Ceterum censeo...
warmongering rhetoric of elites in Berlin and Brussels divides society
warmongering rhetoric of elites in Berlin and Brussels divides society
Ulrike Reisner
-
Ulrike ReisnerPICREADI expert, political analyst at the Brennus Institute Paris-Vienna - Recently, public calls have been heard in Germany that caused a stir due to their belligerent language. Even if these speeches are reminiscent of Cato the Elder*, it must be noted that they do not serve the own country's interests but rather those of the United States, NATO and the financial industry. Let us look at two examples that very well reflect the climate in which politics and the media in Berlin and Brussels currently operate.
On October 16th, there was a clash between German chancellor Olaf Scholz and opposition-leader Friedrich Merz in the parliament. Merz, who is laying claim to the chancellery himself, called on Scholz to speak plainly at the European Council: If the President of the Russian Federation did not stop “indiscriminately bombing civilian infrastructure, a decision should be taken in Europe with broad consensus that the restriction on the range of the weapons currently available to Ukraine will be lifted’.
* In the period leading up to the Third Punic War, Cato the Elder proposed the destruction of Carthage at every session of the Roman Senate with the words: "Furthermore, I propose that Carthage is to be destroyed" (latin: ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam).
Merz, who himself served in the artillery of the German Armed Forces, of course knows that Ukraine does not have the necessary expertise to operate these weapons systems. Russia knows this too. The weapons systems must therefore be operated by German NATO soldiers.
Honest brokers of European interests?
What is praised as “leadership” by Merz' party fellows, can also be understood as the warmongering rhetoric of a lobbyist:
“If he (Putin, editor's note) does not stop bombing the civilian population in Ukraine within 24 hours, then Taurus cruise missiles must also be delivered from the Federal Republic of Germany to destroy the supply routes used by this regime.”
Merz, who himself served in the artillery of the German Armed Forces, of course knows that Ukraine does not have the necessary expertise to operate these weapons systems. Russia knows this too. The weapons systems must therefore be operated by German NATO soldiers.
So whose interests is Merz serving when he strikes such martial tones? Friedrich Merz was chairman of the supervisory board and lobbyist for BlackRock in Germany from 2016 to 2020. He can certainly be suspected of psychological bias, similar to M. Draghi in his relations with Goldman Sachs.
In May 2024, BlackRock, along with other lenders, publicly exerted pressure in Kiev over outstanding interest payments, thus indirectly preventing the long overdue national bankruptcy. 70 per cent of Ukraine's public debt is held by foreign creditors. In July 2024, it was announced that BlackRock, along with other leading investment funds, would write off a large portion of its $23.4 billion in claims against the Ukrainian state by exchanging its current bonds for new bonds with terms of up to 12 years. The new bonds would be structured to defer the bulk of payments. This would reduce the amount Ukraine would have to repay by 75% by 2033.
To summarise: Friedrich Merz's warmongering rhetoric may be reminiscent of Cato the Elder, even though it is important to remember that it does not serve Germany's interests. Instead of a common European foreign and security policy, he would like to see”‘claims management” in the historical tradition of gunboat diplomacy to enforce the economic interests of multinational corporations.
What is praised as “leadership” by Merz' party fellows, can also be understood as the warmongering rhetoric of a lobbyist:
“If he (Putin, editor's note) does not stop bombing the civilian population in Ukraine within 24 hours, then Taurus cruise missiles must also be delivered from the Federal Republic of Germany to destroy the supply routes used by this regime.”
Merz, who himself served in the artillery of the German Armed Forces, of course knows that Ukraine does not have the necessary expertise to operate these weapons systems. Russia knows this too. The weapons systems must therefore be operated by German NATO soldiers.
So whose interests is Merz serving when he strikes such martial tones? Friedrich Merz was chairman of the supervisory board and lobbyist for BlackRock in Germany from 2016 to 2020. He can certainly be suspected of psychological bias, similar to M. Draghi in his relations with Goldman Sachs.
In May 2024, BlackRock, along with other lenders, publicly exerted pressure in Kiev over outstanding interest payments, thus indirectly preventing the long overdue national bankruptcy. 70 per cent of Ukraine's public debt is held by foreign creditors. In July 2024, it was announced that BlackRock, along with other leading investment funds, would write off a large portion of its $23.4 billion in claims against the Ukrainian state by exchanging its current bonds for new bonds with terms of up to 12 years. The new bonds would be structured to defer the bulk of payments. This would reduce the amount Ukraine would have to repay by 75% by 2033.
To summarise: Friedrich Merz's warmongering rhetoric may be reminiscent of Cato the Elder, even though it is important to remember that it does not serve Germany's interests. Instead of a common European foreign and security policy, he would like to see”‘claims management” in the historical tradition of gunboat diplomacy to enforce the economic interests of multinational corporations.
DER SPIEGEL 19/2024 "Die Dämonen des Friedrich Merz"
The coming weeks and the formation of coalitions in the aforementioned eastern German states and at the federal level in Austria will therefore be very important in determining how political sentiment in these countries develops.
US encouraging Germany to warmonger
Only a couple of days later, part of the German elites once again sent a bizarre signal to the public: the US-American author Anne Applebaum received the Peace Prize of the German Book Trade. In her acceptance speech, Applebaum said that Ukraine must be helped to victory:
“If we have the opportunity to end this terrible cult of violence in Russia with a military victory, just as a military victory ended the cult of violence in Germany, then we should take it.”
The sentence is telling: on the one hand, Applebaum presents a new definition of peace. According to this, peace is no longer the absence of wars and conflicts; rather, peace is understood here as an invitation to Germany to defend the interests of the allied hegemon by military force. On the other hand, the author uses a proven trigger by alluding to the Germans' Nazi past. This always works – at least in the circles of the political and media elites. Applebaum raises her moral finger:
“I realize that it is a new experience for you Germans to be asked for help, or to be asked to supply weapons to stop an aggressive military force. But that is the real lesson of German history: not that Germans should never go to war again, but that they have a special responsibility to stand up for freedom and to take risks in doing so.”
To summarize: if the US want Germany to enforce their hegemonic claims (= ‘freedom’) on the European continent, armed force (= ‘risk’) is the order of the day. In this context, it becomes clear that diplomacy, with all its means of finding a compromise, does not seem to be a category for Anne Applebaum and all those who applauded her.
Only a couple of days later, part of the German elites once again sent a bizarre signal to the public: the US-American author Anne Applebaum received the Peace Prize of the German Book Trade. In her acceptance speech, Applebaum said that Ukraine must be helped to victory:
“If we have the opportunity to end this terrible cult of violence in Russia with a military victory, just as a military victory ended the cult of violence in Germany, then we should take it.”
The sentence is telling: on the one hand, Applebaum presents a new definition of peace. According to this, peace is no longer the absence of wars and conflicts; rather, peace is understood here as an invitation to Germany to defend the interests of the allied hegemon by military force. On the other hand, the author uses a proven trigger by alluding to the Germans' Nazi past. This always works – at least in the circles of the political and media elites. Applebaum raises her moral finger:
“I realize that it is a new experience for you Germans to be asked for help, or to be asked to supply weapons to stop an aggressive military force. But that is the real lesson of German history: not that Germans should never go to war again, but that they have a special responsibility to stand up for freedom and to take risks in doing so.”
To summarize: if the US want Germany to enforce their hegemonic claims (= ‘freedom’) on the European continent, armed force (= ‘risk’) is the order of the day. In this context, it becomes clear that diplomacy, with all its means of finding a compromise, does not seem to be a category for Anne Applebaum and all those who applauded her.
In this context, the elites’ belligerent speeches are more of a message to their own ranks. They cause alienation, if not open rejection, among a growing part of the population.
One third want a change
These political elites have spread out in Brussels and Berlin. They sit in governments, editorial offices, NGOs or financial institutions. One of the most fervent proponents of this approach is the Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She is fueling a Europe that is currently at risk of serious damage due to geopolitical tectonic shifts.
Until now, the Commission President could at least rely on her countrymen. Whether it was Ukraine, the Green Deal or migration – Europe's largest economy actively implemented what was decided in Brussels. The backing from Berlin was there, as were the financial resources. However, that is now over. Germany has its back to the wall in terms of domestic policy: almost 3 million asylum applications since 2015, plus more than a million refugees from Ukraine; an enormous investment backlog in public infrastructure; a budget that increasingly consists of ‘holes’. Looming over all this is the dark cloud of a full-blown structural crisis. The German economy is not making any progress: high costs and empty order books are weighing on companies. Popular German industrial products such as machines or cars are selling less well than in previous years.
Ursula von der Leyen and her entourage are obviously not aware that even in Germany more than half of the population is against Ukraine joining NATO and in favor of diplomatic negotiations. In the east of the country, this figure rises to two-thirds.
The recent elections in the eastern German states of Thuringia, Saxony and Brandenburg, as well as the Austrian parliamentary elections, clearly show, however, that 30% of the electorate do not agree with the current government policy at national and also at European level. In addition to arms deliveries to Ukraine, this also concerns, for example, issues of unhindered immigration or increasing authoritarian intervention of state authorities. The great success of the AfD in Germany and the Freedom Party in Austria is that they have managed to become a rallying point for all those voters who want to see a real change in politics at both national and EU level.
In this context, the elites’ belligerent speeches are more of a message to their own ranks. They cause alienation, if not open rejection, among a growing part of the population.
The coming weeks and the formation of coalitions in the aforementioned eastern German states and at the federal level in Austria will therefore be very important in determining how political sentiment in these countries develops.
If these two parties are excluded from the government, a third of the electorate must get the impression that, despite democratic voting, nothing will change in the end. As a reminder: the superiority of the democratic system over all other systems is justified by the fact that the people’s sovereign can bring about a change of power in a bloodless way through elections.
If, on the other hand, the elites find a way to prevent a change of power even though they have been voted out of office, this will also lead to sustained social unrest in Germany and Austria. Unfortunately, there are currently some signs of such a development. How these riots play out in an environment of economic recession needs no further explanation.
These political elites have spread out in Brussels and Berlin. They sit in governments, editorial offices, NGOs or financial institutions. One of the most fervent proponents of this approach is the Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She is fueling a Europe that is currently at risk of serious damage due to geopolitical tectonic shifts.
Until now, the Commission President could at least rely on her countrymen. Whether it was Ukraine, the Green Deal or migration – Europe's largest economy actively implemented what was decided in Brussels. The backing from Berlin was there, as were the financial resources. However, that is now over. Germany has its back to the wall in terms of domestic policy: almost 3 million asylum applications since 2015, plus more than a million refugees from Ukraine; an enormous investment backlog in public infrastructure; a budget that increasingly consists of ‘holes’. Looming over all this is the dark cloud of a full-blown structural crisis. The German economy is not making any progress: high costs and empty order books are weighing on companies. Popular German industrial products such as machines or cars are selling less well than in previous years.
Ursula von der Leyen and her entourage are obviously not aware that even in Germany more than half of the population is against Ukraine joining NATO and in favor of diplomatic negotiations. In the east of the country, this figure rises to two-thirds.
The recent elections in the eastern German states of Thuringia, Saxony and Brandenburg, as well as the Austrian parliamentary elections, clearly show, however, that 30% of the electorate do not agree with the current government policy at national and also at European level. In addition to arms deliveries to Ukraine, this also concerns, for example, issues of unhindered immigration or increasing authoritarian intervention of state authorities. The great success of the AfD in Germany and the Freedom Party in Austria is that they have managed to become a rallying point for all those voters who want to see a real change in politics at both national and EU level.
In this context, the elites’ belligerent speeches are more of a message to their own ranks. They cause alienation, if not open rejection, among a growing part of the population.
The coming weeks and the formation of coalitions in the aforementioned eastern German states and at the federal level in Austria will therefore be very important in determining how political sentiment in these countries develops.
If these two parties are excluded from the government, a third of the electorate must get the impression that, despite democratic voting, nothing will change in the end. As a reminder: the superiority of the democratic system over all other systems is justified by the fact that the people’s sovereign can bring about a change of power in a bloodless way through elections.
If, on the other hand, the elites find a way to prevent a change of power even though they have been voted out of office, this will also lead to sustained social unrest in Germany and Austria. Unfortunately, there are currently some signs of such a development. How these riots play out in an environment of economic recession needs no further explanation.
We don't need consensus, we need compromise
The EU institutions are working hard to identify and remove allegedly harmful and destabilizing foreign content. Projects such as EUvsDisinfo serve as production centers for the simplest opinion-forming, which is based on simple friend-foe dichotomies. However, what the societies of a reorganizing multipolar world need are compromises.
Cover photo by Matt Mutlu on Unsplash