The German military may soon adopt new guidelines that call into question the export of democracy, SPIEGEL has learned. In the future, the Bundeswehr is to take greater account of local traditions and institutions, even if they are violent and corrupt.
In his second inauguration address, US President George W. Bush vowed to redouble American efforts at exporting democracy around the world. "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture," he said in the January, 2005 speech, "with the ultimate goals of ending tyranny in our world."
Seven difficult years later, however, the situation in Afghanistan continues to demonstrate the challenges facing the spread of Western-style democracy. And Germany, for its part, has now begun to adjust its military policy accordingly.
According to information obtained by SPIEGEL, overseas missions undertaken by the German military are no longer to be focused on exporting Western conceptions of democracy. Political systems are only viable, read new draft guidelines for overseas military missions, when they are founded on "local concepts of legitimacy."
The draft guidelines "for a coherent policy relative to fragile states" were developed jointly by the German foreign, defense and development ministries. The paper indicates that intervention strategy must take into account local traditions and institutions, even if they don't correspond to concepts of liberal democracy.
In some cases, the new concept even supports cooperating with corrupt or violent elites. The paper says that it is the responsibility of each country to choose its leader and authorities and that it is difficult to influence such decisions from the outside. "An overly dominant role played by the international community can be harmful," the paper reads. In the future, foreign military missions in "fragile states" are to be coordinated by a task force headed by the Foreign Ministry.
US Demands More Money from Berlin
Despite shying away from the overly zealous export of democratic principles, the paper clearly argues in favor of the use of force in foreign military missions. "Experience gained from international peace missions clearly shows that an initial robust profile can be a factor for ultimate success," the paper reads.
Still, as ongoing NATO negotiations show, withdrawing from such overseas missions can be difficult. Currently, the Western allies are deadlocked in the search for sufficient post-withdrawal funding for Afghanistan. The US has committed to covering half of the €3.1 billion ($4 billion) per year necessary to equip and train Afghan security forces.
Last week's NATO summit in Brussels, however, brought little in the way of concrete pledges from other member states. Internally, Berlin has assumed it would ultimately be saddled with annual payments of no more than €150 million. Now, however, SPIEGEL has learned that the US is demanding at least €190 million from Germany.
"An adjustment to the previously fixed corridor of €100 to €150 million should be taken into account," reads a confidential Foreign Ministry document, which SPIEGEL has seen.
We in the US need to mind our own business. Bush was wrong. If a war is necessary, lets declare it, turn the enemies to glass and get out. Tired of this policing the world stuff
AntwortenLöschenAlso, return to Congress the power of declaring war where it can be probably debated. Currently the President of the US declares wars by military interventions. Of course the corrupt Congress of the US is probably itching to go to war in Iran since they are owned for the most part by Israel.
AntwortenLöschenWho decides, that a war is necessary, Choo?
AntwortenLöschenif is directly affects our national interest...or if we are attacked. Knowing Bin Laden was in Tora Bora and his thugs in Afghanistan...nuked Tora Bora and napalmed the poppy fields, then left. That is war. If we did that, no one would ever fuck with us.
AntwortenLöschenprotecting bankers is not a means for war.
AntwortenLöschenand Congress declares war, not the POTUS
AntwortenLöschenIf only every country adopted this principle. Political systems including democracy evolve and can't be imposed or in the space of a generation or two effectively encouraged. We probably should pull out of Afghanistan now but if we do we should leave the Taliban and the warlords to it and stop all and any support for political factions and all aid. It's a backward tribal country and it along with many developing countries should be left to develop at their own speed without interference (or aid).
AntwortenLöschenI don't see the Afghan forces ever being able to stand up against the Taliban and the influences of the drug trade. The government there will, as a result, always be corrupt. I don't blame these NATO countries for balking at the large sums the US is expecting them to pony up to help support Afghanistan after the withdrawal. Britain just committed to a paltry sum. I expect more countries to follow their lead. I also think the average US citizen will be enraged when they understand this commitment our government has made to sustain that country.
AntwortenLöschenWell,
AntwortenLöschenYeah, this is the responsibility of each country to choose their leaders, but how how about those people who can't distinguish or don't have unbiased parameters to choose their leaders and legal and governing mechanism and more importantly how those irresponsible leaders who not only betray international community and their international supporters but also their own people. As an afghan, who argues that the core of conflict is within afghans and it is being remedied by internationals.
Well,
AntwortenLöschenI think quiet the opposite. Afghan security forces have by now and hopefully by 2014 capacity to stand the Taliban Threats, but i don't think its top end commands and most surely its high end politicians have enough capacity to direct the country properly.
Our troops have developed such reliability and it will improve it as the Taliban increase their threats especially when they target civilians. Their crimes should have international coverage by Press. People don't know what they do in order to enforce their influence in the country side.