US to punish German 'treachery'

The Observer (U.K.) ^ | 02/16/03 | Peter Beaumont, David Rose and Paul Beaver

[Pokey78]

America is to punish Germany for leading international opposition to a war against Iraq. The US will withdraw all its troops and bases from there and end military and industrial co-operation between the two countries - moves that could cost the Germans billions of euros.

The plan - discussed by Pentagon officials and military chiefs last week on the orders of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld - is designed 'to harm' the German economy to make an example of the country for what US hawks see as Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's 'treachery'.

The hawks believe that making an example of Germany will force other countries heavily dependent on US trade to think twice about standing up to America in future.

This follows weeks of increasingly angry exchanges between Rumsfeld and Germany, in which at one point he taunted Germany and France for being an irrelevant part of 'old Europe'.

Now Rumsfeld has decided to go further by unilaterally imposing the Pentagon's sanctions on a country already in the throes of economic problems.

'We are doing this for one reason only: to harm the German economy,' one source told The Observer last week.

'Our troops contribute many millions of dollars. Why should we continue to support a country which has treated Nato and the protection we provided for decades with such incredible contempt?'

Another Pentagon source said: 'The aim is to hit German trade and commerce. It is not just about taking out the troops and equipment; it is also about cancelling commercial contracts and defence-related arrangements.'

The Pentagon plan - and the language expressed by officials close to Rumsfeld - has horrified State Department officials, who believe that bullying other countries to follow the US line will further exacerbate anti-Americanism and alienate those European countries that might support a United Nations resolution authorising a war.

German industry earns billions of euros every year from supporting the US Army Europe which, although reduced from its Cold War heights, still totals 42,000 troops and 785 tanks - almost three times as many as the British Army owns. Many of these soldiers and their fighting equipment, including Apache helicopters, have already been sent to the Gulf.

German industry is heavily involved in supporting the US presence. Among the defence companies which stand to lose out are missile-maker Diehl, aerospace and defence giant EADS Deutschland, armaments maker Rheinmetall and vehicle maker Krauss-Maffei Wegmann.

There is also a US Air Force contingent of about 15,000 service people with bases at Bitburg, Frankfurt-am-Main and neighbouring Ramstein, where the commander doubles as part of the Nato command. This force includes nearly 60 F-16 fighter-bombers and a squadron of A-10 tank-buster aircraft.

Rumsfeld and his staff have made no attempt to hide their fury at Schröder's 'treachery and ineptitude' over Iraq. Last week Schröder leaked to reporters a Franco-German plan for avoiding war by increasing the number of UN weapons inspectors before informing his American counterparts.

'After this, Germany is finished as a serious power,' one of the sources added. 'This is simply not the way to conduct diplomacy at a moment of international crisis.' One diplomatic source said Rumsfeld was 'furious at Germany. He is a bruiser and it looks as though he means to do it'.

Under these plans, the US would move its troops in Europe eastwards to countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states, all of which have strongly supported America's line against Saddam Hussein. It is likely that the overall size of the deployment would be reduced, as the US military changes its priorities for a long-term and disparate engagement with international terrorism.

Although Rumsfeld had already been considering a redeployment of US troops around the world after a war in Iraq to save money and respond to new threats, the plans now under consideration go far beyond what had been discussed.

It is likely that future years will see a sharp increase in the proportion of special forces troops able to deploy rapidly across the globe.

Germany would suffer considerable financial loss if US forces were withdrawn from the country. The bases provide jobs for local people as everything from administrators to cleaners, and are huge customers for dairy products and bread.

[eno_]

You're right. If we hastened the decline of Germany, our official reply would be "Oops, we only meant to realign our alliances to more relevant areas. Sorry about the economy thing. Hey, how about I buy a cookoo clock?"

[RebelDawg]

Oh this is from the observer... Well I'm still going to hope that there is some shred of truth to the story! LOL!

[Bernard]

Actually, given germany's socialism and the emigration of muslims into the country, it might be a good idea to leave a few troops as a "pre-occupation" force when we have to liberate germany from the suicide-bomber religion.

After that, though, we have most of the old-soviet bloc coutries, such as Poland, which would love to have us there. The world changes, and we need to change with it.

Next step would be to get france off the un security council and replace it with a permanent vote from India. The only reason france got on the security council in the first place was a favor after WW II - the country was a total disaster and should have spent it's time rebuilding itself.

[tessalu]

I have read that the troops will go to Poland and Bulgaria, and both need a boost in their economy. It seems that Germany does not need any assistance from us!
Austria has refused permission for out troops to pass through to put them on the "bad" list, too. I am really a bit shocked that Germany has been such a louse of a "friend", but I am not surprised about France, for they have always been turkeys, the really lousy kind.

[eno_]

As eastward movement would also cost Russia any chance of intimidating former Soviet colonies at some future time. What's not to like. That would pay back Russia's squishiness, too.

[Nick Danger]

An administration source would not say much of this, so I don't believe it.

I don't either. These quotes are made up; the story is a crock. A lot of this stuff may well happen, but no one in a serious capacity would say these things out loud.

[jpthomas]

Probably cheaper too! (The beer, not the girls.)

Let us not forget that the name Budweiser comes from the Czech town of Budvar. When their local brewery began marketing Budweiser beer in Europe, their American namesake sued to stop them from using the name, which corresponds to the German pronunciation for their town. The American company lost the suit. I think GIs would appreciate a cold Bud, Czech style.

[Diana Rose]

when we have to liberate germany from the suicide-bomber religion

Don't bet on it.

[bfree]

Great idea, but where will the troops go to?

Was the article too long for you to read? It clearly states which countries want the base's.

[Allan]

If this threatened invasion of Iraq is just a hoax
why should the US be so upset with France and Germany?
Aren't these countries just helping them out with their plan?

[sd-joe]

Are you confused. You certainly have strange ideas. Where do you get the idea that people are told what to think. This is America. Where are you from?

[virgil]

I'm not sure why wanting to leave is considered bullying either.

[Catspaw]

Of course the article is spinning and spinning hard. But it doesn't make any sense to continue to keep as many bases in Germany as we did at the end of the Cold War--and to spread out our bases in Europe.

Then again, I like the idea of Schroeder's spincter tightening just a bit.

[Zeroisanumber]

I'd have to go with the State Department on this one. Seeking to harm Germany in retaliation for not locksteping in behind us is short-sighted and ultimately self-defeating. Yes, we disagree, but kicking the legs out from under an ally's economy in a fit of pique is idiotic.

[Torie]

Are you a Quisling too? :)

[rface]

Under these plans, the US would move its troops in Europe eastwards to countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states, all of which have strongly supported America's line against Saddam Hussein. It is likely that the overall size of the deployment would be reduced, as the US military changes its priorities for a long-term and disparate engagement with international terrorism. ...

Damn!! I was thinking this just yesterday - I have to re-configure my tin-foil beany, they have breached the security it has provided me. The now read my thoughts and publish them in British tabloids!

[eno_]

There are no wolves to toss Germany to. The Soviet Empire is no longer toe to toe with the West right in the middle of Germany. What important thing is Germany near? Latvia has a former Soviet garrison/port city on the Baltic the U.S. could own outright for less than a year's rent in Germany. Poland has room to train. Who needs Germany?

[snooter55]

So let it be written, so let it be done !
Snooter ;o)

[Catspaw]

That's if you consider Germany an ally.

[section9]

Remember, this article was written in The Observer, the Sunday variant of The Guardian.

Part of this story has the ring of truth: Rummy, Rice and the entire administration, especially Powell, are pissed at the Hun. They actually understand the Frogs being Frogs, but cannot abide what Schroeder and his people are doing.

But they are not relocating people from Germany for spite's sake.

Redeployment from the Bundesrepublik has been on the drawing boards for years. Most of the Americans leaving Germany will eventually be returned to the States. No way are the Big Red One and the Old Ironsides divisions going to be sent back to Germany after the war. They are going to be redeployed home, along with their equipment.

I doubt they'll be sent to Poland, Spain, or Slovakia, for that matter. You might see a brigade attached to the Polish Army, but that's it.

This stuff would have happened with or without the war. There's simply no strategic reason to remain in Krautland.

Be Seeing You,

Chris