Dialog International

The Strange Death of NATO

IThis week marked the 70th anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the most successful alliance in history that brought peace, prosperity and freedom to Europe.  And yet the celebration felt more like a funeral, with a number of member nations - led by Germany - questioning the necessity of NATO:

Is NATO dying? The idea was once unthinkable, but after the German cabinet decided to keep defense spending as low as 1.25% of gross domestic product for the next five years it has become unavoidable. This decision is not driven by any fiscal urgency. Germany is projected to have a balanced budget after last year’s surplus of €11.2 billion, its fifth annual surplus in a row.

What Berlin means by this decision is clear: The North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the U.S. are not as important to Germany as they used to be. While irritation with and contempt for President Trump influence German foreign policy, something more profound is at work. Democrats including President Obama, as well as Republicans like John McCain, have long called on Germany to demonstrate its commitment to NATO by spending 2% of GDP on defense. By refusing even to come close to meeting NATO’s spending targets, Berlin is thumbing its nose not only at Donald Trump but at the U.S.

That Germany is now seen as an unreliable partner did not go unnoticed by some German observers - who call Germany "bündnisunfähig" - loosely translated as unable to live up to its commitments:

Am meisten gilt das für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, deren politische Elite gewohnheitsmäßig auf Nato-Gipfeln kraftvolle Entschlüsse unterstützt, um dann, wieder zu Hause, das Gegenteil zu tun. So viel Illoyalität geht eine Weile gut – und dann nicht mehr. [...]Von autonomer europäischer Verteidigung zu fabulieren, falls Trumps Amerika eigene Wege geht, ist Zeitvergeudung und nährt nur Illusionen. Die Wahrheit lautet: Der deutsche Tugendbold ist nicht mehr bündnisfähig.

This unwillingness, or inability, to meet its commitments has caused some to question the value of the alliance - as, for example this commentary in the Wall Street Journal:  Why America Needs New Alliances: 

A central question for a revitalized alliance of democratic nations is which way the winds will blow in Western Europe. For a generation after the Berlin Wall’s fall in 1989, U.S. administrations seemed willing to take responsibility for Europe’s security indefinitely. European elites grew accustomed to the idea that perpetual peace was at hand, devoting themselves to turning the EU into a borderless utopia with generous benefits for all.

But Europe has been corrupted by its dependence on the U.S. Germany, the world’s fifth-largest economic power (with a GDP larger than Russia’s), cannot field more than a handful of operational combat aircraft, tanks or submarines. Yet German leaders steadfastly resist American pressure for substantial increases in their country’s defense capabilities, telling interlocutors that the U.S. is ruining a beautiful friendship.

Recent polls in Germany show that Germans fear Donald Trump more than Vladimir Putin.  Maybe Germany would be happier as part of the Russian Federation?

Anti-Americanism in the Age of Relotius

From time to time I receive an English language publication - The German Times - put out by the German Embassy in Washington DC.  The most recent issue has several articles on the fallout from the Fake News pieces by the  former star journalist at Der Spiegel Claas Relotius.  The writer Tanja Dückers writes about how the highly-acclaimed fake pieces by Relotius both reflected and fuel anti-Americanism in Germany:

"How deeply anchored and socially acceptable this unsophisticated anti-American resentment has become is evidenced by the success of the now-disgraced Der Spiegel journalist, Claas Relotius, who enjoyed particular acclaim for his invented reporting on exceedingly unlikeable Americans. It went over well."

Anti-Americanism in Germany is deep-seated and reflexive - especially among intellectuals.

"Germans’ prejudices with regard to America have both a cultural and a psychological dimension. They see the US as the land of evil capitalists, of fatties and dummies, of the rude and the arrogant, of narcissists who care about nothing in the world except themselves, of women who chase after countless cosmetic surgeries, and of men who, like the character of Scrooge McDuck (an American invention), are interested only in money instead of art and moral values (as we Germans are). They see the US as the land of popcorn children and moronic Trump voters in the Midwest, where, in fact, half of the citizens did not vote for him."

Anti-Americanism is also well-entrenched also in the political class.  Two of Germany's political parties - Die LINKE (The Left Party) and the AfD (Alternative for Germany) - call for Germany to end its alliance with the United States and embrace the corrupt ethno-kleptocracy of Vladimir Putin.  These two parties represent over 20% of the German electorate.  Too bad German politicians and intellectuals don't look beyond Donald Trump to many of the interesting things happening now in the United States: the vibrant start-up culture that has spread far beyond Silicon Valley, the embrace of social-democratic policies by the Democratic Party, which scored a huge victories in the 2018 mid-term elections, the energy and passion of American youth in organizing against gun violence, climate change, and economic inequality.  These developments - and many others (America is a big country) - often go unreported in the German media:

"Intellectuals in Germany have considerably less to say about the reasons for America’s success, which is indeed not solely grounded in exploitation and imperialism. Despite all its shortcomings, the unbelievably inspiring degree of ethnic and cultural integration enjoyed by this vastly heterogeneous country, the high level of personal discipline exhibited by countless workers in the US as well as the willingness of many Americans to embrace sacrifice and risk are seldom mentioned."

For the time being German political leaders like Oscar Lafontaine and Sara Wagenknecht will continue to use their iPhones to post anti-American screeds on Facebook and Twitter - while watching episodes of Breaking Bad on their iPads. 

Der Spiegel's Fake Journalist Reinforced Ugly Anti-American Stereotypes

In early 2017 Der Spiegel sent its star journalist Claas Relotius to a small town in rural Minnesota that had voted for Donald Trump in he 2016 presidential election.  Claas would stay for a month so that he could interview as many residents as possible and write a definitive piece on what makes these Trump supporters tick. 

An einem Dienstagmorgen im Januar, vier Tage nachdem Donald Trump als Präsident der Vereinigten Staaten vereidigt worden ist, steht neben dem Willkommensschild am Ortseingang noch ein zweites Schild, halb so hoch, aber kaum zu übersehen. Jemand muss es in der Dunkelheit aufgestellt haben. Auf diesem Schild, aus dickem Holz in den gefrorenen Boden getrieben, steht in großen, aufgemalten Buchstaben: "Mexicans Keep Out" - Mexikaner, bleibt weg.

Aha! Evidence of the racist undercurrents in this lily-white town.  Problem was, there was no such sign "Mexicans Keep Out".  Relotius had simply fabricated it.  In fact nearly everything in the 7,000 word piece was fabricated.  But the image fit the stereotype of the ignorant racists in rural America.

In the long piece "In einer kleinen Stadt" the townspeople literally worship their idol Donald Trump:

Der Gottesdienst beginnt mit einem Gebet für den Präsidenten. "Herr", predigt der Pastor, ein Mann in grauer Strickjacke, "beschütze unseren Bruder Donald, stehe ihm bei, und lass ihn Amerika beschützen, verleih ihm Stärke, und lass ihn unser Anführer und Hirte sein." Die Menschen in der Kirche schließen die Augen, sie falten die Hände.

That sermon never happened.  Neither did the cowboy-themed festival, nor the Super Bowl party, nor the high school field trip to New York City mentioned in the article.  None of this ever happened. 

The long piece is filled with vivid portraits of Fergus Falls residents.  One recurring citizen is "Neil Becker", whose hands are blackened from the coal dust from the power plant where he has toiled for many years:

Neil Becker ist 57 Jahre alt, verheiratet, ein Mensch mit tiefer Stimme und einem Gesicht, in dem selten Fragen zu finden sind. Er ist kein Farmer, er arbeitet nebenan im Kohlekraftwerk, seine Hände sind immer schwarz davon. Er sagt, dass sie am Flughafen in Washington einen Muslim, einen Jungen, der war erst fünf Jahre alt, verhaftet hätten. Dass die paar Mexikaner, die er kenne, "anständige Menschen" seien. Er schlägt dabei mit seiner schwarzen Hand auf den Tisch.

Problem is, the accompanying image of "Neil Becker" is actually photo of Doug Becker, who works for UPS and has run the Fergus Falls Fitness Center for years.  But this is the modus operandi of Claas Relotius:  include photographs of residents to lend an authentic flavor to the piece and then fabricate stories about each one of them. 

No doubt Relotius thought the townspeople of Fergus Falls were too dumb to actually follow up and read his piece - published in a foreign language in a magazine published in a distant land.  After all, the people depicted in his article are virtually illiterate  dumme Amis. But, unfortunately for Relotius,  some of the good citizens of Fergus Falls did follow up.  Two residents - Michele Anderson and Jake Krohn - dissected the long article paragraph by paragraph and exposed the massive deception: Der Spiegel journalist messed with the wrong small town.

As Anderson and Krohn point out, Rolotius' journalistic fraud has caused hurtful, lasting damage for the people of Fergus Falls:

Unfortunately now, even if it is in German, there is false historical documentation of our community that is not only completely wrong, but that our faces, our landscapes and our community’s name were used for, in service of perpetuating an ugly and exaggerated stereotype during a time when we, in both urban and rural places, need to find ways to understand each other more than to be divided.

And the sad fact is, a real journalist could have written a compelling and fascinating story about the real residents of Fergus Falls and the real and complex challenges they - along with much of rural America - face:

This is just a hunch, but it seems to me that Relotius’ overseas readers might appreciate knowing that small American towns are more complex than they imagine — that die-hard liberals like me can still magically live alongside conservative Republicans — that sometimes we even find some common ground and share a meal together, and take the time to try to understand each other’s viewpoints. You see, we’re definitely not perfect here in Fergus Falls, and many of us feel a lot of responsibility right now, considering that our friends, family and neighbors voted against their own interests in 2016. But we also know how it feels to be ignored in policy and media for decades only to be lectured by ignorant articles such as this after so much silence about our challenges.

Sahra Stands Up

Left Party firebrand Sahra Wagenknecht and her husband Oskar Lafontaine have begun to launch their left-wing "movement" Aufstehen ("Stand Up") with the goal of uniting progressives from all political parties and counteracting the growing threat from the right-wing populist AfD party (Alternative for Germany).  The official launch takes place on September 4, but the Website aufstehen.de is already up, and the group has already signed up over 50,000 supporters.  The three left-leaning political parties (LINKE, SPD, GREENS) altogether have more voters than the conservative parties, but have been unable - or unwilling - to form a coalition government to govern Germany.  Could this new movement Aufstehen somehow break through the impasse?  

By Friday, there was more good news for Wagenknecht's platform: A poll ordered by the Focus magazine showed that more than a third of German voters "could see themselves" voting for Aufstehen if the movement transformed into a political party. The response was overwhelmingly positive among the Left voters, where 87 percent were open to supporting her initiative at the polls.

So far, the Aufstehen movement does not appear to have a coherent platform - other than expressing a vague dissatisfaction with the prevailing "neo-liberal" order in Germany.  The Website consists of a short video clips of citizens from all walks of life talking about their everyday frustrations.  There is the retired pastor Kurt complaining about how badly people treat each other nowadays; there is the "internet economist" Karl-Heinz complaining that Germany is slow to embrace digitization - while gazing at a portrait of Karl Marx; there is Andi, studying to become a teacher, who complains that students are under too much stress to achieve academic success - Germany needs a "big hammer" to shatter the current system and start afresh. 

And then there is Sahra Wagenknecht - a charismatic speaker who, however, doesn't play well with others. She is a polarizing figure, even within her own Left Party.  She has spent her entire political career vilifying leaders of the social democrat SPD and the Green Party, while attacking Western liberal postwar order that made Germany and economic powerhouse and successful democracy.  Sahra Wagenknecht first appeared on the political stage after the fall of the East Germany (DDR) as a committed Stalinist and staunch supporter of the Berlin Wall and the totalitarian system it represented.  In an interesting essay written in 1992 - three years after the demise of the DDR - Wagenknecht mourned the loss of her beloved socialist fatherland and was contemptuous of the "counter-revolution" that brought it down:

So war zum Beispiel das Bildungssystem der DDR auch in den letzten Jahren immer noch erheblich besser als etwa das westdeutsche. Andere gesellschaftliche Bereiche, in denen sich der Sozialismus sogar noch in seinem Niedergang dem Imperialismus überlegen zeigte, ließen sich nennen. Gerade in der DDR konnte trotz allem ein relativ hoher Lebensstandard gehalten werden. Der erzeugte gesellschaftliche Reichtum war zwar nicht üppig - und sehr viel geringer, als er bei einer anderen Politik hätte sein können -, aber er wurde in solcher Weise verteilt, daß in der DDR niemand so leben mußte wie das untere Bevölkerungsdrittel in den imperialistischen Metropolen. Die entscheidende Grundlage sozialistischer Politik, das Volkseigentum, bestand fort. Trotz vorherigem Niedergang war die Konterrevolution des Herbstes 1989 also ein gravierender, ein qualitativer gesellschaftlicher Rückschlag.

("Thus for example the education system of the DDR even in the final years was still considerably better than the West German system.  We can also point out other social sectors in which socialism - even in its decline - were superior to the imperialistic system. In spite of everything the DDR was able to maintain a relatively high standard of living.  Its social wealth was hardly extravagant - and much less than it could have been with different policies, but it was distributed in such a way that no one in the DDR was forced to live like the bottom third of the population in imperialist metropolitan areas.  The decisive foundation of socialist policy - the collective ownership ("Volkseigentum")  - remained in place.  Despite the decline that was taking place, the counter-revolution in the fall of 1989 was a grave and qualitative setback. ") 

Sahra Wagenknecht never completely renounced these views and still considers the west - especially the United States - as "imperialist".  She remains true to Moscow, even though Russia today is a ethno-kleptocracy with little in common with the glorious Soviet Union of her youth.  She shares Putin's view that "the breakup of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century." Does she see Aufstehen as a movement with the potential to take Germany out of its postwar western alliances  - such as NATO  - that brought 70 years of peace and prosperity?  Would such a course resonate with large numbers of German voters?  

Germany's Red-Brown Coalition ("Querfront")

The Querfront - or red-brown coalition - dates back to the early 1930s in Germany when the German communist KPD colluded with far-right forces to destroy the Weimar Republic.  Today the Querfront has been revived by the Die LINKE - the Left Party as successor to the East German Stalinist SED party - which overlaps with neo-Nazis and the growing right-wing populist AfD ("Alternative for Germany") party in its hatred for the liberal democratic order of the Federal Republic.  The two factions - extreme left and extreme right - are united in their rejection of the European Union, of NATO, of the United States and Israel, and in their contempt for the mainstream media (Lügenpresse).  At the same time, both factions embrace Russia - especially Putin's authoritarian order. 

 The political scientist and journalist Kyrylo Tkachenko writes about the enthusiasm of the German left and right for Putin's annexation of Crimea and the Russian incursion into eastern Ukraine:

In the case of Ukraine, the degree of coordination and mingling reached a remarkable level. Those people who figured as ‘international election observers’ during the illegitimate referendum after the annexation of Crimea were for the most part representatives of European far-left and far-right parties (of course they didn’t find anything negative to report).24The biggest faction among pro-Russian so-called ‘peace demonstrations’ in Germany have been Die Linke voters, the second largest being the voters of right-populists Alternative für Deutschland (AfD).25It is noteworthy that the demonstrations themselves have been organized by prominent anti-Semites, which apparently did not hinder even some high-ranking representatives of Die Linke from taking part in them. 26It is not only that one can replace whole paragraphs devoted to Ukraine from far-right newspapers and magazines with those from their leftist counterparts without the readers even noticing the swap: in some cases even the contributors appear to be the same people (like Mark Bartalamai, who simultaneously produces videos and texts about Ukraine for the far-left newspaper Junge Welt and for the rightwing populist magazine Compact).27

This enthusiasm for Russian aggression has then also led to strong support for Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, who, with Russian military support, has slaughtered hundreds of thousands of his own citizens. 

The relativization or/and outright praising of the Russian military intervention in Syria is just a logical counterpart of the leftist outrage about the alleged western ‘intrusion’. Whereas some prominent leftist politicians claimed that there is no evidence that Russian bombs target civilians or expressed doubts as to whether Assad’s forces ever used chemical weapons, some popular leftist newspapers have cheerfully labelled the capture of Aleppo as a ‘liberation’. 31The degree of overlap with interpretations predominant on the far Right goes so far that in Europe we have already witnessed pro-Assad demonstrations during which some demonstrators raise their fists (as a communist greeting) while others proudly show a Nazi salute.32

Eastern Germany was always a bastion of strength for the Left Party.  But over the past few elections, many Left Party supporters have shifted their allegiances to the far right AfD.  In response, the Left Party has increasingly adopted right-wing policies - such as supporting deportation of refugees.  It remains to be seen whether the Querfront will continue to be a force in Germany.

Germans All In for Putin/Assad

This is hard to believe.  Bashar al-Assad, with the support of Russia, uses chemical weapons against his own citizens. Rather than holding Russia and the murderous regime in Damascus to account for this war crime, German citizens blame the United States:

More than 79% of Germans consider United States President Donald Trump to be a greater threat to world peace than Russian President Vladimir Putin, a poll by the Forsa Institute revealed.

Over 90% of respondents said they wanted better relations than Russia, and 83% said they are not afraid of it.

Half of all respondents outright blamed American policy for tensions between the West and Russia.

Russian fighter planes can bomb civilians - hospitals, primarily - in Syria, and very few in Germany voice any criticism.  But when the US, France and UK target chemical weapons facilities - and avoid civilian casualties - the Peace Movement suddenly mobilizes.

 

Die Bombenangriffe auf Syrien waren nicht „erforderlich und angemessen“ (Merkel) sondern ein gefährlicher Bruch des Völkerrechts! Wir sagen: Nein zum Krieg! Deeskalation ist das Gebot der Stunde! Kommt morgen um 18 Uhr zum Brandenburger Tor. #NeinZumKrieg #Friedenskundgebung pic.twitter.com/jUJ2WREcDL

— Sahra Wagenknecht (@SWagenknecht) April 17, 2018

Why this widespread sympathy in Germany for the corrupt regime in Moscow?  The simple answer is anti-Americanism.  

So gesehen ist es auch nicht erstaunlich, dass bei allen Umfragen zurzeit mehr Deutsche vor dem amerikanischen Präsidenten Donald Trump Angst haben als vor dem Russen Wladimir Putin, dass sie Russland mehr vertrauen als den Vereinigten Staaten. Die Befragten beweisen damit viel Geschichtsunkenntnis und vergessen völlig, wer Deutschland nach 1945 überhaupt wieder einen Anfang ermöglichte.

Sie verdrängen auch, wer Deutschland und vor allem Westberlin schützte und schließlich die Wiedervereinigung ermöglichte. Gleichzeitig schimmert bei diesen Umfrageergebnissen immer noch ein Misstrauen gegenüber einer Demokratie, gegenüber einer freiheitlichen und deshalb komplizierten Gesellschaftsordnung durch.

What astonished me was after the nerve gas attack in Salisbury, followed by the deployment of chemical weapons in Syria, high officials in ALL of the major political parties in Germany called for the reduction - or even elimination - of all economic sanctions against Russia.  Why? To reward Putin?  Fortunately, Heiko Maas, Germany's new foreign minister, advocates a tough stance against Russia  But can he withstand the pressure to appease Putin coming from all sides?

 

Useful Idiot? Gerhard Schröder "an embarrassment for Germany?" (NZZ)

Earlier this week Die Zeit ran an interview with  former chancellor Gerhard Schröder in which he compared Donald Trump unfavorably to Vladimir Putin: "Verglichen mit dem US-Präsidenten können wir froh sein, einen Putin zu haben."  Not sure what he was getting at - after all, it was Schröder's friend Putin who greatly facilitated Trump's election victory in 2016.  And as awful as he is, Trump's power is checked by our (still free) press and the judiciary, while Putin rules uncontested over his vast kleptocracy. 

In any case, I wasn't the only one appalled by Schröder's words.  Writing in the NZZ, Andreas Rüesch finds it unseemly that a former leader of Germany would represent the interests of a foreign power  - and, this case, an adversary of the same nation he used to lead. 

Eine Illustration dafür ist das nun publizierte Interview, das «Die Zeit» mit Schröder geführt hat. Darin beschränkt sich der Altkanzler längst nicht darauf, die von ihm verfochtenen Energieprojekte zu verteidigen, über die man verschiedener Ansicht sein kann. Er nutzt vielmehr die Gelegenheit, mit dem Gewicht des altgedienten Staatsmanns die europäische Russlandpolitik zu verdammen und Kremlpropaganda zu verbreiten.

("One good example for this is the interview with Schröder in Die Zeit.  Here the former chancellor doesn't limit himself to defend the controversial energy projects about which there are diverse viewpoints. No, he takes the opportunity to use his prestige as a respected statesman to condemn European policy towards Russia, and then promote Kremlin propaganda.")

In doing so, Schröder has done more damage than Putin's army of internet trolls.

Wozu braucht es noch russische Trolle und Propagandasender, wenn es doch nützliche Idioten wie einen Schröder gibt? Gewiss, dieser Ex-Politiker spricht nicht für Deutschland. Die Regierung in Berlin, der er mit seinen Aussagen in den Rücken fällt, hat ein realistischeres Bild von Putin. Aber für Deutschland ist ein solcher Altkanzler eine Peinlichkeit – und peinlich sollte es auch jenem Teil der Sozialdemokratie sein, der weiter zu ihm hält.

("What's the need for Russian trolls and propaganda networks where there are useful idiots like a Gerhard Schröder?  To be sure, this former politician doesn't speak for Germany.  The government in Berlin - which Schröder attacks with his statements - has a far more realistic understanding of Putin.  But the behavior of this former chancellor is an embarrassment for Germany - and it should also be an embarrassment for those in the SPD who still support him." )

In the interview Schröder is somewhat defensive about the millions he is making working for Vladimir Putin  ("Ich habe ein Recht auf Freiheit").  He should just take his 30 pieces of silver and keep his mouth shut.

 

 

 

 

Gerhard Schröder's shameful second life as Putin surrogate

What happens to political leaders who leave office at a relatively young age? Jimmy Carter writes books, works for world peace, and builds houses for the poor.  Bill Clinton built a foundation that prevents disease and has saved hundreds of thousands of lives in Africa.  George Bush has found a new calling painting portraits of war veterans. And Gerhard Schröder promotes the interests of an authoritarian kleptocracy that seeks to undermine Western democracies: 

Schröder has spent much of the past decade working for the Russian energy industry, serving as a board member of several consortia in which Russian-government-controlled energy company Gazprom is either the majority or sole shareholder. His astonishing career in the Russian energy industry reached new heights this week when the former chancellor was nominated for a position as an independent director on the board of Rosneft, Russia's largest oil company — and one in which the Kremlin also holds a controlling stake. The nomination had been rumored for days and was confirmed by a government decree published late on Friday night.

Rosneft is not just any energy company; it represents the interests of the Kremlin and is run by one of Putin's former KGB colleagues.  Schröder's attempts to rationalize his collusion by insisting that he is simply helping with Germany's energy security is at best cynical:

Schröder begründete sein Eintreten für die Gasleitung, die nun durch eine weitere Röhre ergänzt werden soll (er ist wieder dabei), stets damit, dass ihr Bau im deutschen Interesse liege. Wer noch mehr Erdgas aus Russland importiert, verringert freilich nicht seine Abhängigkeit von dieser Quelle, sondern vergrößert sie. Das ist in diesem Fall durchaus problematisch, weil für Moskau Öl und Gas nicht nur Handelsgüter sind, sondern politische Waffen. Putin hat sie schon eingesetzt. „Aber noch nie gegen Deutschland!“, riefen die Verteidiger des Schröder-Putin-Pakts. Sie verwiesen auf Russlands Vertragstreue, wenigstens Deutschland gegenüber – jedenfalls taten sie das, bis Moskau den alten Vertragspartner Siemens aufs Kreuz legte und dessen Turbinen auf die Krim schaffte. Auch in Berlin fühlt man sich vom Kreml glatt belogen und betrogen.

Schröder's old Social Democrat (SPD) political pals have been reluctant to openly criticize their former leader for his crass opportunism.  After all, Gerhard Schröder is a gifted politician and highly effective campaigner; the party needs all the help it can muster ahead of the next month's election.  Polls show it is likely get trounced by Angela Merkel's CDU.  And, to some degree,  Gerhard Schröder is simply an extreme case of the Kremlin-appeasement tendencies exhibited by other SPD leaders such as Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Sigmar Gabriel.  All of this is very sad for the party of Willy Brandt that once stood for human rights and social justice:

Auch heute noch ist Euch Sozialdemokraten der Kampf gegen Rechts eine Herzensangelegenheit, keine Frage. Nur wie kriegt Ihr das damit zusammen, dass der Kreml der große Patron aller Viertel-, Halb- und Vollnazis ist, von der FPÖ bis zum Front National? Ein Patron, der bei knappen Kassen einspringt, der bei der internationalen Vernetzung hilft, der seine Troll- und Bot-Armeen für die braune Sache einsetzt, der sein schrilles Medienimperium dazu nutzt, um Verschwörungstheorien und „alternative Fakten“ in die Welt zu setzen, der zur Unterminierung demokratischer Prozesse hacken und leaken lässt, als würde es kein Morgen geben. Ein Patron, der keinen Aufwand scheut, wenn es den Feinden der Demokratie nützt, der seine enormen Ressourcen schamlos den rechten Schmuddelkindern zur Verfügung stellt.

("Still today your (SPD) struggle against the right-wing forces is close to your hearts - no question about it.  But how do you reconcile this with the fact that the Kremlin is the great patron of all quarter-, half- and full Nazis - ranging from the FPÖ  to the Front National?  A patron who uses its meager reserves to deploy his army of trolls and bots for the brown cause, who uses his shrill media empire to spread conspiracy theories and "alternative facts" across the globe, who initiates hacks and leaks to undermine the democratic process like there is now tomorrow.  A patron who spares no expense when it serves the enemies of democracy, who shamelessly makes his enormous resources available to any right-wing street urchin.")

Schröder became chancellor with his clever use of anti-American rhetoric.  Today he is applauded across Germany for his especially harsh words for President Trump - conveniently forgetting that it was his pal Vladimir Putin who was instrumental in getting Trump elected.

German Left Party's Love of Dictators

Sahra Wagenknecht, leader of the Left Party (die LINKE), has a few things in common with Donald Trump  Both embrace dictators.  Both admire, in particular, Vladimir Putin - but for different reasons.  Trump admires Putin for running a successful kleptocracy - which Trump himself aspires to - as well as for his imprisonment of regime critics.  Wagenknecht sees Putin as an adversary of the United States - ground zero of capitalist evil, in her mind - as well as a counter-force to the hated NATO alliance.  Wagenknecht supports any dictator - no matter how brutal -  who is a perceived enemy of America.  This includes Bashar al-Assad, who murdered over half a million of his own citizens, and - especially -  Nicolas Maduro, who has wrecked the economy and democracy of Venezuela: 

Wagenknecht hatte 2005 Ex-Staatspräsident Hugo Chávez besucht, einen Mann, der in seiner Amtszeit zwar für sozialpolitischen Fortschritt sorgte, jedoch demokratische Rechte zunehmend zurückdrängte. Von einer freien Presse etwa kann in Venezuela keine Rede sein. Wagenknecht, damals noch EU-Abgeordnete, berichtete nach ihrem Besuch: Chávez habe "wohl sämtliche Mitglieder der Delegation mit seiner offenen und charismatischen Art" beeindruckt.

The foreign policy positions of Wagenknecht and her party can be summarized as "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" - regardless of how antidemocratic the regime is:

Der Chemnitzer Politikwissenschaftler Tom Mannewitz glaubt, dass die historischen Bünde ohnehin nicht ausschlaggebend seien. Vielmehr trieben Antiamerikanismus und Antiimperialismus die Linken an. "Es geht darum, mit wem die autokratischen Länder in Konflikt stehen. Stark vereinfacht gesagt heißt das: Der Feind meines Feindes ist mein Freund."Das bedeutet: Weil etwa Venezuela und Russland mit den Vereinigten Staaten über Kreuz liegen, halten manche Linke erst recht zu diesen Ländern.

One reader comment to the Spiegel article stood out for me as the best explanation for why Wagenknecht & Co. are reluctant to criticize Maduro and Venezuela:

Sie könne Venezuela, Kuba und Co. nicht kritisieren, weil sie damit sich selbst und ihre eigenen Ziele kritisieren würden. Sie müssten sich eingestehen, dass ihre Politik unweigerlich in totalitären Strukturen und endet und zu einem wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Kollaps zusammen mit kollektiver Verarmung/Verelendung führt. Gerade Venezuela wurde doch immer wieder von Linken Salonkommunisten als Paradebeispiel für den "menschlichen. funktionierenden Sozialismus" gelobt und hofiert.

("She cannot criticize Venezuela, Cuba and Co. because that would mean criticizing herself and her own objectives.  They would have to admit that their politics result inexorably in totalitarian structures and lead to economic and social collapse along with collective impoverishment and misery.  Venezuela, especially, was again and again held up by the left-wing salon-communists as a shining example of  a "humanitarian functioning socialism.")

Nearly two decades of socialist mismanagement have transformed Venezuela from the wealthiest country in Latin America to the poorest - unable now to provide food and basic medical care for its population.  The tragedy is entirely self-inflicted - but Sahra Wagenknecht and the delusional German left indulge in wild conspiracy theories involving George Soros and the CIA to blame for the "sabotage" of the Chavista socialist paradise.

Sahra Wagenknecht and the Totalitarian Mindset

Anyone interested in understanding Sahra Wagenknecht's (Deputy Chair of the German Left Party) contempt for parliamentary democracy in Germany - and especially her extreme dislike of the Social Democrats (SPD) - only needs to look into things she has said or written. I found a fascinating essay she wrote in 1992 - two years after Germany's reunification - in which she had this to say about Josef Stalin:

Und was immer man - berechtigt oder unberechtigt - gegen die Stalin-Zeit vorbringen mag, ihre Ergebnisse waren jedenfalls nicht Niedergang und Verwesung, sondern die Entwicklung eines um Jahrhunderte zurückgebliebenen Landes in eine moderne Großmacht währ end eines weltgeschichtlich einzigartigen Zeitraums; damit die Überwindung von Elend, Hunger, Analphabetismus, halbfeudalen Abhängigkeiten und schärfster kapitalistischer Ausbeutung; schließlich der über Hitlers Heere, die Zerschlagung des deutschen und europäischen Faschismus sowie die Ausweitung sozialistischer Gesellschaftsverhältnisse über den halben europäischen Kontinent. Dagegen entstellt keines von jenen Krisensymptomen, an denen der Sozialismus in seiner Endphase krankte, bereits in den zwanziger bis fünfziger Jahren das Bild der sowjetischen Gesellschaft. Wir finden keine wirtschaftliche Stagnation, keine zunehmende Differenz gegenüber dem vom Kapitalismus erreichten technischen Stand,

("And whatever one can criticize about the Stalin era - justifiably or not - its results were in any case not decline and decay, but rather the development of a backward country into a modern great power during a singular historical epoch: including ending misery, hunger, illiteracy, semi-feudal dependencies and capitalist exploitation; and finally defeat of Hitler's army and destroying German and European fascism as well as spreading socialist social programs across half the European continent. In the Soviet Union from the 1920s to the 1950s we don't see any of the crisis symptoms that plagued socialism in its end phase. We don't see any economic stagnation, no growing gaps to the technical advances in capitalism...")

The bit about "ending hunger" is especially ironic, since Stalin engineered the Holodomor- the man-made famine in the Ukraine of 1932 and 1933 in which between 7 and 10 million people died of starvation.  Wagenknecht goes on to state that Stalin enjoyed widespread support among the population and categorically rejects the idea that this support was coerced through a dictatorship or labor camps ("Arbeitslager" - at least she make an oblique reference to the Gulag, where millions were detained).

The entire essay is instructive.  Wagenknecht sees Stalin as the logical successor to Lenin, and the leader who put the Soviet Union and the postwar Soviet Bloc countries on a course to surpass the capitalist west.  She also has high praise for Walter Ulbricht for remaining true to the Stalinist line.  For Wagenknecht, the end of the socialist revolution was the fault of Stalin's successors- especially Brezhnev - who fell for the "imperialist strategy of Détente".  With the new policy of rapprochement in the late 1960s and 1970s the revolution stalled and the socialist experiment fell victim to the "internationales Finanzkapital". 

Genau genommen lief das entspannungspolitische Konzept darauf hinaus, statt durch eine selbstbewußte, offensive Politik dem Weltimperialismus Zugeständnisse abzuringen, dessen Einlenken durch Zahmheit, durch Vorzeigen eigener Schwäche, durch eine Politik des Zurückweichens und der Annäherung an die Interessen des internationalen Finanzkapitals zu erreichen. Wie die Resultate zeigen, ist es auf der ganzen Linie gescheitert. Und dies nicht zufällig. Denn die Taktik war nicht neu,

Yes, "the tactic was not new".  Already in the 1920s Stalin warned against any cooperation with the SPD in Germany.  And here the policy of Wandel durch Annäherung” ("change through rapprochement") was the cornerstone of Willy Brandt's Ostpolitik.  Wagenknecht appears to be reviving Stalin's Sozialfaschismustheorie which held that the Social Democrats and Trade Unionists were just as dangerous as the Nazis and must be crushed.  Needless to say, this had a devastating result for anti-fascist unity in Germany and paved the way for the Nazi seizure of power in 1933.  Even after the Nazis took power the leader of the German Communist Party (KPD) Ernst Thälmann continued to hammer the Social Democrats:

„Die völlige Ausschaltung der Sozialfaschisten aus dem Staatsapparat, die brutale Unterdrückung auch der sozialdemokratischen Organisation und ihrer Presse ändern nichts an der Tatsache, dass sie nach wie vor die soziale Hauptstütze der Kapitalsdiktatur darstellen.“

Sahra Wagenknecht has never completely refuted or distanced herself from her Stalinist views.  Indeed, we see them reflected today in her appeasement policy towards Russian aggression, her hatred of the United States as the center of Finanzkapital, her call to dismantle the NATO trans-Atlantic alliance, and her constant criticism of the "capitalist" political parties - especially the SPD.