"The sovereign nations of the past are no longer the framework within which the problems of today can be resolved. And (European) society itself is only a stage in the transition to the form which the world will assume tomorrow."
Jean Monnet, honored citizen of Europe. Erinnerung eines Europaers, Hansa Verlag 1978, p. 662.
Our European hearts bleed. Putin and his clique have caused Ukranians to be shot, starved and thirst without adequate medical attention. Mothers and children suffer. Our hearts bleed also, because Putin and his clique beat up their own Russian citizens who have gone out in the streets to protest against this war and throw them into overcrowded prisons. The war crimes are Putin's crimes, not those of Russian mothers and fathers. Their sons and daughters are also victims of this dictator‘s madness as are the Ukraininan Sons and daughters.
What can we do against Putin the Russian and the other Putins of our tormented world?
A great deal, actually.
First we can raise our voices loudly against them. We can make it possible to immediately dispatch aid to those suffering. We can send them food and medical aid; we can assure them of our unrestricted solidarity, we can cry out to heaven our anger against Putin and his cliques. We can take in Ukranian war refugees with open arms.
We can face down Putin unreservedly. We can raise our clenched fists against him. We can do all that is possible to isolate them and to openly accuse them of their crimes. Unfortunately economic sanctions will affect the innocent citizens of Russia. Our hope is that as more and more uninformed Russians grasp the true dimensions of the situation and ask themselves just why it is that the cash machines no longer operate. At that point the Russian people can fill the streets and squares of their country against their own dictatorship, depriving it of the rationale to wage war against the Ukraine. We ourselves take these economic measures with a heavy heart. This is a risk we must take.
For the values of freedom, democracy and welfare, for all the peoples of the earth, this struggle is worth waging. These values were not handed to us as a gift. We must fight for them repeatedly, again and again, whether at home or abroad. For the Russian people themselves Putin's actions represent an open assault on these values. The maintenance of these values will require strength, even--very unfortunately--military strength. We do not want war.
"All wars are shit," as former German chancellor Helmut Schmidt once remarked in a television interview. He knew whereof he spoke, having served as a lieutenant in the German army in the Second World War. Confronting the tyrants of this world we must fight to assure our values, even if it proves very expensive in the truest sense of the word.
Taking these considerations into account Germany should and wants to strengthen its armed forces. It must have an army worthy of the name for the maintenance of freedom, democracy and the welfare of its own citizens. This will cost a great deal in tax money.
It is not a new idea that Europe needs its own army. We need to look beyond our own immediate neighbourhood. Putin is not the only dictator who wants to annex other countries. What would happen if China decides to wage a war of conquest of Taiwan, a scenario that cannot be preemptorily discarded as a possibility. The United States would be confronted with the problem of protecting both its European friends and partners and those in East Asia as well. America could well feel overburdened. Does it not have reason to think that it has the right to ask its European friends to make greater efforts at self-defense?
To acquire weapons of war and to develop them costs immense amounts of money, tax money. No European country on its own possesses the resources to undertake the defense of the entire continent. Either it is insignificant compared to other armies elsewhere or it is purely and simply too expensive to do so. Moreover, the cost of defense must be balanced against other obligations, namely, the welfare budget of the state, so that the urgent needs of needy children and the aged can also be met. To square this circle there is only one possibility, namely, a single European state.
In European history there has already once been made a serious effort to raise a European army. This was above all an effort of the Americans, which along with Russia had borne most of the financial burden of the Second World War. For its part, it was hoped that Germany would play its part. Some Frenchmen, along with Konrad Adenauer in Germany, viewed with favour the rearming of Germany within the context of a European army. The effort fell victim to French politicians in 1950, above all Charles de Gaule, who were loath to see French soldiers wear a European uniform. Moreover, it was clear that such an army would remain under an all-European command.
Today, with the expereience of a new European war in the Ukraine, with the civil wars at the very gates of Europe in Syria, Lebanon, Libya and many threats in Africa, Afghanistan and East Asia, it is clear that the only solution is a European army. The 100 billion Euros Germany pledged for its military should be put into a common European military fund, to be followed by other member states.
A European army worthy of the name requires a European leadership, that is, a European general staff. It requires a common defense minister and a European parliament in which will repose the ultimate authority of war and peace. Such authorities should repose where they belong, the European Parliament and not by some European Putin.
A European army will contribute enormously to the ultimate creation of a United States of Europe, the goal set forth already in the Lisbon Treaty. In fact, such an objective already exists in our German constitution as a long-term objective.
Oh happy Europe! According to Goethe, rescue is closest when the need is greatest.
Translated by Dr. Mark Falcoff