German Defense Minister Karl Theodor zu Gutenberg officially presented five options for reforming the Bundeswehr. Their details are generally unknown, but it is reported that the head of the German military department himself gave preference to the project, which provides for a reduction in the number of personnel of the country's armed forces from 250 to 163.5 thousand people and the refusal of universal military duty.
More precisely, the conscription system will legally remain, but in reality they will not "shave" anyone. The situation is similar in the United States, there, too, formally, the army, aviation and navy must be recruited, but every year the conscription is declared "zero."
Naturally, as a result of radical reductions in the Bundeswehr, the number of units, formations and military equipment will decrease. Although as far as the latter is concerned, over the past 20 years, the tank fleet of the ground forces of the Federal Republic has been cut by more than five times, and the Luftwaffe has only a third of its combat aircraft left in 1990. Moreover, even before Gutenberg's speech, a statement was made that this process would continue and that it should not only affect the available weapons (six out of 10 submarines, more than half of the Tornado fighters are being written off), but also the procurement programs for new samples (BMP Puma, aircraft "Typhoon", etc.).
AFGHAN "MOMENT OF TRUTH"
Both the previously announced cuts and the reform now announced by Gutenberg are aimed at reducing the financial costs of the Bundeswehr in the context of the economic crisis that is clearly not over yet (and Germany is forced to save both itself and the countries of the European Union, which are in a much worse position). However, the upcoming transformations, perhaps, are explained not so much by economic as by military-political reasons. We are talking about the new role of Germany in Europe and Europe (more precisely, the EU) in the world.
The Federal Republic is the state with the most powerful economy in the Old World, the economic and political "locomotive" of the EU. Until now, the Bundeswehr was considered to be "the main NATO strike force in Europe." It is for this reason that universal military service remained in the country - the "main striking force" must have a reliable, prepared reserve. Another reason for retaining the draft is a fearful glance at the recent Nazi past of Germany: it is well known that it is much easier to make a mercenary caste rather than a popular conscription army a support for a totalitarian regime (see the article "A mercenary is not a defender of the Fatherland" in No. 19 of the "VPK" for 2010).
But recently it has become absolutely clear that the Bundeswehr no longer represents any "main strike force". First, it has decreased too quantitatively, its current potential is completely insufficient not only for an attack on someone, but even, perhaps, for defense. Secondly, the duration of conscription service in Germany is now equal to six months, but more than half of the recruits still prefer an alternative civilian service to it. Third, the country's constitution prohibits the Bundeswehr from participating in missions outside NATO, with the exception of peacekeeping operations. Moreover, in this case, the German military must first of all be guided by the norms of "humanitarian international law".
The "moment of truth" for today's German army was the Afghan campaign. Germany ranks third after the United States and Great Britain in the number of soldiers and officers sent to Afghanistan, but the Germans demonstrate extremely low combat effectiveness there. They have neither the right nor the desire to fight. After the famous incident in Kunduz a year ago, the Bundestag issued its military with absolutely remarkable instructions: "The use of force that can lead to death is prohibited, except when it comes to an attack or an imminent threat of attack."
Moreover, the Afghan situation in Germany is officially forbidden to be called a war, because the Bundeswehr has no right to participate in the war. For Afghanistan, the German leadership is beaten from two sides: the Anglo-Saxons - for the actual sabotage of the general military efforts, and a significant part of their own population - for participating in the Afghan operation, even in the current half-witted form. The Left and the Greens demand an immediate withdrawal of troops, and the SPD is beginning to lean towards the same decision.
The German army is known to have one of the longest and richest military histories. And if in the early centuries it was exclusively hired, then later a recruitment system appears. And in 1871, with the proclamation of the German Empire, universal conscription was introduced. By 1914, Germany had one of the largest and most well-armed European armies (808,280 men).
"A German either in boots or under a boot"
NEW TIMES - NEW CHALLENGES
As a result, in Berlin, apparently, they realized that it was necessary to take radical measures in the field of military development. There is no need to build out of oneself as the "main strike force of NATO in Europe", since the Bundeswehr can no longer be considered such. In addition, no one needs it, because the great classic war for which the North Atlantic Alliance was created 61 years ago will obviously never happen (in addition, Germany is now surrounded by allies on all sides). Accordingly, the meaning of universal military duty has been lost, especially since even now, with a half-year service of an insignificant number of conscripts, no prepared reserve will be obtained in case of a "big" war. And to be afraid of totalitarianism in the current super-democratic Federal Republic is simply absurd.
True, it is still very important for Berlin to keep Germany's role as the EU's “locomotive” in the military field. And here the trends are quite obvious. The armies of European countries are being reduced to purely symbolic levels. There are very few equipment left in them intended for waging a classic war: tanks, artillery, combat aircraft. The armed forces are reoriented to conduct counter-guerrilla, peacekeeping and police operations in third world countries, for which light equipment is acquired - armored vehicles, transport helicopters, landing ships such as the Mistral, which is so attracted to some in Russia (this helicopter carrier is essentially a slightly altered civilian ferry and practically no weapons).
Naturally, such armed forces can only be recruited, no European government will dare to send conscripts across the seas and oceans to other continents in order to conduct hostilities that have nothing to do with protecting their own country from external aggression. For this, only mercenaries are suitable, consciously ready to go to third world countries, engulfed in chaos.
The reform of the Bundeswehr, proposed by Gutenberg, fits perfectly into this concept. After its implementation, the German army will have less than a thousand (it is possible that about 500) tanks and slightly more than 200 combat aircraft (in 1990, the FRG Armed Forces had 7 thousand tanks and over a thousand aircraft), after which the status of the "main strike force" you can completely forget.
At the same time, the personnel will purposefully prepare for operations in Asia and Africa within the framework of NATO and the EU, and with the main focus on participation in European foreign and military policy. After all, it is clear that Germany can bring its political status in line with economic leadership only within the European Union, where it is the most important system-forming force, and not within the framework of the North Atlantic Alliance, which was created not only to confront the USSR, but also to control precisely over Germany.
WORLD EMERCOM WITH POLICE FUNCTIONS
Today, the EU's weakest point is the extremely low coordination in foreign policy and the almost complete absence of the power component. That is why the geopolitical significance of the European Union is an order of magnitude behind its economic power. The EU's economy is the first in the world, but in the military-political plan, it is good if it is among the ten strongest.
Europeans, especially the leaders of the EU - Germany, Great Britain, France, Italy, cannot be satisfied with such a situation. Therefore, talks about the creation of a "European army" are getting more and more active. In total, it will be much smaller than the current armies of individual states, which will save significant financial resources. At the same time, it will be ruled not by national governments and not by Washington through NATO structures, but by EU leaders, which will significantly increase the weight of the European Union in world politics.
The possibility of the "European army" waging a great classical war cannot even be considered. First, it will not have the potential for this (most likely this army of 27 countries will be approximately equal in size to one Bundeswehr of the 1990 model). Secondly, an extremely pacifized Europe is purely psychologically incapable of waging such a war. In addition, she, in general, has no one to fight. Its purpose is operations other than war (literally, “operations other than war,” that is, police, peacekeeping, humanitarian, etc.). It will be a kind of "global Emergencies Ministry with police functions."
Actually, the process of building the "European army" began a long time ago, only it is proceeding extremely slowly. In 1992, the Petersberg Declaration was adopted, in which the Europeans declared their intention, independently of NATO, "to solve humanitarian, rescue and peacekeeping tasks, to send military contingents to resolve crises, including by forcing peace."
In 1999, the Helsinki Declaration on the main parameters of the military development of the European Union was signed. The Military Committee and the Military Staff of the EU are being created, the concept of brigade tactical groups has been developed. It was assumed that by 2008 their number will reach 13 (then they decided to increase this number to 18 with an extension of the formation period until the end of 2010), 1, 5-2, 5 thousand people in each. Four of them should include German servicemen, and they will lead two brigade groups (in one they will command the Dutch and Finns, in the other - the Czechs and Austrians).
By the way, in reality the EU brigade group is just a reinforced battalion, its combat potential is very low. In addition, Europeans remain almost entirely dependent on the United States in terms of combat support (intelligence, communications, command, electronic warfare, logistical support, aircraft refueling capabilities in the air) and global redeployment, while they have extremely limited capabilities for the use of precision weapons. (here, too, they will not be able to do without the help of the Americans).
These circumstances are hampering European military development. Firstly, the armies of the countries of the Old World are being reduced, in addition, they have to be divided between NATO and the EU. Secondly, the Europeans do not have much desire to invest huge amounts of money in the WTO, means of combat support and global redeployment. Nevertheless, the process is underway.
Thus, the military reform in Germany will become another confirmation of two trends: the erosion of both the military and political components of NATO (minimization of the Bundeswehr finally turns the Alliance's Joint Armed Forces into a fiction) and the emergence of the European Union as a single confederal state with all the necessary attributes, including the Armed Forces.
Opponents, internal and external
Of course, such a radical version of the reform of the Bundeswehr, which is supported by Gutenberg, will have many opponents. Not everyone in Germany welcomes such a rapid reduction in the combat potential of the German army and its reorientation to overseas operations with the actual loss of the ability to defend their own country. Many political forces consider it a matter of principle to preserve the conscription for the above-mentioned "anti-totalitarian" considerations.
The main opponents of the refusal of universal military service are, surprisingly for us, social services - after all, more than half of the conscripts, as already mentioned, become alternatives. With the cancellation of the draft, alternative service will also disappear, due to which the social sector will lose a significant part of the personnel. At the same time, there is not the slightest guarantee that the Bundeswehr will be able to recruit at least the minimum required number of contract soldiers. After all, the army is unpopular in society and uncompetitive in the labor market.
As a result, the salaries of the volunteers will have to be increased so significantly that it will not save money, but an increase in military spending. Actually, world experience shows that a mercenary army is much more expensive than a draft one. Or it will be necessary to further reduce the number of personnel. Most likely, it will simultaneously result in an even greater reduction in the number of servicemen and an increase in the cost of their maintenance.
A sharp reduction in parts and connections will lead to the loss of jobs in the civilian sector serving the Bundeswehr. A further cut in the number of equipment and military orders will deal another blow to the German military-industrial complex. Moreover, it will be quite difficult to compensate for the loss of domestic orders through exports - Europe is too scrupulous in this respect, too many political restrictions are imposed here on the export of arms, which is why it is losing not only to the United States and Russia, but already to China.
Finally, the process of building the "European army" does not suit Washington at all. It is clear that the EU Armed Forces will become not a supplement, but an alternative to NATO. Ultimately, this alliance, 21 of the 28 members of which are members of the EU, will simply become unnecessary for Europe, which will lead to an almost complete loss of US influence in Europe. Accordingly, the White House will try to slow down this process in every possible way (primarily by acting through the UK and the countries of Eastern Europe). However, under President Obama, Washington's actions have significantly diminished in relation to both opponents and allies, so now is the time for “old Europe” to destroy NATO.
For all of the above reasons, the reform of the Bundeswehr can take place in one of the less radical options. However, this will not reverse all these trends. Europe objectively does not need the old traditional aircraft, they are too expensive, while the Europeans are not going to use them anyway. Because of this, they objectively do not need NATO either; Washington (for him, it is an instrument of influence on Europe), the Brussels bureaucracy (no comments here) and Eastern Europeans, who experience an irrational horror of Russia, are preventing it from dissolving it.
However, even Eastern Europeans, not to mention Western Europeans, while allowing Washington to defend themselves, show very little (and the further, the less) readiness to participate in its various military activities (if not to say - adventures). And this option causes quite understandable irritation on the part of the Americans. The debate about what the Bundeswehr will become is a reflection of these trends. And on the other hand, the choice of the version of the reform of the German Armed Forces will have a very large impact on all the processes described.
