to Gorky Park
Listening to the wind of change
An August summer night
Soldiers passing by
Listening to the wind of change […]

… And whom precisely does Germany follow?

On 22 August News Agency Reuters reported: “Germany, France and Great Britain rejected US President Donald Trump’s proposal to once again admit Russia to the Circle of G7 countries.
On Wednesday evening, before meeting with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Chancellor Angela Merkel said that in 2014 Russia had been excluded for definite reasons, and that those reasons were still valid […]. A few days before the G7 Summit in France President Emmanuel Macron declared his rejection of Russia’s re-admittance as well. “I believe that Russia’s unconditional return would be a sign of the G7’s weakness and a strategic mistake. Britain’s Prime Minister Johnson concurred in this opinion. […]
In contrast US-President Trump had recommended, to enlarge G7 to G8 once again. Many of the issues discussed had to do with Russia, he argued. He reproached his predecessor Barrack Obama of having edged Russia out of the Circle.    •