German dilemma, defence or development

Today, Germany is facing a big dilemma: whether to concentrate on defence or develop the country so as to move on from the current Middle Level State to a Great Level State and to be recognised as such globally. Here are the brass stacks:

America lost her case as the solo superpower to the emerging trio of Russia, China and surprisingly Iran. Consequent to the US-Israel war against Iran where the latter emerged unbeaten resulting in the formation of a contiguous landmass connecting all three countries Russia, China and Iran. What is surprising is that Iran under massive sanctions imposed by the West including Germany Iran has managed to strike the optimum level on the defence-development trade-off.

Geoeconomics dictates that both these aspects must be approached on even keel because of the tense and inter-locking relationship between both ends of the spectrum. Huge military expenditure could possibly make a country strong yet stunting human and social progress domestically. Whereas pure welfare state would make a nation easy prey to outside militarily aggressive powers.

Let us look at America which has a one Trillion Dollar budget splurging over defence by ballooning the military-industrial complex as the mainstay of American manufacture. China on the other hand went on a shopping spree in developing infra-structure such as housing, roads, railways and enhancing manufacturing industry such as shipbuilding and armaments. Today, China   emerges as a great power firstly in geoeconomics and thereafter in geopolitics & geostrategy as well.

Sadly, Germany followed the American example but on the reverse side. She sub-contracted her defence to NATO. Of course, there is armament industry, but this caters to the whims and fancies of NATO led America and not based on the needs of the Eurasian chessboard. Accordingly, Germany left Russia to run the show there. Choosing internal economic issues over external geoeconomics issues, Germany squandered all her chances to become a resolute military partner either in NATO or in the European neighbourhood. Underlying assumption is to allow France to carry the big stick as the Nuclear Triad to provide semblance of defensiveness.

Here is how Germany illustrates that how she got herself on the horn of defence – development dilemma:

Defence Minister Boris Pistorius intends to build Europe's largest conventional army, with a target of at least 460,000 deployable personnel across the country and elsewhere. To meet this goal, Berlin plans to recruit more men beyond currently available positions resulting in manpower surplus to ensure readiness. Pistorius framed the expansion as a strategic ambition: Germany must become the dominant conventional military power on the continent, perhaps challenging even France.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz while boasting  “We are still at the top of the world; we can build, a strong army” tones down stating the obvious drawbacks including weak economy, declining investment, high energy prices, ever-increasing bureaucracy and high taxes impacting negatively. Topping it all he mentioned. “We have a shortage of skilled labour, and all of this, coupled with massive demographic changes”.

Navigating strategy amid geoeconomics impel both Merz and Pistorius to put their heads together to arrive at via-media in defence - development trade-off.

 

Cheers!

 

Muthu Ashraff Rajulu

Strategy Adviser

Mobile: + 94 777 265677

E-mail: cosmicgems@gmail.com

Blog:   Strategy Adviser