progressive trivialization “- Against

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Chairman of the Bundestag Defense Committee

Katarina Korting

The more we talk about the war against Ukraine, the more we hear words like “nuclear war”, “atomic bomb”, “nuclear weapons”, “World War III”. [1]. “The use of nuclear weapons” – to put it mildly – insidiously wins the appearance of normalcy. And almost everyone is involved. This gradually gives the impression that nuclear war is “controlled”. In this way, politicians are pushing the Third World War into people’s minds – and preparing for it as an acceptable option.

For example, the husband of the FDP [Parti libéral au gouvernement]Michael Theurer [vice-président du groupe parlementaire du FDP au Bundestag]asked Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s criticism of heavy weapons [2]confessed on April 23 on the radio Deutschlandfunk that the “risk of nuclear escalation” also existed. “Escalation”? It sounds even nicer than Special Op. It was as if it was an explanation between the roommates about the untidy kitchen. Or the FDP wanted to refer to the “laugh to progress” formula [slogan de la coalition gouvernementale lors de son installation] this progressive trivialization that claims to be understandable? [L’auteure renvoie à l’analogie entre les termes escalade et progrès.] This dialectic of clarification gives itself the appearance of sanity, but pulls the mind into the abyss: always forward, never backward!

Anton Goffreiter’s argument [coprésident de la fraction d’Alliance 90/Les Verts au Bundestag] also exciting. With typical German egocentrism, Olive Green exclaims that if Germany does not immediately supply heavy weapons, it risks waging a “de facto third world war.” Note: there are world wars that are just world wars; and there is a strengthening of Anton Goffreiter’s real military policy, the “de facto third world war,” which could not have been avoided by careful consideration and restraint in the delivery of heavy weapons, but only by increasing the number of weapons. With his militant statements, this de facto military expert increases his chances of obtaining the post of European Commissioner.

The urge to rise rises

Public position [voir son entretien dans Der Tagesspiegel du 22 avril] Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann [présidente de la Commission de la Défense au Bundestag, membre du FPD] for the supply of arms also looks marked by a positioning neurosis: “We must not allow ourselves to be constantly influenced by military scenarios,” the FDP falcon demanded, with all his carelessness, drawing the Scenario of Military Horror of victorious Russia on the wall. Translation: “You fools must finally stop thinking about the risk of nuclear war”! Faced with such recklessness, protected by the greatest possible certainty, it is only a matter of time before the Defense Committee becomes a de facto military committee.

The desire to escalate is also growing on the Internet. We had fun lighting the formulas. Russia’s commander-in-chief will still detonate a “tactical atomic bomb,” one of them said, “as a show of strength” no matter what happens first. It says, on a colored background – how demonstration of strength – in bold letters. And it spreads like those males who release all the most restrained in the subway. Yes, the “tactical atomic bomb” is making noise! You have to be tough in these times of change, you have to master the conditions! If you want to have your say, you have to talk about war! Whoever hesitates or worries is Putin’s friend! Fear is just a feeling.

This is how tactical nuclear lanterns disperse discourse and ridicule security policy thinking, even in language. An embargo on arms supplies is harder to bring to mind than the supply of “heavy weapons”, but anyone who thinks only in military terms, in which “human material” reproduces strategically, is in fact behaving extremely irresponsibly. Anyone who enjoys tactical bombs and disgraces any idea of ​​compromise, negotiation and dialogue, sets fire to the atomic bomb more effectively than the craziest autocrat. (The article was published in the weekly FreitagApril 24, 2022; writing a translation HAS Meeting)

______

[1] The author emphasizes the political-discursive process, which she describes as: “How language nuclear weapons devastate the debate and prepare for world war.”

[2] According to Tagesspiegel of April 21: “The German government is currently excluding any direct supply of heavy weapons to Ukraine. This should work through Slovenia, a NATO partner. The German government is preparing a combined exchange for the supply of heavy weapons to Ukraine. According to information released on Thursday (April 21st) by the German news agency (dpa), Slovenia, NATO’s eastern partner, will hand over a large number of its T-72 battle tanks to Ukraine and receive Marder armored infantry in exchange for Germany. car and wheeled battle tank Fuchs. The T-72 weapons system, which dates back to Soviet times, is already in use in the Ukrainian army and does not require significant additional training. According to the dpa news agency, Slovenia has also asked Germany for more modern equipment as compensation, including the German Leopard 2 battle tank, the Boxer wheeled tank and the Puma armored infantry vehicle to be presented. to the German army to replace the Marder, which had been used for 50 years. (Ed.) On this topic, see the article published on this site on April 22, 2022.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *