>Just what is liberal about saving the planet from capitalist greed, and
>trying to create a just, tolerant society where people are valued as
>people, and not classified according to their reproductive status? Marx
>was a ferocious critic of liberal ideology, but he constantly harped on
>the socialist possibilities of liberal reforms (all those quotation from
>the Factory Acts, e.g.).
>
>-- Dennis

Is the professionalization of the military a liberal reform?   Yoshie

*****   German Green party calls for professional army
By Ulrich Rippert
24 June 2000

...The lurch to the right by German political parties since the 
Kosovo War is most obvious in the case of the Greens. Only three 
months after the end of the war, the defense spokeswoman of the Green 
parliamentary group, Angelika Beer, presented a 12-page paper 
entitled "Less is More! Proposals for a Security-Policy and 
Technology-Oriented Modernisation of the Bundeswehr [German Army]". 
Up to then, the Greens had always linked their opposition to military 
service to a general rejection of the army. Now they call for the 
abolition of military service and the creation of a powerful 
professional army that can be deployed swiftly and reliably anywhere 
in the world.

In Angelika Beer's opinion, the reform of the German army must be 
oriented toward enabling Germany to make a powerful contribution to 
the creation of an independent European defense identity: "NATO 
defense and crisis management require the restructuring of the German 
army into an army that can deploy suitable, excellently trained and 
adequately equipped forces requiring a low level of mobilization time 
in Europe and its peripheral and neighbouring regions."

Beer calls for armed forces "that are characterized by great 
mobility, technical and operational superiority, leadership-adapted 
discipline and flexible deployment capacity in the context of 
multinational and international operations." Following detailed 
technical proposals aimed at creating "higher performance and more 
cost-efficient armed forces", Beer concludes her paper with a clear 
affirmation of support for national German interests and the warning 
that there is a danger "that we could miss our chance of making a 
German contribution to the change in international relations".

In the introduction to her theses, Beer repeats a few phrases from 
her pacifist past. She has much to say about "strengthening the 
preventive elements in foreign and security policy" and "early 
detection and prevention of conflicts". But, then, so do top military 
leaders like former German Army Chief of Staff Klaus Naumann, who has 
often stressed "the elimination of conflict sources as a central 
aspect of crisis management".

Based on Angelika Beer's paper, the Greens have taken on the role of 
foremost proponent of a heavily armed professional army. They praise 
the report of the Weizsaecker Commission (a commission headed by 
former German President Weizsaecker which recently submitted its 
proposals for a reform of the German army) and criticize the plans 
put forward by Defense Minister Rudolf Scharping (SPD), because these 
plans do not go far enough and continue to call for military service.

The hapless attempts by Green members of parliament to pacify critics 
in their own ranks by claiming that the reduction in the number the 
soldiers, the closure of a few barracks and their demand for the 
abolition of military service are all steps in the direction of 
disarmament are farcical. Nothing can obscure two fundamental facts: 
first, that the restructuring of the German army is linked to a 
gigantic rearmament programme budgeted at 120 billion marks for the 
next 10 years; and second, that the Greens have made a 180-degree 
turnabout in their position on military issues.

As on so many other political issues, the Greens' arguments are 
thoroughly opportunistic. In the debate on military service they take 
a narrow-minded position which approaches the question entirely from 
the standpoint of individuals who would no longer be obliged to do 
military service. The Greens ignore the broader consequences for 
society.

The creation of a professional army does not-as the Greens 
claim-reduce the influence of the military in society. Rather it 
increases it, while reducing the influence of society on the 
military. German history over the past century has amply demonstrated 
how closely linked the creation of a professional army is with the 
danger of a military caste that strives for social recognition and 
political influence, and thus becomes an independent power factor.

But all such issues are of no interest to the Greens. Instead, they 
proclaim that democratic control of the army is secured through 
parliament. They themselves demonstrated what that means in practice. 
With very few exceptions, the members of parliament voted for a war 
in which 15 heavily armed NATO countries bombed an underdeveloped 
country for weeks on end....

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jun2000/germ-j24.shtml   *****


_______________________________________________
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international

Reply via email to