The military situation in Eastern Europe is being escalated

A policy of détente is becoming increasingly necessary

rt. Ignoring the rhetoric of the media, it can be noted today: Since Donald Trump has taken office, the US have not started any new wars – in complete contrast to the predecessors (Barak Obama: Syria, Libya, continuation in Iraq and Afghanistan; Bush jr.: Iraq, Afghanistan). On the contrary, US troops are withdrawing from Syria, in Afghanistan there is a struggle for a withdrawal, and the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine is calming down (because of the good relationship between Trump and the new Ukrainian president Selenskij?).
Creeping deployment in the East
However, in many European states people are increasingly worried about the rearmament and the systematic massing of military forces at the borders to the Russian Federation since 2014. In particular:

  • the armament of some Eastern European states by the USA (Baltic states, Poland,   Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Moldova, Bulgaria),
  • the extension of US military bases for the army, navy and air force,
  • the ongoing rearmament of the NATO states (2% of the gross domestic product* for armaments),
  • for example the tacit reconstruction of German tank units (probably not for journeys in the Lüneburger Heide),
  • the ever-increasing NATO manoeuvres on the border of Russia (Defender 2020 with 34,000 soldiers) for exercising rapid troop deployments from the USA,
  • a systematic development of the enemy image “Russia” since 2014,
  • war-mongering in the political arena, such as the speeches of the German Defence Minister Kramp-Karrenbauer or the new EU Commission President von der Leyen,
  • a lack of efforts on the part of the EU and NATO states to bring about peace,
  • suspension of existing disarmament treaties with Russia,
  • continuation of boycott measures against Russia, etc.

Battlefield Europe

After the deployment of the Russian armed forces in Syria it became apparent that  the Russian army has meanwhile modernised its weapons and would be in a position to easily relocate the military conflict zone 1,500 kilometres to the west, i.e. to the heart of Western Europe.
Assuming that the US arms industry and its far-reaching lobby has a certain interest in military escalation in order to increase the export of its products, and thus one may also assume that the US policy has an interest in preserving domestic jobs. However, it remains incomprehensible why resistance to a policy of escalation is so weak in the governments of most European states.
Learning from experience
After many devastating wars, the European states have experienced in the past 100 years, it is generally known and scientifically researched that wars are prepared in a long-term and systematic manner and that they are “deliberately” or systematically promoted by certain groups of people. Such a process can also extend across several states, for example in an alliance:

  • in the country social and political forces are being involved expecting to gain advantages of war or being open to blackmail for such goals.
  • the media are used to establish and expand an enemy image based on psychology of the masses (PR) in the population which can be called up at any time.
  • “impeding” laws or constitutional articles that would restrict an aggressive war policy are successively changed (e.g. parliamentary reservations or neutrality requirements).
  • a planned and systematic military armament,
  • asymmetrical and low-threshold measures against an “enemy” power (boycott, sanctions, economic war or “legal” persecution of individual political exponents),
  • exaggerating individual “incidents” by media,
  • medial and verbal political rhetoric of war, threats,
  • breaking off diplomatic relations,
  • acts of war.

Today, it is a truism that Europe will be the battlefield in a military conflict between the USA and Russia. Both the USA and Russia will want to keep a military battle zone far away from their own countries.

Every step towardsinternational understanding counts

That’s why every step taken to de-escalate is important today. Every effort to build peace or to promote international understanding is a step in the right direction. Every political effort for mutual understanding and mutual respect is important. Respect for international law and the concerns associated with the founding of the UN must urgently be put back at the centre of the political commitment of all states.
Considering the widening social gap and the threat of economic and financial crisis Europe’s countries need a peace dividend more than ever. It could result from a peaceful foreign and economic policy with all states if not more and more money would be spent on unproductive military equipment.    •

* We must not be deceived by the figure of 2% of GDP. The gross domestic product (GDP) measures the production of all goods and services in the domestic economy after deduction of all intermediate consumption. In 2018 a GDP of 3.344 trillion euros was calculated for Germany. This means that 2% corresponds to around 66.88 billion euros for military expenditure (the current figure is 38.9 billion euros in 2018). This is an enormous increase of the military budget.