Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances... Rantburg

Europe
Germany's Merz elected chancellor after surprise setback
2025-05-07
[GEO.TV] Germany's conservative leader Friedrich Merz won on Tuesday a nail-biter second vote in parliament to become chancellor after he lost the first round in a stunning early setback.

Merz, 69, scored an absolute majority of 325 against 289 in the secret vote in the lower house of parliament.

He takes over at the helm of a coalition between his CDU/CSU alliance and the centre-left Social Democrats
...every time you hear the phrase white people, white supremacy, white anything but paint, you're listening to a Democrat. Ask him/her/it to reimagine something for you; they do that a lot, though not well. They can hear a dog whistle a mile or two away. They invented the spoils system and Tammany Hall, and inspired the addition of the word (Thomas) Nasty to the English language. They want to stop continental drift and repeal the law of unintended side effects...
(SPD) of the outgoing chancellor, Olaf Scholz.

President Frank-Walter Steinmeier was set to appoint him as post-war Germany's 10th chancellor later Tuesday, along with his cabinet, before Merz is due to visit Gay Paree and then Warsaw on Wednesday.

His victory caps a long ambition to lead Europe's biggest economy, which was first foiled decades ago by party rival Angela Merkel
...former chancellor of Germany and the impetus behind Germany's remarkably ill-starred immigration program. Merkel used to be referred to by Germans as Mom. Now they make faces at her for inundating the country with Moslem colonists...
who went on to serve as chancellor for 16 years.

Merz's eventual victory on Tuesday was bittersweet as the initial defeat — the first such outcome in Germany's post-war history — pointed to rumblings of discontent within his uneasy coalition.
Related:
Friedrich Merz 05/06/2025 "Historic Shock": Germany's Merz Falls Short In Chancellor Vote Sparking Fresh Political Turmoil
Friedrich Merz 05/06/2025 AfD files lawsuit against German spy agency’s extremist classification
Friedrich Merz 04/29/2025 Ukrainian Perspective: Invasion of Ukraine: April 28, 2025

Link


Europe
A cook, a butcher and a lady who charmed a prince: who will get into the German government
2025-05-07
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.

A bit of "inside baseball" on German politics.

Note that the reference to a cook in a government post is a reference to Lenin's saying that he wanted the Soviet government to be simple enough, even a cook could operate it.

by Gregor Spitzen

[REGNUM] A week ago, German politicians from the CDU/CSU presented their ministers for the new cabinet, and on May 5, their coalition partners followed suit. And now the list of candidates for the new federal cabinet has been finalized.

The SPD's agreed candidates included more women than men, and the party replaced all of its previous cabinet members, with the exception of Defense Minister Boris Pistorius. The CDU/CSU candidates also had some surprises.

WAITED FOR IT. FEDERAL CHANCELLOR FRIEDRICH MERZ (CDU)
A fairly elderly chancellor, 69 years old (the tenth oldest of all members of the German Bundestag of the current convocation), who has been “walking towards success” for a long time. He had it all in his biography: a parliamentary mandate, lost elections, leaving politics for business, and returning.

There was also a loss in the party elections for the post of head of the CDU to Angela Merkel's failed successor, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer... And now, finally, at the age of seventy, Merz is ready to receive the highest administrative post in Germany.

On May 6, the Bundestag voted to approve it on the second attempt, and analysts are inclined to think that the deputies' main motivation was to "get on their nerves."

In fact, the appointment to the post of head of government of a person who has not previously been a federal minister, nor a minister-president of a federal state, nor even a mayor of one of the cities, raises many legitimate questions.

And the main one is: how can someone who does not have any relevant experience in the field of public administration rule a huge country?

Moreover, the new chancellor faces many domestic and foreign policy challenges.

The country's economy is sinking into the depths of recession, the pace of its deindustrialization continues to skyrocket, and the migration problem remains far from a constructive solution.

And to top it all off, there is an armed conflict raging on the EU's borders, in which Germany has chosen a side. It has already cost it €45 billion in war money, with no end in sight.

To top it all off, Merz begins his term with a very negative background: political opponents and many voters accuse him of deceiving the electorate during the election campaign.

Just two weeks before the Bundestag elections, he adhered to the principles of strict budgetary austerity, but as soon as he won, he abruptly changed his position by 180°, intending to increase the national debt by as much as €800 billion.

THE LOSER'S REWARD: FINANCE MINISTER AND VICE CHANCELLOR LARS KLINGBEIL (SPD)
The SPD leader, who led his 150-year-old party to its worst ever election result of 16.4%, was rewarded with a nomination for the post of vice-chancellor and finance minister.

Klingbeil, 47, is considered a charismatic leader, but his main weakness is exactly the same as that of his formal boss Merz: a lack of experience in public administration.

With all due respect to Klingbeil's achievements as the chief party apparatchik of the Social Democrats, one cannot go far on the experience of behind-the-scenes party struggle alone. He will have to gain experience on the job.

Considering that he will be entrusted with an extremely important direction - managing the finances of the largest economy in the European Union, such an appointment cannot but cause concern among Germans. Especially since the Social Democrats have always been famous for their unbridled social spending, which Germany now simply cannot afford.

THEY WILL SQUEEZE AND CUT. FOREIGN MINISTER JOHANN WADEPHUL (CDU)
He is one of the politicians in the CDU/CSU who advocates a rethinking of the situation with the Alternative for Germany, a very popular party that is now considered extremist.

In April, he advocated giving members of the pariah party important committee posts "as long as they have not attracted negative attention in the past." This position is controversial even within his own party, and Wadephul is disliked by opponents in other mainstream parties and some supporters.

For many years, he was responsible for foreign affairs, defense and the Council of Europe as deputy leader of the parliamentary group. Yes, this is partly relevant experience for the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but experience in the legislative and executive spheres are still slightly different concepts.

The powers of the Foreign Ministry and its head in the current cabinet will be limited: Friedrich Merz intends to create a National Security Council in his own office.

The Council will focus many foreign policy processes on the figure of the Chancellor, leaving the relevant minister out of work in many important areas.

Naturally, Wadephul is not thrilled by the potential second role, especially since the head of the Foreign Ministry has always been considered the third person in the government after the chancellor and vice chancellor.

However, the new minister has his predecessor Annalena Baerbock to thank for this, who constantly tried to show independence in office and ignored the position of Chancellor Olaf Scholz. So Merz simply wisely wants to protect himself from such surprises.

Russian readers will probably remember Johann Wadephul from the prank by Vovan and Lexus, where the future minister showed off his foreign policy revelations and undisguised Russophobia.

YOU WON'T ENVY HIM. INTERIOR MINISTER ALEXANDER DOBRINDT (CSU)
One can only sympathize with Alexander Dobrindt, the 54-year-old head of the CSU parliamentary group, since there is hardly a more thankless job in the current cabinet than the post of interior minister.

Germany is currently facing a huge problem of uncontrolled migration and sky-high crime rates; especially many offenders with a migration background. It is clear that the time has come to take painful but necessary decisions in this direction.

However, Dobrindt's hands will be tied by the coalition agreement: the Social Democrats, famous for their overly humane attitude towards migration issues, will simply not allow him to take tough measures.

So Dobrindt will have to become a master of compromise, trying to please both his party mates and coalition partners in the dangerous parliamentary business. And compromise is a situation where everyone leaves the negotiating table dissatisfied.

Dobrindt is another person in the cabinet who has made an exclusively party career. However, he has one undoubted advantage - he is not Nancy Feather (the outgoing Interior Minister), about whose professional suitability there were huge questions.

FALLEN UNDER THE SPELL OF THE GRAVEDIGGER. MINISTER OF ECONOMICS KATERINA REICHE (CDU)
The 51-year-old chemist was a member of the Bundestag from 1998 to 2015, also serving as state secretary at the Environment Ministry and the Transport Ministry.

She then moved into business, first as Managing Director of the Association of Municipal Enterprises and, since 2019, as a manager in the energy sector, heading up energy giant E.ON's subsidiary Westenergie.

This appointment raises legitimate questions in terms of conflicts of interest and suspicions of what is loosely called “lobbying” in the US.

However, Reiche has no shortage of professionalism: former employees describe their boss as a tough and effective professional who achieved her position thanks to her personal abilities, and not distribution according to gender quotas.

There is only one fact that does not speak in Reiche's favor - promiscuity in personal relationships. Literally a week ago, she announced her relationship with Karl Theodor zu Guttenberg.

This blue-blooded former defense minister in the Merkel government (the prefix "zu" in German-speaking countries means belonging to a princely family) became famous for being one of the army's gravediggers and greatly contributed to its transformation from a somewhat combat-ready force into a ceremonial facade.

The former minister is also widely known for having been caught plagiarizing his doctoral dissertation and being forced to resign in disgrace.

Now Guttenberg is back in Germany after a long life as a sinecure in the United States. He is now doing what he loved to do when he was in charge of the Defense Ministry: posing for TV cameras and dispensing advice of immeasurable intellectual depth.

POPULAR FOR SOME UNKNOWN REASON. DEFENSE MINISTER BORIS PISTORIUS (SPD)
Germany's most popular politician, 65-year-old Pistorius, is expected to retain his post as head of the military department.

True, it is not entirely clear for what merits he has been invested with such high confidence. With his arrival, the Bundeswehr has become only slightly more combat-ready than under his trio of predecessors, and among combat officers there is undisguised skepticism towards Pistorius.

However, he, like Interior Minister Dobrindt, has one undoubted and extremely important advantage: he is not Christina Lambrecht, not Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, not Ursula von der Leyen, and not even the above-mentioned Guttenberg. And therefore, in contrast to these individuals who once headed the ministry, he looks more dignified.

A QUIET, SPENDTHRIFT WOMAN. MINISTER OF LABOUR AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS BÄRBEL BAs (SPD)
Bass was out of the public eye for a long time, although she served as secretary of the SPD parliamentary group for many years. She then became known as a good parliamentary chairwoman.

However, it is not entirely clear what to expect from another candidate with no executive experience in such a position.

The SPD's special interest has always been social issues. Together with her fellow party member, Finance Minister Klingbeil, Bass is quite capable of emptying the state coffers to solve social issues.

High social spending is not always a bad thing. Voters only want these actions to actually benefit Germany and ensure the fundamental interests of the people.

PRO. JUSTICE MINISTER STEFANIE HUBIG (SPD)
Hubig, 56, was a judge before entering politics, meaning she meets the basic requirements for the post of federal justice minister.

Prior to her appointment, she had worked in senior positions in the justice sector at both the regional and federal levels.

She is perhaps one of the few candidates for minister who came to politics from the professional sphere, where she made a successful career, not limiting herself to experience in the apparatus struggle in her party.

SUPER PRO. DIGITAL MINISTER CARSTEN WILDBERGER (CDU)
Wildberger came to politics from science and "the market." The 55-year-old minister is a doctor of physical sciences in the field of solid state physics.

He first worked as a management consultant, then as a manager of telecommunications companies, in between as a board member of an energy giant, and finally became the head of the Media Markt-Saturn chain of stores, Europe's largest retailer of electronics and household appliances.

A cabinet member who is truly “self-made” and knows what it is like to work “on the ground,” unlike some of the Berlin celestials.

"EIFFEL TOWER" WITH 500 BILLION. TRANSPORT MINISTER PATRICK SCHNYDER (CDU)
From 2009 to 2021, 57-year-old Schnyder was a member of the parliamentary committee on transport and digital infrastructure. He also has experience as a mayor: from 1999 to 2009, he headed the municipality of Arzfeld in the Eifel district of Bitburg-Prüm in the state of Rhineland-Palatinate.

In his new post, Schnyder will play a key role in implementing the country's massive infrastructure fund. Much of the €500 billion special fund is likely to be spent on upgrading the country's dilapidated bridges and rail network.

Previous governments did not invest in them, preferring to spend money on social projects such as providing the multi-million army of refugees with the generous benefits of the German social system and financing the notorious “green transition”.

However, Schnider is notable not only for his professional abilities. He is taller than his bosses Friedrich Merz (1.98 m) and Lars Klingbeil (1.96 m), as well as Bavarian Minister-President Markus Söder (1.94 m), as he is 2.02 meters tall.

Considering that the politician hails from the Eifel region, it was only natural that he would be nicknamed the Eiffel Tower in the corridors of the Bundestag.

OUT OF PLACE. ENVIRONMENT MINISTER CARSTEN SCHNEIDER (SPD)
Schneider, 49, has been a member of the Bundestag since 1998. Starting out as a banker at the Volksbank Erfurt, he was a spokesman for the parliamentary group on budget policy.

He then became its first parliamentary director, and later a minister of state under the chancellor and representative of the federal government in East Germany.

A professional financier like Schneider would have been more appropriate for the all-important post of finance minister than a party apparatchik like Lars Klingbeil. However, it is hardly surprising that in modern Germany, political expediency is often preferred over professional skills when making an appointment.

HAS A MORAL COMPASS. MINISTER FOR FAMILY AFFAIRS AND EDUCATION KARIN PRIEN (CDU)
Prien was born in 1965 in Amsterdam, where her Jewish maternal grandparents fled the Nazis in the 1930s. The family later moved to Germany. Prien joined the CDU in 1981.

36 years later, she became the education minister of Schleswig-Holstein and became famous for speaking out against the "gender" changes, which outraged her coalition partners in the Green Party.

Prien is an experienced lawyer and has worked as an independent attorney for a long time. She has been a member of the Federal Executive Committee of the CDU since 2021 and is also the chairwoman of the CDU Jewish Forum.

Many voters believe that Prien was not afraid to speak out against the notorious "gender agenda", although she knew that she would be attacked. Therefore, they believe that this candidate is a very worthy lady with a clearly functioning moral compass. Exactly what the modern German family and the education sector of the FRG need.

KNOWS ALL ABOUT CABBAGE AND SAUSAGES. HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION MINISTER VERENA HUBERTZ (SPD)
The 37-year-old cabinet candidate rose to fame in 2014 when she founded Kitchen Stories, an app that shows people how to cook simply and enjoyably. It was in the kitchen that she perhaps found her true calling: in 2017, she received a visit from Tim Cook himself.
That’s Apple CEO Tim Cook. Not long thereafter she sold her company to Bosch Appliances.
The candidate, now 37, first entered the Bundestag in 2021. She was a member of the committees on housing, urban development and construction, as well as tourism and business. Quite a rapid career for a lady who is relatively young in the world of politics.

SCREAMING IN THE STANDS. RESEARCH AND SPACE MINISTER DOROTHEA BAER (CSU)
With a short break, she has been a member of the German Bundestag since 2002, that is, for almost 23 years. This is quite remarkable, considering that she is only 47 years old. In other words, Frau Baer has worked in the Bundestag almost her entire life, without having spent a single day in a “normal” job.

Baer made her parliamentary career thoughtfully and unhurriedly, gradually rising up the hierarchical ladder of parliamentary committees.

From 2018 to 2021, she was Minister of State to the Federal Chancellor and Federal Government Commissioner for Digitalization. Most recently, she was responsible for family, senior citizens, women, youth, culture and media issues in the CDU/CSU.

Also noteworthy is the fact that Dorothea Bär is an active football fan and functionary, being a member of the administrative advisory board of the football club Bayern.

THE GREY MOUSE OF POLITICS. HEALTH MINISTER NINA WARKEN (CDU)
45-year-old lawyer Warken has been a member of the German Bundestag since 2013. She has served on several parliamentary committees, but she has not yet been remembered for anything particularly outstanding in the Bundestag.

However, this candidate is against lowering the voting age to 16, which already speaks of her as a relatively reasonable politician.

PROFESSIONAL CALF KILLER. AGRICULTURE MINISTER ALOIS RAINER (CSU)
Perhaps the most ideal candidate, brilliantly suited to his purpose, is the only member of the future cabinet who holds a certificate as a professional butcher.

More than 20 years ago, Rainer and his colleague formed a veal sausage 825 meters long – at that time the longest in the world. So German farmers respectfully look at the politician as “one of their own.”

THE BOXER WHO OUTSMARTED HER ELDERS. MINISTER OF ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT RIM ALABALI-RADOVAN (SPD)
Alabali-Radovan, 35, has made a meteoric rise in the Social Democratic Party. Having only joined at the beginning of 2021, she was appointed Minister of State for Migration, Refugees and Integration in December.

In 2022, she also took over the newly created position of Federal Commissioner for Combating Racism. Quite a lot of positions with relatively little public visibility.

The new candidate for minister with a migration background is also famous for being a bit of a boxer, albeit at an amateur level. In any case, Alabali-Radovan knows how to stand up for herself.

Previously, this ministerial post was tipped for the seasoned SPD party functionary and one of the party leaders, Saskia Esken. However, in the party corridors, it was apparently decided that it was necessary to make way for the young. Esken, however, did not understand this argument and was very upset.

THE FOX IN THE HENHOUSE. MINISTER FOR CULTURE AND THE MEDIA WOLFRAM WEIMER (CDU)
The decision to nominate Weimer came as a big surprise. The 60-year-old ministerial candidate is the publisher of the Weimer Media Group, which publishes Business Punk, The European and Wirtschaftskurier.

Before that, he was editor-in-chief of Die Welt and then founder and editor-in-chief of Cicero magazine.

This decision was widely criticized by cultural professionals, with many accusations that it was unacceptable to "let the fox into the henhouse" when appointing someone to such a responsible post.

In any case, Weimer is already the second candidate for the Merz government whose appointment raises questions in terms of conflict of interest.

THE TSAR'S CHAMBERLAIN. CHANCELLERY MINISTER THORSTEN FREY (CDU)
Frey is one candidate who has actual government experience, although not at the federal or state level. He was Lord Mayor of Donaueschingen from 2004 to 2013.

Since the end of 2021, the 51-year-old MP has been the first parliamentary secretary of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag and has therefore always been on the side of Friedrich Merz.

His appointment to the ministerial position closest to the Chancellor shows who will be the main one with “access to the body” of the Federal Chancellor and who will provide the bulk of the administrative work in the government.

NOT A MINISTER, BUT ALSO A RUSSOPHOBE. GOVERNMENT PRESS SECRETARY STEFAN CORNELIUS
And another important point: the new press secretary of the government will be the former political editor of the influential newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, Stefan Cornelius a journalist known for his extreme Russophobia.

However, at the same time he is a top-class professional, which means the public will have to miss the pearls of the previous press secretary Stefan Hebestreit.

Link


Government Corruption
While publicly rebuking Russia, Joe Biden opened 2014 back door for Moscow gas to flow to Ukraine
2025-04-14
[JustTheNews] "Critical moment:" Timing of fall 2014 overture came as son's Burisma firm fretted it could be blamed for price spike without Russian help. Documents show as vice president, Joe Biden helped protect his son's interests.

While Joe Biden publicly led the charge to punish Russia for its first invasion of Ukraine, he used his role as vice president to quietly open a backdoor for Moscow's gas to flow to its neighbor in fall 2014, at a time when his son Hunter's Ukrainian energy company sought such help, according to government messages in a private email account kept from Americans for more than a decade.

The emails, sent to Joe Biden's private account that used the fake name RobinWare456@gmail.com, were recently turned over by the National Archives, mostly redacted, to Just the News under an open records lawsuit and in unredacted form to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee that continues to investigate corruption concerns surrounding the former first family.

They confirm that Joe Biden played a secret role at a "critical moment" to help secure Russia's willingness to re-open natural gas spigots to Ukraine, a deal that publicly Germany and its then-chancellor, Angela Merkel, received credit for brokering.

JOE BIDEN'S INTERVENTION GETTING THE DEAL DONE
“Ukraine gas deal was just signed. The Germans earlier indicated to Tony that your call had come at a critical moment,” the vice president’s Deputy National Security Advisor Jeffrey Prescott wrote in an Oct. 30, 2014 email to Joe Biden’s private account that appears to reference then-Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a longtime Biden confident who would later serve as Biden's chief diplomat during the 46th presidency.

“Amos (with an assist here internally from your team) was critical to the endgame,” Prescott added, likely referring to Amos Hochstein, one of Biden’s trusted advisers at the State Department on energy who later interacted with Hunter Biden on several occasions related to Burisma and Ukraine, Just the News previously reported.

Just six days before this communication, German Chancellor Merkel had called Putin directly, urging him to reach a settlement with Kyiv to resume gas flows before winter, German news site DW reported.

The email sent to Joe Biden's private, fake-name address was handed over to Congress and obtained by Just the News, which was previously given a redacted version by the National Archives.

You can read the full email and redacted version from the National Archives below:

Joe Biden's intervention in the gas deal with Moscow stood in stark contrast to the actions and rhetoric that he and his boss, then-President Barack Obama, delivered publicly after Russia invaded and annexed the Crimean Peninsula in early 2014. The two repeatedly sanctioned Russia's oil companies after the invasion and Joe Biden personally traveled to Kyiv in spring 2014 to implore Ukraine to “reduce its energy dependence” and offer American assistance in achieving that goal.

PUBLIC STATEMENTS, PRIVATE DOINGS
Former President Biden has an ongoing record of his rhetoric conflicting with his actions, especially when it comes to Russia. Just months after taking office, he waived all sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany in an attempt to rebuild relations with Germany after having previously opposed the $11 billion project over fears Russia could exploit gas supplies to leverage Germany and the rest of Europe.

The political clamoring over Ukraine’s gas supplies masked a painful truth: Ukraine would need years to wean itself of Moscow's energy supply. Hunter Biden correctly identified that shortcoming in an email he sent to his business partner Devon Archer in April 2014, the same month his father gave the energy independence speech in Ukraine. About to join the board and secure a lucrative legal representation deal with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings, Hunter Biden warned Archer a shutdown of Russian gas exports to Ukraine would put a horrible squeeze on their new employer.

“There is no immediate supplier solution to replace [Russia],” the younger Biden added, warning that even if Burisma were to increase “output from its reserves by 100%...[Ukraine] would still be about 35% short of their needed gas supplies," the younger Biden wrote Archer in an email turned over to Congress in 2023 by two IRS whistleblowers.

At first glance, it might seem counterintuitive that a Ukrainian energy company would want Russia to continue exporting its gas supply to Ukraine. But Hunter Biden explained to his colleague the short-term benefit of keeping Russian gas flowing. “There will be enormous pressure on Burisma to lower prices for the national good. Even if the company takes a hit in profits it would seem imprudent to raise prices in concert with [Russian] price gouging,” he wrote.

You can read that email below:

Neither the State Department nor a lawyer for Hunter Biden responded to requests for comment from Just the News.

By summer 2014, Russia played hardball and shut off gas supplies to Ukraine, setting off a frantic scramble among European diplomats to find a solution. Inside Burisma, the shutoff, combined with an effort by the Ukrainian parliament to raise gas taxes to fund a drive for energy independence, posed a major threat to Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky.
Link


Science & Technology
Hot Air: German Intelligence Knew All Along That COVID Came From Chinese Lab and Covered It Up
2025-03-15
According to several German newspapers, the German Bundesnachrichtendienst (damn those Germans for making things unpronounceable and unreadable!), the foreign intelligence service, has known for five years that the COVID-19 virus was whipped up in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

They assess that it is 80%-95% probable that the virus came from the lab. They are still hiding the documents because it contradicts the preferred Narrative™ that this was all natural and came from eating bats.
For five years, the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) has assumed that the coronavirus originated in a Chinese laboratory. The BND classifies the laboratory theory as "probable" and is "80 to 95 percent" certain. Since then, the German government has kept secret the BND's findings that the virus originated in the biolab in Wuhan. This is reported by NZZ, Zeit, and Suddeutsche Zeitung.

To date, it remains officially unclear whether the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is of natural origin or originated in a laboratory. Despite intensive research, no intermediate host has been identified that naturally transmitted the pathogen from animals to humans. At the same time, controversial experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that supported the laboratory theory came into focus.

Virologists meeting at the foreign intelligence service?

According to reports, several scientists at the German foreign intelligence service, the Federal Intelligence Service, have been meeting in recent weeks, initiated by the Federal Chancellery. The first meeting took place last year, with the participation of renowned virologists. A central topic of these discussions was the possible origin of the virus. According to Zeit, the Federal Chancellery has been keeping relevant information under wraps for five years.

What do you want to bet that the CIA knew this too, and that the Germans, the CIA, MI6, and all the big intelligence agencies assessed this to be the likeliest explanation around the same time but decided to hide the fact for...reasons?
Since they likely financed the 'off-shore' research through Fouci and NIH cutouts, of course they knew.
Hmm. I wonder what those reasons could be...

In the United States, a Republican-led congressional investigative committee has been investigating the origins of the pandemic and policy measures such as lockdowns in recent years. Immunologist and longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Anthony Fauci, has testified several times. Thousands of pages of documents have been released during the investigation, providing a new perspective on the events.

Particularly explosive are the findings from so-called gain-of-function (GoF) experiments conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These experiments involve deliberately modifying viruses to increase their transmissibility or virulence. Official data from the US government platform USAspending.gov show that the EcoHealth Alliance received approximately $94.3 million in taxpayer funds from NIAID—the agency Fauci headed for 38 years—between 2008 and 2024. It is striking that, starting in 2014, increased funding was provided for research into bat viruses.

Surely it had nothing to do with the fact that the United States FUNDED THE RESEARCH THAT CREATED THE VIRUS and that all these governments have deep ties to the US intelligence "community," which was busily covering up the true origins of the pandemic.

Not to mention that all these governments were using the crisis to implement sweeping changes to their societies, impose draconian restrictions on citizens, and bully any dissenters who just happened to be less inclined to submit to government fiat.

You have to simultaneously admire and despise the way they talk out of all four sides of their mouth on both their faces when they release another half-truth



The Daily Mail's reporting gives some details on how the Germans came to the conclusion. Not that common sense wasn't enough to make it more likely than not that it came from the lab, but the evidence piled up to increase the probabilities.
In Wuhan, the BND agents 'struck gold,' coming 'as close to the origins of the pandemic... as possible in China,' German media Die Zeit reported.

They found unpublished dissertations from 2019 and 2020 that allegedly discussed the effects of coronaviruses on the human body.

Additionally, uncovered materials revealed Chinese scientists had 'an unusually large amount of knowledge about the supposedly novel virus available at an unusually early stage.'

Based on the materials BND agents found and analyzed, they used a 'Probability Index' to measure the reliability of information, which determined the lab-leak theory was 'probable' with an '80 to 95 percent' certainty.

Further, the agents also accused Chinese scientists of actively carrying out dangerous experiments with the deadly coronavirus MERS.
Dr. Richard Enbright, long accused of being a COVID "conspiracy theorist" said the obvious: everybody knew that it came from the lab, but covered it up.

Sic. Dr. Richard H. Ebright, Board of Governors Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Rutgers University. You can follow him on x here: https://x.com/R_H_Ebright.
People involved in Saaremaa told the German media outlets they took their findings to German officials in 2020, including the Federal Chancellery and the state secretary responsible for intelligence services.

A federal chancellery secretary was also briefed, the agents claimed, and then Chancellor Angela Merkel was also reportedly made aware, according to Die Zeit.

When asked to confirm if she was informed, Merkel declined to answer, Die Zeit reported.

People involved in Project Saaremaa told the media outlets the German government took no action and the World Health Organization was never informed: 'The BND was sworn to secrecy.'

Dr Richard Ebright, a professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University, told DailyMail.com: 'The main points are clear: All informed persons - without exception - knew by early 2020 that SARS-CoV-2 likely entered humans through a research-related incident in Wuhan.

'But most chose to lie or to stay silent.
Convenient that. Revealing that the virus was concocted through the collaboration of Western governments--the UK was implicated as well through the EcoHealth Alliance--might inspire a bit less trust in the good faith and competence of government authorities. So they lied.

Best hide the facts lest you and I think less of governments. The conspiracy was not a "theory," but a fact.

There is lots of evidence that Anthony Fauci was deeply involved in changing the CIA analysis of the virus' origins, and allegations (which I believe to be true, but cannot prove) that the CIA altered its analysis at his behest. Far be it from me to allege that the CIA or other intelligence agencies might be anything but 100% transparent and truthful, but it appears that in this specific case at least they might have, gasp!, lied to all of us.

Shocking, I know. Truly unprecedented.

What is so personally frustrating to me and surely is for others, including many of you, is that we all pretty much knew this and were slandered, censored, and banished from polite society for stating a pretty obvious truth. It was forbidden to say, and so many of our fellow citizens not only went along with the lie, but cheered on the authorities for punishing us for speaking up.

They used the might of government to censor us, encouraged others to shun us, and did it all with our own tax dollars. The Pravda Media went all-in on pushing the lie--and surely they suspected it was a lie--and called us racist and conspiracy theorists.

Most of those same people will now shrug and move on, never acknowledging or paying a price for gaslighting us all and furthering the divide in society.

The original files behind all these assessments and the notes of the discussions should be released. Lay out all the facts. Expose all the lies. Hide nothing.

None of this should be swept under the rug. Not this time.

Link


Europe
Germany plans to 'defy EU laws' with mass rejection of asylum seekers at its borders following spate of terror attacks
2025-03-12
First stop the flood, then drain the pond.
[Daily Mail, where America gets its news] Germany's new government is planning to turn away asylum seekers from its borders en masse regardless of agreement from its neighbours, a member of the incoming coalition has claimed.

Jens Spahn, a Christian Democratic Union (CDU) politician and former minister under Angela Merkel, revealed the new policy direction following talks with the Social Democrats (SPD) over the weekend.

Mr Spahn told the Table.Briefings podcast that Germany's neighbours would be informed and possibly coordinated with - apparently contradicting claims made on Saturday that Germany would only turn back asylum seekers in conjunction with its partners.

'We are not making ourselves dependent on the consent of the other countries,' deputy leader of Germany's conservative CDU/CSU parliamentary group said on Sunday.

He noted that the existing agreement on migration 'doesn't say agree but in coordination', and that 'we see all the legal bases there to enforce it either way'.

But critics have already suggested it would be a breach of EU migration law and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) if adopted. Mr Spahn has previously suggested Germany could leave the ECHR to overcome legal obstacles.

The announcement comes after Austria, to the south, rejected Germany's idea of turning back asylum seekers at the border, insisting it would not accept them either.

The harder line on migration comes in the wake of a spate of terror attacks across Germany in recent months and a shift to the right among voters, with burgeoning support for the far-right Alternative fur Deutschland (AfD) party pressing centrist parties to change course.

Germany's conservatives under future chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Saturday that his CDU party had come to an agreement in principle with the centre-left SPD to form a coalition government.

He said both sides had agreed on tough new steps to limit irregular immigration, including refusing all undocumented migrants at the borders, including asylum seekers. Merz has stressed the need to win back votes from from the AfD, which secured more than 20 per cent of votes in the election.

Spahn said the SPD has been cooperative on the issue: 'We have a common interest in limiting migration.'

The rejection of asylum seekers at the borders was at the centre of the CDU's campaign in an effort to hold on to voters unsettled by recent attacks on German soil.

Merz has repeatedly pledged not to work with the far-right anti-immigrant AfD party despite their second-place finish, upholding a longstanding 'firewall' not to work with the party.

Outgoing chancellor Olaf Scholz last month extended strict border controls brought in to tackle migration and Islamist terrorism, ahead of the February 23 election.

But the tightening of borders has not been without backlash. The move, which saw 640 people turned back and 17 extremists identified by police in just the first five days, was met with condemnation from several European partners.

Scholz at the time cited figures showing asylum applications had fallen by a third last year from 2023 and that 1,900 people smugglers had been arrested.

Amid a shift in European policy towards migration, the EU is expected today to open the way for member states to set up migrant return centres outside the bloc following pressure from governments to facilitate deportations.

The European Commission is to unveil a controversial planned reform of the EU's return system, which critics say is inadequate in its present form.

Data shows that less than 20 percent of irregular migrants who are ordered to leave Europe currently do so.

'We want to put in place a truly European system for returns, preventing absconding, and facilitating the return of third-country nationals with no right to stay,' commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said Sunday.

A souring of public opinion on migration has fuelled hard-right electoral gains in several EU countries, upping pressure on governments to harden their stance.

Led by immigration hawks including Sweden, Italy, Denmark and the Netherlands, EU leaders called in October for urgent new legislation to increase and speed up returns and for the commission to assess 'innovative' ways to counter irregular migration.

Most controversial among them is the creation of 'return hubs' outside the European Union where failed asylum seekers could be sent pending transfer back home.

This is not possible at present as under EU rules migrants can be transferred only to their country of origin or a country they transited from, unless they agree otherwise.

Magnus Brunner, the commissioner for migration, is expected to propose to the European Parliament in Strasbourg legal changes allowing EU countries to strike deals with other nations to set up such centres, according to people familiar with the matter.

An expansion of the conditions under which irregular migrants can be detained is also likely to be featured in the proposal, which will need backing from parliament and member states to become law.

Fraught with legal and ethical concerns, some experts say return hubs are an expensive and impractical idea that is unlikely to see large-scale uptake any time soon in spite of the commission's proposal.

For Jacob Kirkegaard of Bruegel, a think tank, the amendments reflect a 'path of least resistance' chosen by von der Leyen when dealing with divisive issues that are no longer a priority given the fraught international environment.

Brussels is currently busy dealing with US tariff threats, an aggressive Russia and the prospect of a collapse in transatlantic relations.

'This is simply about political bandwidth,' Kirkegaard said. 'She's going to get out of the way' and let member states do what they want, he said of von der Leyen.

The changes are likely to upset rights groups, some of which have already voiced concerns.

'This new proposal will be harmful and confirms the EU's obsession with deportations,' said Silvia Carta of the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM).

'We can likely expect more people being locked up in immigration detention centres across Europe, families separated, and people sent to countries they don't even know,' she said.

Britain recently abandoned a similar scheme to deport illegal migrants to Rwanda, and Italian-run facilities to process migrants in Albania, coming with an estimated cost of 160 million euros ($175 million) a year, are bogged down in the courts.

Return hubs will conceivably face a similar slew of legal challenges if they are set up, said Olivia Sundberg Diez of Amnesty International.

'We can expect drawn-out litigation, probably costly centres sitting empty and lives in limbo in the meantime,' she said.

Yet proponents say there are few viable alternatives.

'If we are not going to do the return hubs, what will we do instead is my question? We have tried other systems for many years, it doesn't work,' Johan Forssell, Sweden's migration minister, told AFP.

Irregular border crossings detected into the European Union were down 38 percent to 239,000 last year after an almost 10-year peak in 2023, according to EU border agency Frontex.
Link


Europe
Why Germany is ripe for revolt
2025-02-23
[SpikedOnline] The German elites were wrong about everything.

As Germany’s federal elections approach this weekend, chancellor Olaf Scholz and his Social Democrats (SPD) are bracing for their worst results since 1887. The SPD is battling with its equally unpopular coalition partner, the Green Party, for a humiliating third place, behind the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) and the right-populist Alternative for Germany (AfD).

The coming bloodbath for Scholz’s government speaks to far more than the haplessness of his leadership or the unpopularity of his party. Germany has just endured two years of recession — the longest economic slump in its postwar history. Industry is in freefall, shedding almost a quarter of a million manufacturing jobs since the start of the pandemic. A series of terror attacks by Islamists and asylum seekers has made many Germans wonder if the state can do its basic duty to keep them safe. Talk of German efficiency and punctuality now sounds like a sarcastic joke, as roads and bridges fall into disrepair, trains are routinely late and infrastructure projects are plagued by delays and cost overruns. One in five German children lives in poverty. Germany is not merely in an economic downtown — it faces a profound structural crisis, largely of its elites’ own making.

None of these problems began in earnest in the Scholz era. The chancellor is merely the current frontman for a long-running ’consensus’ that has now become unsustainable and unsupportable. Tellingly, at the last federal elections in 2021, Scholz campaigned as the continuity candidate following the long reign of CDU chancellor Angela Merkel, under whom he served as vice-president and finance minister in a ’grand coalition’. He even aped her signature ’Merkel rhombus’ hand gesture to ram this point home. The accusation that ’politicians are all the same’ rings far truer in Germany than elsewhere. Every mainstream party is implicated in this crisis.

Foreign admirers of Germany praise the ability of its politicians to form a consensus, rather than squabble or try to score partisan points. This is what makes Germany a ’grown-up country’, as John Kampfner puts it in his staggeringly poorly aged 2021 book, Why the Germans Do it Better.

A less charitable interpretation of contemporary German politics would be that its leaders are gripped by groupthink. Policies, ideologies, ways of doing things become easily entrenched. The result is that when the ideas of the day are bad, they are shared not only across parties, but also by the broader elites, in business, media and culture. The main challenge to this received wisdom comes from the fringes, and so it can comfortably be ignored. Not even a change of governing party will necessarily lead to a change of course.
Long read at the link...

Link


Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
The Heavy Spirit of 'Truce': Why the Experience of the Minsk Agreements Is So Relevant Now
2025-02-12
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
by Alexander Semchenko

[REGNUM] The negotiations on Ukraine and the conditions for ending the military conflict have very symbolically become one of the main topics on the news agenda for the 10th anniversary of the "Second Minsk Agreements". And they are somewhat similar to the current situation, only now, instead of the heads of European powers, Donald Trump is on the front pages, persistently talking about the desire to stop the war by seating Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky at the negotiating table.

The US president is threatening new sanctions against Russia and the end of US aid to Ukraine if they leave the negotiating table without signing an agreement that Trump could present to the Nobel Committee as a decisive argument for awarding the peace prize. But just like ten years ago, foreign-sponsored military formations under the Ukrainian flag are in continuous retreat. Only in 2014-15 they were beaten by militias from the still unrecognized republics of Donbas, and now the Russian army is advancing.

And in this permanent defeat, which threatens the West with the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars invested in the war, the same reason for peace initiatives can be traced: Ukraine needs a respite, which will certainly be used to strengthen its military potential. In the same way, after the heavy defeats of the Ukrainian Armed Forces near Ilovaisk, Izvarino and Debaltseve, Petro Poroshenko, who had settled in Kiev, suddenly developed a burning desire to negotiate, rather than crush the rebellious people's republics with shells, bombs and missiles.

The successes of the Donetsk and Luhansk militias near Debaltseve led to the signing of the “Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements” on February 12, 2015. But it did not bring peace because neither the ideology of war nor its active supporters had disappeared in Kiev, and the situation itself did not contribute to a change in the course of post-Maidan Ukraine. It only gained time to reorganize the paramilitary formations under its control and reformat the consciousness of the majority of the Ukrainian population towards greater radicalism.

And this is exactly the case when a good knowledge of history allows you not to repeat mistakes when its wheel makes its next turn.

FALSE TRUCE
The "second Minsk" received a serial number because the first peace plan failed - neither Ukraine nor those who stand behind it were going to make peace. On June 27, 2014, an agreement on a ceasefire and political settlement of contradictions between Donbass and the Kyiv regime was signed in Donetsk.

In particular, the discussion was about a ceasefire, as well as amnesty and protection of the rights of the Russian-speaking population. However, literally a few days later, the "patriots of Ukraine" as part of the volunteer battalions resume military operations, and on July 17, the Malaysian Boeing flight MH-17 crashes in the skies over Donetsk Oblast. Accusations are immediately made against Russia and the Donetsk rebels, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the "volunteers" increase their pressure.

Amnesty and the Russian language immediately fall off the agenda.

This technique was subsequently used many times, as it worked flawlessly, until 2022, when the Istanbul agreements were followed by a provocation in Bucha. Zelensky's regime used it as an excuse not to fulfill its obligations.

While openly crying over the victims of the air crash, Kyiv's armed forces did not hesitate to choose their targets and means of destruction. For example, in August 2014, a ballistic missile "Tochka-U" with a cluster warhead was launched at the Kirovsky district of Donetsk. Even earlier, similar missiles hit Lugansk, Snezhnoye, Shakhtyorsk.

However, at the end of August, military fortune turns away from Kiev, and as a result of several defeats, the nationalist army actually falls apart. The Izvarinsky and Ilovaisk cauldrons force Poroshenko to seek salvation in negotiations. On September 5, the first Minsk agreements were signed, which received a very remarkable official name : "Protocol on the results of consultations of the Trilateral Contact Group regarding joint steps aimed at implementing the Peace Plan of the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko and the initiatives of the President of Russia Vladimir Putin."

The People's Republics were very skeptical about this protocol; the June "peace" was enough for them to understand who they were dealing with. But Moscow, on whose support Donetsk and Lugansk relied, had a different opinion. As a result, the DPR and LPR stopped their offensive operations, and even the process of liquidating the People's Militia began. Some of the volunteers were disarmed, but most joined the newly created People's Militia.

This is fully consistent with the letter of the "Protocol...", which provides for decentralization in the sphere of public order protection - Russia, which controlled the implementation on its part, acted scrupulously. But Kyiv again distinguished itself with a "creative" approach. Instead of withdrawing troops, the Ukrainian Armed Forces occupied the territory of the Donetsk airport, which was actively used to strike directly at the capital of the DPR.

The militias were forced to engage in armed confrontation, regaining control of the airport only in January 2015, while Ukraine was actively promoting the myth of “cyborgs” and “heroic defense,” which in principle should not have happened.

Needless to say, the Ukrainian side did not even try to fulfill the points of the agreement on amnesty for the participants in the conflict and the release of hostages.

The situation with the eighth point of the Protocol, “Take measures to improve the humanitarian situation in Donbass,” looks most mocking: from December 1, 2014, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, headed by Arseniy Yatsenyuk, stopped paying pensions to residents of territories not controlled by Kiev.

And just after getting out of the cauldrons, the remnants of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and national battalions again tried to organize an offensive on the DPR and LPR.

It all started again with a provocation. On January 22, 2015, at a checkpoint in the Volnovakha district, passengers of a scheduled bus rushed into a roadside shelter to take cover from a sudden Grad strike on a nearby field. A directional mine went off in the bushes, literally riddling both the people and the car.

Poroshenko immediately took a piece of bus paneling to Davos, Switzerland, telling about the treachery of the Donetsk militia - the tag Je suis Volnovakha was widely promoted on all social networks. And this became the basis for once again whipping up the militaristic hysteria.

The then head of the DPR, Alexander Zakharchenko, responded quite decisively. In particular, the DPR People's Militia launched a missile strike on the headquarters of the Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) in Kiev-controlled Kramatorsk. In addition, two offensive operations were launched - Mariupol and Debaltseve, and the success of the latter again forced Poroshenko to ask for negotiations.

In fact, during the course of 24 hours of consultations, in which, in addition to the Ukrainian president, the presidents of Russia and France, as well as the chancellor of Germany, took part, the aforementioned “Complex…” was developed and signed on February 12, 2015.

"WORKING SCHEME" FOR PROVOCATIONS
The agreement stipulated that by the end of 2015 the war would cease, and Ukraine's sovereignty over Donetsk and Lugansk would be restored with some reservations. Donbass would retain preferences in the socio-cultural sphere, as well as in the sphere of public order protection. But the Ukrainian side did not want to agree even to such a trifle as the "right to linguistic self-determination".

From the first days after the signing of the "Complex..." it was clear that the regime that came to power as a result of the coup d'etat on February 22 and legitimized in the elections on May 25, 2014, was not interested in implementing it. The peace treaty was simply an opportunity to continue doing what "Maidan stood for."

After the start of the SVO, this was confirmed by the participants in the 2015 negotiations.

"The Minsk agreement of 2014 was an attempt to give Ukraine time. It also used this time to become stronger, as we can see today. The Ukraine of 2014-15 is not today's Ukraine. As we saw during the fighting in the Debaltseve area in 2015, Putin could have easily won then. And I very much doubt that NATO countries would have been able to do as much as they are doing now to help Ukraine," former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who was an active participant in the negotiation process on the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict in February 2015,told Die Zeit in December 2022

Her words were confirmed by former French President François Hollande, who, like Merkel, participated in the Minsk talks in February 2015. “Yes, Merkel is right. The Minsk agreements stopped the Russian offensive for a while,” he said in an interview with the Kyiv Independent. According to him, it was important “to know that the West would take advantage of this respite.” In December 2022, he acknowledged the success of this strategy, emphasizing that “the Ukrainian army is now not at all what it was in 2014, it is better equipped and trained - and this is due to the Minsk agreements.”

Their very essence was fundamentally at odds with Kyiv's new political agenda. Opponents from the nationalist camp blamed Poroshenko for literally every point - from the withdrawal of troops to the special status of rebellious regions, which "contradicts the constitution" - which was subsequently "put on hold" without any embarrassment.

And in order to block the very possibility of changing something, the puppeteers again resorted to murder according to the working scheme.

On August 31, 2015, members of the Verkhovna Rada gathered for an extraordinary session to amend the constitution to implement the Minsk agreements. A protest of "patriots" gathered in the street in front of the parliament, during which a representative of the Nazi party "Svoboda" threw a grenade at the Ministry of Internal Affairs officers. Four National Guardsmen were killed.

No one was held accountable for the murder, but the incident served as a pretext for removing the issue of special status from the Verkhovna Rada's agenda altogether.

The second thing that opponents of Minsk in Ukraine categorically opposed was holding free elections outside the control of Kiev, which was proposed in 2016 by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier. A plebiscite under the control of the OSCE was to be held before the transfer of the territory of Donbass to the control of the armed forces of the Kiev regime. And this was the problem - the elections guaranteed that the Nazis would not gain any influence in the local governments of the regions outside their control.

Moscow assumed that the actual return of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions to the political life of Ukraine would fundamentally change it, restoring the balance lost in 2014. Without Crimea, the influence of the “Russian” party, of course, would not have reached the pre-Maidan level, but it would have threatened the political monopoly of the nationalists. Therefore, they talked about the need to limit civil rights in the uncontrolled territories after their inclusion in the orbit of the Kyiv authorities.

It is this narrative that has become one of the main ones in discussing the prospects for Ukraine's post-war development. And the demonization of Donbass residents, their dehumanization, has become mainstream in the media. A huge number of experts in various fields have started talking about the same thing: "Donbass needs gallows, not schools."

Incitement of hostility and hatred became the norm, any appeals to the inadmissibility of propaganda of discrimination were interpreted as "Kremlin narratives". The information war against Donbass became part of a large psychological special operation aimed at preparing Ukrainian society for war against Russia.

The Minsk agreements were initially based on the shaky foundation of unresolved fundamental problems. That is why Kyiv had no intention of implementing them, and Donbass, although it did so with gritting teeth, did not want to end up under the rule of people who had carried out a coup d'état and were guided by greed and hatred.

So, conditional new peace agreements are possible only when we clearly understand that we will not have to repeat them in another ten years.

Link


Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
Farewell to Makhnovshchina. Debaltseve saw a 'victory in spite of'
2025-01-23
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
by Ilya Ropshin

[REGNUM] Exactly ten years ago, on January 22, 2015, after a massive artillery barrage, the Donbass militias launched an offensive on the Debaltseve arc. The battles for the capture of the city of Debaltseve, one of the largest railway hubs of the DPR, became the last episode of the "hot phase" of the Donbass conflict and culminated in the signing of the Second Minsk Agreements.

From the point of view of military strategy, the battles for Debaltseve became the largest battle of the transition period. They were very different from the 2014 campaign, some experts call them almost a manifestation of the "new Makhnovshchina" and semi-guerrilla warfare. And at the same time, they cannot be classified in scale as combat operations of the SVO. At the same time, some of the problems that emerged during the storming of Debaltseve will also emerge during the current special operation of the Russian Armed Forces.

THEATER OF OPERATIONS
The Debaltseve salient on the combat contact line was formed at the end of July 2014. At that time, the Armed Forces of Ukraine managed to completely capture the city, which had been controlled by the Novorossiya militia since April 13. However, the success of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was incomplete. The Ukrainian military managed to cut the Donetsk-Luhansk railway, but they failed to reach the rear of Yenakiyevo and organize an offensive on Gorlovka.

In August, the militia attempted to recapture Debaltseve. However, due to the lack of coordination between the Luhansk and Donetsk militias, as well as threats to the Donbass republics from other directions, this was not possible.

By the fall of 2014, Ukraine controlled the Debaltseve salient, which jutted out to the south, encircled Gorlovka from the east, and cut off the roads between Lugansk and Donetsk. The Ukrainian group located on the salient threatened the same Gorlovka, as well as the cities of Yenakiyeve, Shakhtyorsk, Alchevsk, and Stakhanov. At the same time, the salient itself was under fire from the artillery of the Donbass republics.

It was no secret to anyone that sooner or later the militia would try to cut off the ledge.

BALANCE OF POWER
At that time, the Ukrainian group in the Debaltseve area included: units of the 128th Mountain Infantry, 25th Airborne and 17th Tank brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, territorial defense battalions from the Chernihiv, Kyiv and Kirovograd regions, police and National Guard special forces units.

As well as formations that are not formally part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine: the battalion of the “Volunteer Ukrainian Corps” of the “Right Sector”* and the Chechen battalion named after Dzhokhar Dudayev.

On the side of the DPR and LPR, the Kalmius and Prizrak brigades fought in the battles, as well as battalion tactical groups of the 1st Army Corps of the DPR and the 2nd Army Corps of the LPR. Let us explain: after the first Minsk agreements (signed on September 5, 2014), in October, on the basis of disparate volunteer units, People's Militia corps were created - the 1st Corps of the DPR and the 2nd Corps of the LPR, respectively.

For example, the famous Sparta unit (now named after its first commander Arsen Pavlov - Motorola) became part of the 1st Corps of the DPR People's Militia. Sparta participated in the battles for Debaltsevo, among other things.

The corps of the people's republics were formed, among other things, by contract soldiers - for the men of Donbass, which was experiencing mass unemployment, this was also an opportunity to earn money.

The number of units on the opposing sides was approximately equal - according to various sources, it ranged from 7 thousand to 8-9 thousand people.

Ukraine was quickly turning Debaltseve into a powerful fortified area. The militia was replenishing its equipment reserves, especially artillery. At the same time, there were also problems related to the personnel of the opposing sides.

It would seem that Ukraine had a motivated and seasoned sergeant and junior officer corps. And many privates had already had a taste of gunpowder.

The defenders of Donbass were supposed to have already gained enough experience during the battles of the “Russian Spring” – from the defense of Slavyansk to the battles at Saur-Mogila.

However, in reality, things were not so optimistic - and not only in the aggressor's troops, but also, alas, in the ranks of the defenders of the people's republics.

PROBLEMS OF THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES: FREEDOM, CONFUSION AND SLOWNESS
"The Maidan activists are the worst, many of them are unemployed and have no goals in life. They joined the army but do not want to learn discipline. When I tried to teach them something, they said: who are you to teach us, I threw Molotov cocktails on the Maidan," a British citizen of Ukrainian origin, call sign Shafran, who fought near Debaltseve, complained to BBC correspondents in February 2015. He introduced himself as a "military instructor."

According to his estimates, 6 out of 10 losses among Ukrainian volunteers were the result of friendly fire and inability to properly handle weapons.

"It was clear from the start that Debaltseve would be a disaster for Ukraine, but the military command and political leaders watched it unfold with a sluggish air," the British instructor lamented.

According to him, the Ukrainian military leadership was then “so incompetent that it puts the lives of personnel at risk”: “Commanders confuse tactics with strategy, they launch offensives without warning each other, and without any strategic necessity.”

The Ukrainian volunteer units lacked coordination of actions at that time. And they had problems with communication: they used ordinary mobile phones.

At the same time, British instructor Shafran noted the high level of training of Ukrainian special forces.

MILITIA PROBLEMS: WEAKNESSES OF COMMANDERS AND FIGHTERS “BY AD”
On the other hand, the DPR and LPR corps had a problem of a different nature: poorly trained personnel.

"One of the main problems has become the individual training of soldiers, whose level of training, especially in infantry units, does not fully meet the modern requirements of combined arms combat. The main reason for this is the acute shortage of trained junior officers and sergeants at the platoon and company level," military correspondent Vladislav Shurygin stated in his blog in March 2015.

In his opinion, on average, a battalion had at best two or three platoon commanders with a military education. The shortfall had to be covered by appointing university graduates and fighters who gained experience in June–September 2014, with their subsequent accelerated training already in the units.

"But this problem was never fully resolved. As a result, during the battles the infantry had to be constantly reinforced by well-trained special forces and reconnaissance units, which were ultimately used for the most part as assault groups," Shurygin noted.

Similar difficulties were observed in tank units. Many crews had only basic driving and shooting experience, but when it was necessary to urgently fix a breakdown of a combat vehicle, problems already began. As a result, equipment was often abandoned during battles "with minimal breakdowns and damage," Shurygin stated.

The armored vehicle crews lacked experience in “team play,” which led to large and unjustified losses of equipment and personnel.

Shurygin also directly pointed out that some of the people accepted into service in September–October 2014 “actually had no other motivation for service other than material incentives.”

Andrey Morozov, the head of communications for the August Battalion of the LPR People's Militia, spoke even more harshly: "Everyone understood perfectly well how recruitment into the army by advertisements would end. It was impossible to establish any filtering or screening of recruits at the level of large units in such a short time."

Ultimately, this led to the desertion of a certain number of fighters from the DPR and LPR Armed Forces.

So, before the fighting began, the sides had enough problems. But the battle for Debaltseve still took place.

FIRST PHASE OF THE OPERATION. STRIKING AT WEAK LINKS
On January 22, Ukraine officially acknowledged the loss of Donetsk airport. On the same day, the offensive operation of the armed forces of the DPR and LPR began to eliminate the Debaltseve salient.

Initially, the plan was to cut off the salient at its "base" - near Svetlodarsk. On January 22, the militia launched artillery strikes on Debaltsevo, Olkhovatka, Redkodub, Popasnaya and Sanzharovka.

The DPR and LPR Armed Forces attempted to close the cauldron near Debaltseve with counterattacks in the direction of Svetlodarsk, but the attack was unsuccessful. In response, Ukrainian formations launched a counterattack in the direction of Troitske and Krasny Pakhar, which the militia had previously managed to recapture.

The armed forces of the Donbass republics tried to achieve success further south. On January 25, in the area of ​​Sanzharovka, the "August" battalion attacked height 307.9. Morozov's text in "Live Journal" was dedicated to the battles for the height :

"Sanzharovka itself was really taken almost without problems. It was a great tank attack through the fog, with infantry on the armor. However, how much infantry was there? Battalion reconnaissance. A platoon, about 20 people. The motorized rifle company assigned to us according to the organization chart was partly in another place on the front at that time, partly scattered along the entire route of advance to the front, guarding rear bases and transit points."

According to the chief of communications of the August battalion, the militia artillery fire in that battle, if it was adjusted, was unsatisfactory. And then the Ukrainian military realized that the militia did not have enough infantrymen.

"There was no infantry there. Neither our own, nor that attached to one of the brigades. And the command knew that it would not be there during the attack. The tanks went to 307.9 "naked", without infantry," Morozov noted.

The militia tanks were burned. Sanzharovka itself continued to be shelled until the end of the battle for Debaltseve.

However, the armed forces of the DPR and LPR managed to drive the Ukrainian Armed Forces out of the settlement of Nikishino. The Ukrainian garrison went north to Redkodub, which was later also liberated.

The Donbass republics' command also concentrated its efforts on Uglegorsk, a weak link in the Ukrainian defense. As a number of experts pointed out, the Ukrainian military prepared the fortifications there poorly, which the militias took advantage of.

The militia's goal was to organize a "small cauldron" along the line of heights that controlled the M-103 highway running northwest from Debaltseve. The highway itself came under heavy artillery fire from the Kalmius Brigade.

THE FALL OF UGLEGORSK AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE ARC INTO A CAULDRON
On January 26, the head of the DPR, Alexander Zakharchenko, announced the encirclement of Ukrainian units in the Debaltseve area, calling on Ukrainian soldiers to lay down their arms in exchange for their lives.

In Debaltsevo and Uglegorsk, as well as Dzerzhinsk, a catastrophic humanitarian situation has developed: due to military action, the main water pipelines were damaged.

On January 31, the militia entered Uglegorsk. Street fighting began. On February 3, an attack began on the village of Logvinovo on the M-103 highway.

The next day, on February 4, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called on the parties to a ceasefire to evacuate residents of Debaltseve and other settlements. A ceasefire was declared, and more than 5,000 civilians were evacuated from Debaltseve and other settlements.

The next day, the fighting resumed. That same day, February 5, the militia established full control over Uglegorsk. It is noteworthy that at the height of the fighting for this settlement, the head of the DPR Zakharchenko visited it, which demoralized those Ukrainians who believed the official media information that the attacks on Uglegorsk were "repulsed."

Two days later, on February 7, Redkodub was liberated, and on February 9, Logvinovo. Ukrainian paratroopers tried to recapture the latter, but they failed. After that, the DPR and LPR announced that the M-103 highway was blocked.

Thus, the cauldron near Debaltseve was formed. However, the Ukrainian side did not admit this. On February 11, the Minister of Defense of Ukraine Stepan Poltorak stated that "the units located in Debaltseve are receiving weapons and ammunition, there is communication and interaction with the command." But in fact, even in Ukraine itself, they did not believe in this.

FIGHTS AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF MINSK
The next morning, February 12, the Ukrainian Armed Forces attempted to break out of Debaltseve. Logvinovo was attacked. Moreover, the attack was carried out both from within the cauldron and from outside.

By that time, negotiations had taken place in Minsk between Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President François Hollande and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. On February 12, the heads of the DPR and LPR, Aleksandr Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky, also arrived in Minsk.

Militiamen of the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) on the road to Debaltseve.
As a result of the Minsk agreements signed that day, the troops of both sides were to cease fire from 00:00 Eastern European Time on February 15. Zakharchenko and Plotnitsky announced their readiness to allow the Ukrainian formations to leave the cauldron if they left behind their weapons and equipment.

In reality, the fighting did not stop. OSCE representatives who arrived to record the ceasefire were unable to get to Debaltseve. DPR leader Zakharchenko was wounded during the fighting for Debaltseve on February 17.

FEBRUARY FINALE
On the night of February 18, the Ukrainian command decided to withdraw all the blocked units from Debaltseve. Their backbone was made up of units of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade. The Ukrainians went for a breakthrough. In total, more than 2,500 people tried to leave the cauldron. The majority of them succeeded. Although three roads leading out of the city were mined and were under close fire control of the militia, the enemy had the opportunity to retreat along paths and rough terrain. But there were also prisoners and dead.

Later that day, the DPR Ministry of Defense announced that Debaltseve was under full control. And the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, in turn, announced the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Debaltseve. At the same time, Poroshenko tried to claim that the withdrawal of Ukrainian units was organized, which caused criticism both in the DPR and in Ukraine itself, since it was a case of flight at random, with personal weapons, but without heavy weapons and equipment.

According to various sources, Ukraine's losses amounted to 250 people killed and 110 captured. Some authors also estimate the militia's losses at almost 240 people killed. The armed forces of the Donbass republics took quite a lot of trophies, primarily equipment and weapons. But militia officers were rather skeptical about the battles for Debaltseve.

"The offensive on Debaltseve began on the 22nd. I would call it "disgustingly planned", but I seriously doubt that anyone planned it at all. Tanks without infantry, infantry without cover, no communication between units... In general, everything ended as it should have. A week later, everyone sent their superiors to a well-known address and began coordinating actions among themselves at the grassroots level. But there were no reserves left," noted Alexey Markov, commander of the Luhansk Prizrak brigade, on February 1, 2015.

According to him, the liberation of Debaltseve, the neutralization of the Ukrainian group threatening Gorlovka, and the straightening of the front line were a victory achieved in spite of the circumstances and at a rather heavy price.

Later, in 2019, the "Coordination Center for Assistance to Novorossiya", of which Markov was a member, prepared a report "How Russia is Losing the War in Donbass". The report covered in detail the problematic aspects of the battles for Debaltseve. In particular, it discussed the personnel, their training, as well as problems with communication and coordination of the units of the Armed Forces of the Donbass republics.

Some of the problems later "surfaced" at the initial stage of the SVO. But that's a completely different story.

Link


Europe
Two-Year-Old Child Among Dead in Mass Stabbing at German Park, ‘Afghan' Knifeman Arrested
2025-01-22
[Breitbart] At least two people have been killed, including a child, in a mass stabbing at a historic but now crime-plagued park in a Bavarian town.

UPDATE 1600 — Suspect known to police, ’mentally ill’

The 28-year-old Afghan suspect was already known to police and "mentally disturbed", local German language newspaper Main-Echo carries in its latest updates on the Aschaffenburg attack. They state security service sources who say the man was a registered refugee and that a local refugee accommodation had been searched by police after the attack, but emphasise no officially confirmation of these assertions has yet been forthcoming.

Apparently, police are still not discussing any motives.

Understandably, the stress of responding to a crime scene with dead and gravely injured children has been so traumatic first responders are receiving psychological counselling.

The newspaper states they spoke to a local politician in Aschaffenburg who told them the killings reminds him of the Wurzburg attack. To remind readers, in Wurzburg in 2021 a Somali asylum seeker living in the city went on a knife rampage, stabbing ten people — all women — three of whom died. One of the deceased was an 82-year-old woman who threw herself between the knifeman and a child he was attacking, while another was a 49-year-old woman while defending another child the Somali was trying to stab.

The killings sparked some heated debate which were angrily dismissed by the then-mayor of Wurzburg Christian Schuchardt, a party colleague of Angela Merkel, who criticised the public for stereotyping migrants by linking the knifeman’s refugee status to the stabbings. As reported then, he claimed: "the crimes of individuals can never be traced back to population groups, religions or nationalities. We Germans were not condemned in general after the Second World War either. Nor does this now apply to Somalis or refugees in general. This pigeonholing must come to an end".

"How would you feel as a foreigner in our city today?", the mayor asked rhetorically in 2021.

UPDATE 1400 — Slain child two years old, suspect an Afghan national

The latest on the Aschaffenburg park attack is that the two people who were killed were a two-year-old boy suffering "multiple stab wounds" and a 41-year-old man. The arrested suspect is a 28-year-old Afghan male, so says local police in a statement.

The number of "seriously injured" people has been revised up from two to four, including another child and three adults, Germany’s Die Welt relates.

Distressingly, the newspaper states the attack may have been on a group of day-care children who had been taken out to the park for a walk by their teachers. It reports the attacker followed the group, and when they tried to leave the area he attacked, allegedly "specifically targeting the children".

The deceased adult male is reported to have put himself between the knifeman and the children.

It is further asserted that "The police are said to have ruled out a terrorist background."
Update from Deutsche Welle at 6:40 p.m. ET:
A 41-year-old man and a two-year-old boy died in the attack. Two others were seriously injured.

A 28-year-old suspect, who police say is from Afghanistan, has been taken into custody after the killing. Another person who witnessed the attack is also being held for questioning, but was not suspected of wrongdoing.

GERMAN CHANCELLOR MEETS SECURITY CHIEFS
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the attack was "an unbelievable act of terror" and offered his sympathies to the victims' families and two more people injured.

"I am sick of seeing such acts of violence occurring in our country every few weeks, by perpetrators who have actually come here to find protection here," he said.
A complete reverse from what I recall of his previous attitude — he is to be congratulated.
Scholz met with the heads of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the Federal Criminal Police Office, and the Federal Police at the Chancellery late in the evening. Interior Minister Nancy Faeser also participated in the meeting.

"The authorities must work as hard as possible to find out why the attacker was still in Germany," Scholz said ahead of the meeting.

"Things cannot go on like this," the Christian Democratic Union's Friedrich Merz wrote on X, formerly Twitter, after the attack. "We must and will restore law and order!"

The Alternative for Germany party's Alice Weidel also posted a message on X urging "remigration now!" -- using a term that the far right has adopted to call for the mass deportation of migrants.

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE ATTACK?
The stabbing occurred shortly before noon at the Schöntal park near the city center. Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann said the suspect deliberately attacked a kindergarten group in the park with a kitchen knife.

A 41-year old German man, a passerby, and a two-year old boy of Moroccan descent were both killed, Herrmann added.

Bavarian Health Minister Judith Gerlach confirmed that three other people were wounded, including a 61-year-old man, a child and a teacher.

The perpetrator had attempted to run away from the crime scene across nearby railroad tracks, with German rail company Deutsche Bahn temporarily halting trains in the area.

Herrmann said the suspect had entered Germany in 2022. His asylum claim was unsuccessful and he was supposed to have left the country late last year.

"The authorities must explain as quickly as possible why the attacker was even still in Germany," Scholz said.

The suspect had a history of violent behavior and was undergoing psychiatric treatment by the time his asylum case was denied.

The suspect's accommodation at an asylum center was searched. Investigators found psychiatric medication but no "evidence of a radical Islamist attitude."
The Daily Mail has his name:
According to Spiegel, the Afghan's name is Enamullah O., and said he was born in 1997 and lives in an asylum accommodation in the region.

Bavaria's Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann said: 'On December 4, the suspect himself announced his voluntary departure.

'As a result, on December 11, the BAMF finally closed the asylum procedure and asked the person concerned to leave the country.'

The suspect had allegedly been following a day care group of five young children before launching the attack, according to Main-Echo.

An eyewitness told the Main-Echo newspaper that the arrested man was taken away 'in a headlock.'

Cops confirmed that two people had died while two others were seriously injured in the attack, and are now being treated in hospital.

According to Bild, one of the seriously injured is also a child.

'Two people were fatally injured,' police said, while 'two seriously injured people are receiving treatment in hospital.

In November, police classified parts of the city centre park as a 'dangerous place' due to an increase in 'drug-related crimes', which reportedly included robbery and assault.

There were reported to be regular patrols of the area, which is potentially why the suspect was apprehended so quickly.
Link


Home Front: Politix
Mark Steyn: Tapped Out
2025-01-11
by Mark Steyn

[SteynOnlime] I think of the fire hydrant as a quintessential bit of American iconography. Yes, they predate the United States, going back to the sixteenth century and the spread of piped municipal water systems in Europe and Asia. But, if you asked the average person to picture a fire hydrant, his imagination would conjure one in the American design - in part because elsewhere (Britain, Germany, Spain) the hydrants are below ground and no one knows their shape. It's the Yanks who brought them up to the surface as if to say: see? here our writ runs; you can count on that. Decades ago, somewhere in Queens, I rounded a corner and found the fire department flushing a hydrant, and the excited kids jumping around and occasionally darting into the spray. Golly, I thought, I've walked into a Norman Rockwell cover. Which I had (see Saturday Evening Post top right).

Silly me. Like Angela Merkel diversity bollards or utility poles in western North Carolina, fire hydrants are now purely decorative:

As I usually say at this point, nothing works anymore. But, when even the fire hydrants don't work, it may be time to retire that line. This is your future - the future they're building for you every day. When you work as assiduously as the west does to become the Third World, don't be surprised that it happens a lot quicker than you thought.

Seventeen years ago, I received a note from a reader advising me to lighten up - on the grounds that we're rich enough that we can afford to be stupid. Almost two decades later, some of us are rich enough to be able to afford a home in Pacific Palisades and are willing to indulge a monumentally stupid mayor who, as the first ciswoman of colour to go on a fact-finding mission to study West African emergency-services management, shattered the glass ceiling before it had a chance to burn down:

Needless to say, it was a whippersnapper of a foreigner badgering and hectoring the poor wee defenceless chief executive of one of the most famous jurisdictions on the planet. Any American "journalist" minded to do the same would never work again. But it will make a great vignette for her pre-2028 political memoir It Takes a Child to Raze a Village.

Read the rest at the link
Related:
Fire hydrant 01/10/2025 LA's $750k-a-year water boss struggles to explain why fire hydrants ran dry in bumbling video about inferno response
Fire hydrant 01/09/2025 Trump has history of warning Newsom over wildfire prevention
Fire hydrant 01/09/2025 Malibu beach homes are completely gone

Link


Europe
'Green wishes' and aid to Ukraine have destroyed the German government
2024-11-08
Direct Translation via Google Translation. Edited.
by Gregor Spitzen

[REGNUM] What had been talked about for so long and quietly prepared for in the German Bundestag for months has finally happened: On November 6, Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) announced the expulsion of Finance Minister and leader of the Free Democrats (FDP) Christian Lindner from the government. This means the collapse of the ruling "traffic light" coalition, a vote of confidence in the Chancellor in January and, most likely, early parliamentary elections in March next year.

After three years of work, the federal government, consisting of the SPD, the Greens and the FDP, is ending its work with a bad taste in the mouth from an internal corporate scandal and the airing of dirty "coalition" laundry for all to see.

After the coalition committee failed to agree on a common economic and financial policy on Wednesday evening, Scholz accused his finance minister of "violating his trust too often." According to Scholz, the FDP leader was not concerned with the interests of the country, but only with his own "clientele" of big business. In explaining his decision, Scholz accused Lindner of selfishness and pursuing short-term interests.

You can have different attitudes towards the former finance minister. You can dislike his party, which in its love for the free market and libertarianism sometimes descends to almost social Darwinist positions and openly lobbies for the interests of the military-industrial complex. However, despite the complexity of Lindner's character, he was one of the few real professionals in the "traffic light coalition" who really understand the business they were entrusted with.

The Minister of Finance must economize by definition. And Lindner, fully aware that Germany's fattest years are already behind him, called on his colleagues at the "traffic light", who are used to putting out any fire with banknotes, to moderate their appetites. And not to throw away billions of euros so madly on "green wishes", excessively inflated social programs and aid to Ukraine, which has exceeded all reasonable limits and has crossed the astronomical figure of €40 billion.

Lindner took the chancellor's speech (which had obviously been in the works for a long time, as it was filled with an overview of the government's activities and elements of election rhetoric) as an opportunity to accuse Scholz of "deliberately breaking the coalition." The chancellor, according to the former minister, was no longer interested in compromise and had even stopped accepting proposals from the FDP on economic reform projects.

Instead, Scholz issued an ultimatum to Lindner to soften his stance on increasing the national debt, which would allow the Greens and Social Democrats to continue to enthusiastically finance their political projects at the expense of future generations of Germans.

Lindner, somewhat pompously but quite reasonably, objected that such a demand was in conflict with the oath he had taken to the German people, and refused to continue cooperation under such conditions. "For three years, the FDP had demonstrated political responsibility and a willingness to compromise 'within the limits of what was acceptable,'" he said. But this time the limits had been seriously exceeded.

The Finance Minister did not limit himself to describing the situation, but took a tough stance against Scholz.

The Chancellor, he said, had long ignored and downplayed the dire economic situation in Germany. Now he has decided to put forward proposals that are "not serious and not ambitious" and do nothing to overcome the country's fundamental weakness in economic growth. "Unfortunately, Olaf Scholz has shown that he does not have the strength to breathe new life into the country," Lindner concluded.

In fact, Scholz's main proposal was to increase the government debt threshold, which would include a cap on energy costs, subsidies for the auto industry, and a guarantee of continued support for Ukraine after Trump's victory in the US elections.

By and large, the Chancellor is doing the same thing he did when he was Finance Minister in Angela Merkel’s cabinet – solving political problems with borrowed funds, without really thinking about who will repay these loans and how.

“Helicopter money” in the era of the coronavirus pandemic, energy subsidies and subsidies for the purchase of electric cars, the creation of a special fund for the Bundeswehr financed by government debt - all these are projects of the current chancellor, which have cost Germany hundreds of billions of euros.

In fact, Scholz's idea of ​​creating special funds alongside the regular budget in order to reconcile "green" climate, "social democratic" social and "liberal" financial policies became the cement for the highly contradictory "traffic light coalition".

However, any manipulation of finances and public debts has its limits.

In November 2023, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled the financial ploys to create further shadow budgets unconstitutional, and this marked the beginning of the end of the coalition. The cautious Lindner was no longer willing to take constitutional risks.

If you look at it objectively, the Chancellor's reasoning is, to put it mildly, indeed questionable from a legal point of view.

He believes that the Russian special operation in Ukraine and the election of Donald Trump as US president, which is expected to be followed by a reduction in American aid to Ukraine, constitute an emergency comparable to a natural disaster. And if lava from an erupting volcano is approaching the country, then, according to the Chancellor, there is no time for neatness.

However, Lindner's departure from the government coalition will lead to its collapse and early parliamentary elections, which do not bode well for Scholz. Both the Chancellor's personal popularity and that of his SPD party are far from being enough to claim the post of head of government in the new cabinet.

However, having gotten rid of Lindner, Scholz may try to pass a series of bills requiring an increase in the national debt, thus sacrificing himself to the interests of a certain part of the German elite, and only then sink into political oblivion.

Related:
Olaf Scholz 11/07/2024 Germany's governing coalition collapses
Olaf Scholz 10/30/2024 Jamshid Sharmahd daughter blames Biden-Harris admin for his execution in Iran
Olaf Scholz 10/30/2024 German charged with Islamist attack plot against Jewish institution

Link


Europe
Asylum seekers will be stripped of their benefits under new rules in Germany as the country continues to crack down on migration
2024-10-19
[Daily Mail, where America gets its news] Asylum seekers will be stripped of their benefits as Germany cracks down on immigration after the country's parliament on Friday voted to tighten its rules for refugees.

The package of measures will withdraw benefits from asylum seekers who have already been registered in other EU countries and are slated for deportation. It will also mean that refugees who temporarily return to their home countries will 'as a rule' lose their right to protection in Germany, according to the legislation.

The same will apply to refugees who commit crimes with anti-Semitic or homophobic motivation.

The new rules were brought forward by the government in August in response to a deadly stabbing at a festival in the western city of Solingen. The suspect, a 26-year-old Syrian man with suspected links to the Islamic State group, was slated for deportation but evaded authorities' attempts to remove him.

The whole package will also introduce stricter rules on the carrying of knives and gives police broader powers of investigation.

While lawmakers in the Bundestag have approved the new rules, they still need to be passed by Germany's upper chamber, which will meet on Friday to decide on them. With a year to go before national elections and anti-immigration parties rising in the polls, the government has been under intense pressure to take a stricter line on immigration.

The benefits restriction provoked vocal criticism from within the government - a three-way coalition between Chancellor Olaf Scholz's Social Democrats, the Greens and the liberal FDP.
“I curse your mustache, you Dootzer fop!”
“Ha! I haven’t got one, you ugly Turk! That’s ‘cause I’m a girl!”
(Actually, I’m sure the invective was terribly restrained and erudite, demonstrating their education, but no less virulent in intent. And no invective demonstrating possible bigotry was even hinted at, they being all civilized specimens of humanity. )
After internal discussions, the legislation was changed to provide exemptions for children and to withdraw support only in cases where removal was actually possible.

The implementation of the stricter rules marks a change in German attitudes towards immigration, almost a decade after former Chancellor Angela Merkel opened the country's doors to refugees in 2015.

The new German approach comes against a backdrop of hardening attitudes to immigration across Europe, where far-right parties are garnering growing support. On Thursday EU leaders called for urgent new legislation to increase the number and speed of migrant returns.

It also comes after the German state of Saxony-Anhalt cut the benefits of asylum seekers who refused to pick up debris following heavy flooding in east Germany for less than a pound an hour. 64 migrants had been written to by local authorities demanding they help clear rubbish and erect dykes for a wage of just 80 cents (68p) per hour after devastating floods in the area at the end of last year which saw hundreds of residents in parts of Germany forced to evacuate. 39 people agreed to help, while the rest, who are said to be from Syria, Afghanistan, Niger, Mali and Albania, failed to turn up. As a result, the district council declared that the 15 asylum seekers who had no excuse to take part in the clean-up will have their asylum benefits cut in half to €232 (£195) a month for three months. These benefits are meant to cover basic necessities, such as food, accommodation, personal hygiene and clothing.
Link



Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More