Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

July 28, 2010 |  11 comments |  Print  Your Opinion  

From the Editorial Team

Topic Germans Express Solidarity with the Troops

From the Editorial Team: The Atlantic Initiative has teamed up with Germany’s best-selling daily newspaper BILD to encourage readers to write personal messages of support to German soldiers stationed in Afghanistan in an effort to boost morale.


The Atlantische Initiative e.V. (the publisher of atlantic-community.org) believes that foreign policy should not remain the exclusive prerogative of Berlin's elite circles, as it affects the lives of each and every one of us. Its core mission is to make foreign policy accessible to everyone. The joint undertaking with BILD ensures that the initiative reaches the greatest number of ordinary German citizens as possible. German Defense Minister zu Guttenberg has expressed his delight at the initiative: "This is a great joint undertaking by the Atlantische Initiative and BILD. Our soldiers more than deserve this type of broad, visible support by the public."

Even though Germany has 4,335 soldiers in the field in Afghanistan and is the third-largest contributor to ISAF forces, the war-weary German public has up to now demonstrated no more than "a friendly disinterest" in the soldiers' fate, according to former Federal President Horst Köhler. Indeed, 59 percent of Germans today think that sending German soldiers to Afghanistan was a mistake in the first place. Nearly half of the population (48 percent) favor bringing the troops home without delay, while 32 percent caution that this is a viable option only after the country has been stabilized. Almost three-quarters of Germans do not agree with the official position that Germany's security needs defending in the Hindukush Mountains.

This notwithstanding, the German men and women deployed in Afghanistan are in that country at the behest of the popularly elected Bundestag. In a democracy such as the Federal Republic of Germany, this means that they are fighting on behalf of the German people. Irrespective of their political convictions, the very least those at home can do is to send them a sign of encouragement.

Over 1,200 submissions have already been received by atlantic-community.org and bild.de. The short posts tend to reflect their authors' stances on the war. Though a number of contributors appear to be opposed to the military engagement, most express strong support for the men and women in uniform, admiring the individual valor and personal strength of the troops One participant Rene Fuss stresses that although he is "a convinced pacifist and opposed to all forms of violence as a matter of principle," he realizes that soldiers "are risking their lives for the security of the German people and on behalf of peoples everywhere who hopefully will soon enjoy a better life."

Nevertheless, for many citizens today, the idea of having German soldiers once again fighting in a war is an uncomfortable one given the country's historical legacy. On the other hand, Germans feel called upon in a special way to fight against dictatorship and oppression. Gerd-Günter Finck writes that "we Germans have a particular moral obligation to take away the weapons of those who kill innocents." Herbert Thiel of Eschborn believes that Germans should remember that freedom must be defended, and often at a high price. The war in Afghanistan reminds him of his experiences as a boy, when he and his family were freed by American soldiers: "If the United States had not intervened in the First and Second World War and had not many young men and women sacrificed their lives back then, we would be living in a very different world today - and one that certainly would not be any better for it."

According to some contributors, German politicians appear unwilling to pay that price, and their cost-cutting measures come at the expense of the troops' security. As Severin Montag explains, "The government wants to save money on the one hand, namely, by cutting back on equipment and training soldiers, while on the other hand giving money freely to Taliban, who now promise to be good boys and no longer cowardly and dishonorably shoot the German unbelievers in the back." The majority of respondents feel that whenever the Bundestag determines to send soldiers abroad, it is obligated to provide the necessary resources to get the job done properly. As Detlef Heumann points out, the word "cost" does not belong in the context of soldiers fighting for their lives. What soldiers need is proper equipment, not loquacious funeral orations.

The only politician to receive favorable mention is Defense Minister zu Guttenberg. Contributors commend him for calling a spade a spade when referring to the situation on the ground as akin to "warlike circumstances." Reinhard Schmid of Brunssum expresses his hope that "the one young German politician, who is not weighed down by the trauma of two wars and the anxieties of the military" will survive long enough on the political stage to make a difference. Schmid further points out that thanks to the courageous stance taken by Bundeswehr commissioners, no German politician today can claim to be unaware of the logistical problems facing the men and women fighting in Afghanistan.

Many writers also stress their disappointment at the German public's inability to sufficiently differentiate between the mission and individual service members returning from deployment.

Possibly because of the painful experience of the Vietnam War, the American public is far more careful to distinguish between condemning the political underpinnings of an ongoing mission and individual soldiers serving their country. Most contributors feel that following the lead of the Americans, a lot more needs to be done in Germany to honor the soldiers' individual contributions to the war effort. Bjoern Giebisch suggests introducing a national holiday akin to Veterans' Day in America or making "Support Our Troops" bumper-stickers popular. Indeed, one website that promotes solidarity with soldiers in the field already exists. Those at home who support the troops, such as Daniel Schuergens, send the following message: "Keep a stiff upper lip... you are doing a great job!"

Meanwhile, the Atlantic Initiative asks its members and supporters to keep the expressions of solidarity coming, regardless of whether or not you agree with the mission in Afghanistan.

Read the individual posts on atlantic-community.org and bild.de.

 

  • 4
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
Tags: | Afghanistan | feldpost | troops | Germany | NATO-ISAF | bild |
 
Comments
Unregistered User

July 28, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Until now I had the feeling that this platform was designed to allow for exchange of political opinion and research interests but not for advocating (a dubious) political agenda.
Teaming up with a tabloid as the BILD is even more questionable.

The argument that in a democracy a parliamentary decission would automatically bind the population to support each and every decission is a very strange way of interpreting democracy.

Whatever opinion people might have on the issue of deploying troops to Afghanistan (or any other region in the world), I would respectfully like to ask atlantic-community.org to abstain from political partisanship and remain an open plattform for discussion and research. For nothing different I have signed up to.
 
Unregistered User

July 28, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I entirely agree with the position taken by mister Brakel. I cannot see the societal surplus in promoting unreflected sentimental support towards "the troops" creating the illusion of a discourse about an occupational group rather than a political (and by the way personal) decision.

Whatever one may think about the necessity of "defending Germany in Afghanistan" or any other place in the world, if one is to launch a public dialogue on the military, this can and will never be unpolitical.

Basing a political subject's campaign on entirely emotional grounds is about what I expect of a tabloid like BILD, not a platform that understands itself as a serious forum for discussion and research.

Reinforcing patriotic sentiments and the ilusion of a national common bond within the sphere of international politics and war, however is something I would kindly ask anyone to leave undone.
 
Unregistered User

July 28, 2010

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
God bless die vatterland

God Bless Germand

and may his Angles be with the soldiers of gemany

God bless your Freedom an Democracy

All soldiers of the Free world are united

We are all united by the spiritual principal

of freedom an democracy.

God bless Germany Long live Germany
 
Jordan  Brown

July 30, 2010

  • 3
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
As an American I appreciate the statement that we have learned out lesson when it comes to differentiating between the soldiers and the politics of war. Vietnam was very traumatic in that respect (and many others). If you see an elderly homeless guy with a few screws loose on an American city street, it's not unlikely that said guy is a Vietnam vet. The reception that many of these young kids received coming home was not positive to say the least and the damage that it did to a generation can still be seen.

I don't think that what the Atlantic Initiative is doing here is so partisan.

All of the political statements made here seem to be commonly held:

-Soldiers go where their governments tell them too. In this case, an elected government.

-When a military force is sent to a hostile area it should be properly equipped.

-Soldiers on the ground are not the ones making decisions on the national level.

Not that there aren't people who would disagree with any of these points, but the values implied by these statements are fairly universal.

 
Unregistered User

July 30, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
My point is not, if you agree with sending troops abroad or not, but I would dispute that the issues mentioned by you are "common values", these are as well political decissions. German soldiers in Afghanistan for example are not there are against their will, but because they signed up for this job. This is already a political decission.

If we assume that there is a common agreement on whatever values, I could also expect that other campaigns would be supported. As this would turn this platform into a website for political lobbying I rather doubt that this "Support our troops- campaign" is helpful. At least it is not how this platform was advocated initially.

And: I would also like to question, why this campaign call for solidarity with German troops but not for solidarity and support with the hundreds of civilian staffers from aid organisations who also work there executing German political decissions.
 
Unregistered User

July 30, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
BTW.: I would also like to hear the editors' opinion on the questions asked.
 
Joerg  Wolf

July 30, 2010

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
@ Kristian,

Thank you very much for your comments.

Of course, we also support all the aid worker. Three friends of mine are among them. I very much appreciate their work and worry a lot about their safety.

For pragmatic reasons, we limited this campaign to Bundeswehr soldiers. For the same reason, we did not include the soldiers of our allies.

I am open to starting a new campaign of sending messages of support to civilian staffers, because obviously Afghanistan's future depends not much more than military support. Economic aid, education, health systems, institution building, human rights and gender awareness, fighting corruption, etc. are very important.

We featured this video interview of mine with the director of the Boell Foundation's Kabul Office for quite a while on our start page:

"Civil Projects Need to Play a Greater Role"
Security and stability are clearly important aspects of the international community's mission in Afghanistan, but, as Dr. Bente Scheller points out, it is only part of the equation. There is a lot of room to improve the functioning of the state, its administration and legal system. Furthermore, unemployment must be tackled and income generating projects must be promoted. Strategies need to be developed towards improving these important civil areas.

http://www.atlantic-community.org/index/Open_Think_Tank_Article/Civ...


Would you like to draft the first letter of support to civilian staffers of aid organizations?
We could feature it as a Your Opinon article and not just as a comment.

 
Florian  Kuhne

August 2, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
@ Jörg Wolf

Please answer to the questions Mr. Brakel has raised! Mr Lucke and me started the same discussion and Mr Bohnen and you did not answer in appropriate ways.
You and AC do not confront yourself with the legitimate confusion your BILD-campaign has generated, on the contrary you try to bind Mr Brakel by suggesting another campaign.
This is not what I expect from an Open Think Tank!!!
 
Mike  McCormack

August 2, 2010

  • 4
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I agree with what Jordan said, but to go a bit further:

I think Kristian makes a very reasonable point (and as an American with a very strong interest in the civil-military relations sphere I'm always interested in seeing how this debate takes shape in different countries). Nonetheless, I think this article indeed falls within the scope of this website's purpose. If you click on the "Mission" section at the top you will see one of the goals of this site is "To bring together the collective intelligence of our members in order to develop new ideas and concepts of how Europe and America can cooperate over foreign and security policy as well as globalization in the twenty-first century. Our approach is constructive, nonpartisan, and aims at problem solving." I would say that would already show support for the institutional frameworks that exist in the Atlantic relationship and realization that they should exist (how and when they are used, however, being the point of debate). So while this forum indeed is designed to allow different viewpoints on the issues, I think the people who utilize this forum nonetheless do so with a certain set of common underlying beliefs.
 
Paul-Robert  Lookman

August 3, 2010

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I welcome the initiative to offer “our boys” support in overseas missions. However, as a non-partisan, non-profit, and independent organization, The Atlantic Initiative perhaps might also like to organize a platform for people of any nationality or origin to pledge their support to the Afghan population, which has for decades fallen victim under foreign occupation, has to cope with the brutality of aggressive folks from foreign lands which they have not invited to intervene in their internal politics through a democratic process akin to the German decision to send German troops to Afghanistan, which Jörg Wolf so eloquently describes.
 
Member deleted

August 13, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I must say, trying to co-opt me into joing your campaign by drafting a message to civilian staffers is a rather strange approach.

Also while this website follows a certain mission of "To bring together the collective intelligence of our members in order to develop new ideas and concepts of how Europe and America can cooperate over foreign and security policy ", I fail to see how that justifies such a campaign. A discussion about, if such a campaign would be useful is fine in an academic portal like this, but executing the very campaign with the means and ressources of this portal violates the ethics of academia.

Also suggesting that you only decided for mentioning military personnel due to "practical reasons" is of course not very convincing. It is much more likely that a tabloid like the "BILD" and it's readers can easily connect with the appeal for patriotic feelings for "our boys" than with those for aid workers.

The question, if cooperating with the "BILD" does damage the image and relaiability of this community as such is annother valid point, that I completely miss in the explanations of the editors.
 

Commenting has been deactivated in the archive. We appreciate your comments on our more recent articles at atlantic-community.org


Community

You are in the archive of all articles published on atlantic-community.org from 2007 to 2012. To read the latest articles from our open think tank and network with community members, please go to our new website