A few years ago I met German peacenik Irene Eckert in Chicago at an anti-NATO protest while the cancerous military alliance was holding its annual meeting in that city. Irene has been very active on the Ukraine issue and yesterday I sent her a question...see below for her response.
BG: Can you give me your opinion on Merkel and how much Germany will resist Washington?
IE: Well your question goes right into the heart of the matter and there is no clear answer.
There is an ongoing "dispute" here mainly on the political right over an assumed "limited German sovereignty". In this debate they keep quoting a secret document from May 21, 1949, the so-named "KANZLERAKTE" according to which every West German chancellor had and still has to be approved by the US-government in the first place, so does her or his policies. Officially the existence of such a document is denied.
Another kind of queer juridical argument refers to the "enemy clause" in the UN charter (Art 53.2 and Art 107) according to which in times of war or better in case of a new aggression, German "freedom" be restricted.
De facto, several "treaties" do exist bearing clauses that give the US quasi unlimited rights over our territory. From the US point of view we are still under "occupational status", see justification for military bases, US-troops, nukes on our soil. What is also relevant in this context: Our gold reserves presumably have been taken to the US Fort Knox long ago.
Legally this is all unacceptable of course. It goes to show the neo-colonial US attitude Vis-à-vis her "allies" and "friends" who are all dependent creatures. The US never accepted signing a formal peace treaty with Germany under the pretext of cold war conditions. However, they and not the Russians were the refuseniks.
But at latest with the 4+2 treaty on German reunification (1990) these "reserves" where eventually pushed aside by history.
The four allies: US-USSR-GB-France and East and West Germany signed the treaty, which in official language was supposed to replace a peace treaty, it was officially interpreted and characterised here as de facto peace treaty.
But of course everything is matter of power relations. You probably know Zbigniew Brzezinski's Book "The Only Global Power" (2004) according to which we Germans are simply US vassals.
On the other hand: Mrs. Merkel did sign the Minsk agreement after 17 hours of bargaining. The MINSK AGREEMENT seems a highly relevant document (see for details on the Russian website Strategic-Culture.org) bearing the signatures of the NORMANDIE Team, signed by Hollande, Merkel, Poroshenko, Putin and the Self Defense Forces and the OSCE representative and the foreign ministers.
German business is suffering enormously under the sanctions on Russia, forced upon Europe by the US and her business interests, [they] offer more or less silent resistance.
The Eastern Ukrainian victory in Debalcevo over thousands of Kiev troops and resistance in Kiev against their war hungry puppet government that pushes the country into further impoverishment are all elements of weakness on behalf of the NATO side. Maybe that Debalcevo is even a Stalingrad in miniature.
Politicians are prone to power relationship inside their constituencies and beyond. So Merkel has to somehow respond to the German business class and the strong anti-war sentiment in the German population. She cannot act as a mere puppet. But business is an unstable factor, I do not fully understand their heterogeneous interests. Merkel is under enormous pressure from various sides....
The peace movement is still completely irrelevant, occupying itself with internal debates. But public opinion, in spite of all the brain washing, is not in favor of war against Russia.
I hope to have given you somewhat of an answer...
No comments:
Post a Comment