2014-09-03 By Julien Canin
Germany has formally announced that they will support the Kurdish fighters, the Peshmergas, against the terrorist organization of Islamic State (ISIS), by sending weapons and providing training as well.
Although the decision was known since the August 20th‘s statement of the German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen, the details were clarified on Sunday.
Debate followed on Monday September 1st at the Bundestag during an extraordinary session and was concluded by a symbolic vote in favor of the motion.
“We have seen acts of unbelievable brutality,” said Angela Merkel, describing before the Bundestag, threats, persecutions, tortures and murders committed on Christians, Yazidis and others minorities, by the ISIS terrorists.
According to the German Defense Minister, the shipment will include 16,000 assault rifles (8,000 G36 and the same amount of G3 rifles), 30 Milan anti-tank missile systems equipped with 500 missiles, 8,000 pistols, hand grenades, ammunitions and five Dingo armored vehicles.
Non-lethal equipment will be added (mine-clearing equipment, night-vision goggles, helmets, radio and helmets).
All of these deliveries valued at 70 million euros ($92 million) and aims to equip 4,000 Kurdish soldiers.
These weapons are going to be drawn from existing German army stockpiles and provided in three stages during September in areas not immediately affected by the war.
In addition, the training provided by the country for the use of complex armament will take place in Germany or, if that is not possible, near Erbil or in a third country, according to the defense minister Mrs. von der Leyen.
Germany has already delivered humanitarian aid, defensive equipment and funds to support Kurds and internally displaced persons in northern Iraq – more than 26 million euros and 143 tons of supplies according the website of the Federal Government – and has sent six military to the general consulate in Erbil to coordinate relief effort.
But until now, German has delivered weapons to the Kurds.
This exceptional decision in the German foreign policy, which follows similar moves by several other countries (UK, USA, France and Italy), was preceded by a tortuous and intense week-long discussion in the government.
It is indeed the first time that Germany sends weapons into an ongoing conflict since the end of World War II.
The Germans have begun a process of out of area operations, but it is a difficult history.
The Bundewehr’s very first combat missions occured at the time of war in Kosovo (1999) and then Afghanistan, but to do so almost led Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder to lose his position.
But as Chancellor Angela Merkel, on the Central German Broadcasting MDR, that decision is an “exceptional case, of a sort we have not seen to date.”
“When we are asked to supply arms and ammunition on a limited scale, we cannot simply say that it is impossible,” she added.
“Every conflict has its own nature” underscored the Chancellor in her parliament speech on Monday.
Merkel said to parliament:
“The far-reaching destabilization of an entire region affects Germany and Europe… When terrorists take control of a vast territory to give themselves and other fanatics a base for their acts of terror, then the danger rises for us, then our security interests are affected.”
In fact, according German intelligence, at least 400 Germans have joined IS ranks.
In a piece in The Wall Street Journal, the German foreign minister explained the German decision (excerpts below):
This decision has sparked intense debate in Germany. Indeed, some people even see it as a fundamental change in German foreign policy.
I do not share this view. The fact is that Germany is taking on its responsibility in the world—in the fight against IS, but also in the Middle East, in Africa and in Afghanistan. Along with the European Union, we are particularly active in the search for a political solution to the highly dangerous crisis close to home, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
Responsibility is always about concrete action. We must calibrate our engagement depending on what is at stake for fundamental principles of a peaceful and just international order, for our own interests and our closest partner countries and allies. Germany’s skepticism about military intervention and its restrictive approach to arms exports are politically well-founded and deeply ingrained in Germans’ collective consciousness. There is no paradigm shift regarding our foreign-policy principles, which include a policy of military restraint. But in the face of a threat like the one posed by IS, we must not hide behind principles. We must take responsible decisions, knowing full well that they involve difficult trade-offs. We take the greatest care in making such decisions, and we do so in close coordination with our European, trans-Atlantic and regional partner countries.
Where there is a threat of mass murder, where the stability and order of countries and entire regions are endangered, and where there is no chance of successful political settlements without military support, we must be willing to honestly weigh up the risks of getting involved against the consequences of doing nothing. This was why Germany decided to take part in international military interventions in Kosovo in 1999 and in Afghanistan in 2001. That is also why we decided that there were good reasons for opposing military action in Iraq in 2003.
Our opposition to the IS terrorists does not start with supplying arms, nor does it end there. IS cannot be stopped by either humanitarian or military means alone. We, the international community, must develop a comprehensive political strategy to counter this terrorist organization systematically.
In my view, four main elements are crucial: We need a new, effective and inclusive Iraqi government in Baghdad to dry up potential support for IS by closing ranks with the Sunni tribes. We need intensive diplomatic efforts to unite the countries in the region to confront the IS threat together. We need the Islamic world’s leaders to clearly distance themselves from IS and to unmask the rank cynicism of the propagandists and ideologists claiming religious legitimacy for terrorist savagery. Finally, we need resolute steps to hamper and prevent the flow of fighters and funds to IS.
It is clear that the ISIS attacks in Iraq and Syria have refocused Western attention on the Kurds and I will be looking in coming pieces at the emergence of the Kurdish option for the West and what actions are being taken and ought to be pursued.
Is this an exceptional action by Germany or part of a broader evolution of German global defense and security policy?
The events in Iraq and Syria and Western engagement will provide an answer in part to this question.
At least one German defense industrialist sees the German government’s decision as a very significant step in the right direction.
According to this German defense industrialist:
It is a sea change.
Too many Germans believe we should be like Switzerland, Sweden or Costa Rica.
This will only change when Putin enters Poland or the Baltic states.
But we are already supplying body protection to the forces in the Ukraine. We should do more.
Crimea, East-Ukraine and the destabilizing of Ukraine all sounds like Austria and “Sudetenland” and the Czech Republic of earlier times. The West didn’t want to listen even when the invasion in Poland started.
Is this being repeated now?
I believe six things need to be done now:
The French Mistrals need to be stopped from exporting, and they should be sold to the EU and deployed to the Baltic Sea under EU or NATO or whatever command;
Germany must step up its budget to the famous 2 percent;
We need to supply weapons to Ukraine;
We need to create a European Energy Union aimed at independence from Russia and others (harbors for ships for liquid gas from Canada, Fracking etc.);
We need to find ways to better inform the Russian public and win the information war;
We need diplomatic efforts to continue to find solutions. Excluding Russia from Swift is a total rubbish, it should be excluded.
It should be noted that the government shift is politically difficult in Germany; three recent opinion polls showing that around thirds of Germans are against the idea of delivering weapons.
http://www.dw.de/germany-to-deliver-weapons-to-iraqi-kurds-battling-is-terrorists/a-17894131
The Weapons to be Supplied:
First tranche:
4,000 G3 assault rifles; 1 million rounds of ammunition
20 MG3 heavy machine guns; 500,000 rounds of ammunition
4,000 P1 pistols; 500,000 rounds of ammunition
20 MILAN anti-tank weapons; 300 guided rockets
100 shoulder-fired Panzerfaust 3 rocket launchers; 1,250 rockets
20 heavy rocket launchers; 500 rockets
50 flare guns; 2,000 rounds
5,000 hand grenades
20 WOLF jeeps
10 lightly armored WOLF jeeps
20 UNIMOG trucks
Second tranche:
4,000 G3 assault rifles; 1 million rounds of ammunition
20 MG3 heavy machine guns; 500,000 rounds of ammunition
4,000 P1 pistols; 500,000 rounds of ammunition
10 MILAN anti-tank weapons; 200 guided rockets
100 shoulder-fired Panzerfaust 3 rocket launchers; 1,250 rockets
20 heavy rocker launchers; 500 rockets
50 flare guns; 2,000 rounds
5,000 hand grenades
20 WOLF jeeps
10 lightly armored WOLF jeeps
20 UNIMOG trucks
Third tranche:
8,000 G36 assault rifles; 4 million rounds of ammunition
1 tanker truck
5 DINGO-1 armored vehicles
Total weapons, munitions, and vehicles:
8,000 G3 assault rifles; 2 million rounds of ammunition
8,000 G36 assault rifles; 4 million rounds of ammunition
40 MG3 heavy machine guns; 1 million rounds of ammunition
8,000 P1 pistols; 1 million rounds of ammunition
30 MILAN anti-tank weapons; 500 guided rockets
200 shoulder-fired Panzerfaust 3 rocket launchers; 2,500 rockets
40 heavy rocket lauchers; 1,000 rockets
100 flare guns; 4,00 rounds
10,000 hand grenades
http://www.dw.de/german-weapons-deliveries-to-iraqs-kurdish-region/a-17892161
Julien Canin has received a French law degree and a master’s degree from the Universite Libre de Bruxelles (Belgium).
He has worked with both the French Political Party UMP on foreign and defense issues and with the Ministry of Defense recently at the Eurosatory conference.
This is Julien’s first piece for Second Line of Defense but he is following Iraqi developments for us and will provide additional reports in the future.
Also see:
http://sldinfo.wpstage.net/iraq-2014-is-not-iraq-2003-the-allied-dimension/