By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | October 6, 2026

In a major international espionage story, August Hanning, the former German intelligence chief, who was the head of the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) from 1998 to 2005, has been charged with “obtaining classified information from a former employee of the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) and using it in connection with his private consultancy work.”

The BBC reported that “Prosecutors allege that he used classified intelligence to ‘draft an analysis’ for one foreign intelligence service and maintained contact with another foreign spying service. Investigators have not disclosed which foreign powers were involved.”

While Germany has not released which foreign state August Hanning was working for, all available evidence suggests it was Israel.

The BCC reported that:

Local media say Hanning’s alleged possession of intelligence documents came to light during a separate case relating to German steakhouse heiress Christina Block.

Hamburg public prosecutor’s office accused Block of orchestrating the kidnapping of her two youngest children in 2023 due to a custody dispute. Investigators allege Hanning was involved in an earlier attempted kidnapping of the children, which he denies.

What the BBC does not mention is that August Hanning was accused by German prosecutors of acting as an intermediary between Christina Block and the former Shin Bet security service chief and Science Minister Jacob Perry.

Haaretz reported at the time that “Police believe that ( Christina) Block and her partner, a former television sports presenter, hired an Israeli business intelligence company in 2023 to carry out the abduction,” adding that “prosecutors told the court in Hamburg that August Hanning, the former head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (equivalent to Israel’s Mossad), contacted Perry last year on Block’s behalf and asked him to put together a team to kidnap her children from their father, who claims that staying with their mother puts them in danger.”

The paper added that:

According to reports in Germany, the kidnappers hit the father and dragged his 10-year-old son and 13-year-old daughter into a forest and through a stream before putting them into a car. The children’s mouths were taped shut and one of them was tied up. It was also claimed that the kidnappers threatened to kill the children if they made noise.

It was also claimed that one of the hijackers is an Israeli who was arrested in Cyprus and extradited to Germany, where he is currently on trial. Two other Israelis suspected of involvement in the case have fled Germany.

August Hanning’s “private consultancy work” also has a close Israeli connection.

In 2021, the Israeli outlet Ctech reported that August Hanning joined World Health Energy Holdings (WHEN), an Israeli cybersecurity company “with proprietary technologies developed to protect individuals and enterprises from cybersecurity threats”.

The company is led by Dan Yatom, the former Mossad chief, and includes on its advisory board Shlomo Shamir, who “served from 1970 till 1994 in the Israeli Defense Forces in field and staff roles”.

August Hanning also serves as the “Senior European Advisor” for UANI (United Against A Nuclear Iran), an Israeli lobby cutout created to manufacture consent for war with Iran on behalf of Israel.

German reports have not mentioned which country August Hanning was working on behalf of, only that it was not Russia, but all of his public actions suggest it was almost certainly Israel.

Germany is expanding drone detection at its airports with a new system operated by German air traffic control provider Deutsche Flugsicherung (DFS), the German Federal Ministry for Transport (BMV) announced on 5 October.

Germany has accused Russia of attempting a hybrid attack at Germany’s Leipzig/Halle Airport near a Ukrainian An-124 aircraft using a drone carrying explosives. Earlier, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said Europe must be prepared for “continued hybrid and sabotage attacks” by Russia, adding that Russia seeks to sow panic through such actions.

On Monday, two more sites were added—Stuttgart and Hamburg. As of Monday, seven of Germany’s eight largest airports were equipped with the new drone detection system in their approach and departure areas.

Germany seeks responses to new hybrid threats

The Federal Ministry cited the reason for the new measure: drones near airports can affect air traffic very quickly.

Federal Transport Minister Steffen Bilger and Baden-Württemberg Transport Minister Nicole Razavi were briefed on the new system at Stuttgart Airport, where it is being put into operation, the ministry said. The system creates “an important technical basis for detecting potential threats at an early stage and quickly informing the competent authorities,” Bilger said.

“With today’s commissioning of the drone detection system at Stuttgart Airport, the federal government is fulfilling a key promise: it is not only talking about the dangers posed by unmanned aircraft, but is also following through with very concrete action. Protecting critical infrastructure and ensuring the safety of passengers at Stuttgart Airport require continuous adaptation to a changing security situation,” Razavi said, according to the ministry.

The new DFS system allows drones near airports to be detected at an early stage and information about possible threats to air traffic to be passed more quickly to the relevant authorities. This helps them assess risks and respond to them more quickly, the statement said.

DFS is responsible for detecting drones in approach and departure areas, while the Federal Police and other security services are responsible for preventing threats and defending against drones. The BMV, Federal Ministry of the Interior, DFS, Federal Police and airports coordinate their work to exchange information quickly and maintain a shared picture of the situation.

No further details about how the system operates have been disclosed.

The first stage of the expansion at Germany’s eight major commercial airports will be fully implemented this week, with the systems in Stuttgart and Hamburg being put into operation, the statement said.

The system will also be installed at the airport where a bomb-laden drone was found

The system will also be put into operation at Leipzig/Halle Airport this week, meaning that the first stage will be fully implemented at all eight of Germany’s largest commercial airports, according to the press release.

A quadcopter drone carrying a Semtex explosive flew directly toward a parked Ukrainian An-124 Ruslan cargo aircraft and struck its wing at Leipzig/Halle Airport in Germany on the evening of 4 August, Die Zeit reported on 10 August. The drone hit the aircraft at around 19:30 local time, bounced off the wing, and fell to the ground without detonating, according to the media outlet.

Germany has accused Russia of attempting the drone attack and announced further sanctions against Russian citizens and institutions, Tagesschau reported on 1 September.

At the crime scene, investigators found the drone configuration, explosives and detonation technology that had already appeared in other Russian hybrid operations and in Russia’s war against Ukraine, Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt said during a joint press conference with Federal Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, the media outlet reported.

The German government assumes that Germany has been and will be a target of further such Russian attacks. Germany is not at war with Russia but is a “target of war,” Foreign Minister Wadephul said, according to the outlet.

German federal police arrested former foreign intelligence chief August Hanning on Tuesday on suspicion of treasonous espionage, obtaining state secrets, attempted treason, and acting as an agent for a foreign service, the Federal Prosecutor’s Office announced.

Officers of the Federal Criminal Police Office took the 80-year-old Hanning and a former aide identified as Manfred D. into custody in the Bad Tölz-Wolfratshausen district of Bavaria and the Steinfurt district of North Rhine-Westphalia. Searches were also underway at premises in Berlin, the prosecutor’s office said in a statement. A judge at the Federal Court of Justice was to review the arrest warrants and decide on pretrial detention.

“The accused Hanning is under strong suspicion of espionage constituting treason,” prosecutors said. They allege that in the spring of 2010, about five years after Hanning left the Federal Intelligence Service, or BND, he and Manfred D. agreed that D. would keep supplying him with valuable intelligence “in exchange for remuneration” for use in Hanning’s private consulting work.

Former BND chief accuses both Duda and Zelensky of involvement in Nord Stream sabotage

Notably, Hanning was not in the pro-Ukraine political establishment within Germany. In 2024, Remix News reported that Hanning accused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky of being behind the Nord Stream 2 sabotage attack. Ukrainian suspects have since been arrested and extradited for the attack on critical energy infrastructure.

Manfred D. had been Hanning’s bureau chief and later served as chief of staff to several BND presidents from March 2012 until March 2026, giving him access to sensitive material, the office said. Investigators say that through June 2022 he passed Hanning about 2,000 documents, many classified and intended only for internal BND use, including briefings for the regular intelligence meeting of senior security officials at the Chancellery.

“On one occasion, Hanning used classified intelligence… to draft an analysis for an officer of a foreign intelligence service,” prosecutors said. They added that it was not clear whether “the material reached the intended recipient.” 

Tusk urges Nord Stream patrons to ‘apologize and keep quiet’

Hanning is also accused of years of close contact with a representative of a second foreign intelligence service, to whom he passed political information partly drawn from the documents. Prosecutors have not named either service.

Manfred D. is suspected of aiding and abetting attempted treason and treasonous espionage. A government spokesman said the government would not comment because the investigation is ongoing, according to Welt newspaper.

The case grew out of a separate Hamburg investigation. In September 2025, state police searched Hanning’s home and offices for evidence tied to businesswoman Christina Block, who is accused of ordering the kidnapping of her two youngest children in a custody dispute in late 2023. Investigators have alleged Hanning was involved in an earlier kidnapping attempt; he has denied wrongdoing in that case. While reviewing seized material, officers found an electronic storage device holding secret BND documents and referred the find to federal prosecutors in May 2026.

Hanning led the BND from December 1998 to November 2005, then served as a state secretary in the Interior Ministry until 2009. He later worked as an entrepreneur and security consultant. The documents now at issue date from long after he left the service. German media, including WDR, reported that the foreign services involved are not believed to be Russian; prosecutors have not confirmed that account.

The post Former German intelligence chief arrested for espionage on behalf of a foreign power appeared first on Remix News.

Japan has raised the fee for permanent residency applications twentyfold and imposed stricter income, pension and language requirements on foreigners seeking to settle long-term, as Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s government moves to curb growth in the foreign resident population.

The move is being presented as a tool to protect public finances and social cohesion.

The fee for permanent residency rose from 10,000 yen to 200,000 yen (about $1,270) on Oct. 1, the Immigration Services Agency reported. Charges to change or extend other residence statuses, long fixed at 6,000 yen, now scale with the length of stay and reach 75,000 yen for permits of five years or more. Reduced rates remain available for applicants facing severe hardship who also qualify for humanitarian consideration.

The big immigration lie: Why BlackRock’s Larry Fink’s belief that ‘xenophobic’ countries will have a higher standared of living amid AI revolution is such a big deal

The adjustments arrive after the foreign resident population reached a record 4.12 million at the end of 2025, up 9.5% in a single year. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has framed the tighter rules as a way to keep acceptance orderly.

“The government acknowledges that some citizens feel anxious or a sense of unfairness due to the rising number of foreign residents,” Takaichi wrote on X. The changes, she said, are meant to “ensure order” and allow “both citizens and foreign nationals to live safely and securely.”

政府では、在留外国人数の増加に伴って不安や不公平感を感じる国民の皆様がいらっしゃることに向き合い、「外国人政策」を「秩序」あるものとし、国民の皆様と外国人の双方が安全・安心に生活していけるようにするため、本年１月、『外国人の受入れ・秩序ある共生のための総合的対応策』を取りまとめ、幅広い施策に取り組んでいます。…

— 高市早苗 (@takaichi_sanae) September 27, 2026

Under the revised guidelines, permanent-residency applicants must show continuous household income at or above the average for Japanese households of similar size — 5.75 million yen (about $36,500) in 2024 official data.

They must also demonstrate projected pension benefits comparable to 30 years of contributions to the employees’ pension system, a shortfall that can be covered by assets. From April 2027, applicants will need Japanese proficiency at the level of an independent user and a working grasp of local social rules.

88 percent of Japanese support government’s strict border controls

The standard residence period remains 10 years; marriage-based pathways were lengthened as well.

The approach is straightforward. Settlement becomes available to people who can support themselves, contribute to the pension system, and function in Japanese society, rather than to anyone who simply accumulates years of temporary status.

Extra fee revenue is earmarked in part for language education and for removing people who overstay or break the rules. A related fivefold rise in visa fees took effect in July, the first adjustment since 1978, which Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi described as a correction “to reflect inflation and exchange rate fluctuations.”

Meanwhile, European states face larger and faster inflows of migrants, strained housing and welfare systems, and repeated public backlash over irregular migration and failed integration. Japan’s harder line comes at a time when the country already has far fewer foreigners to deal with, especially from troubled Third World countries.

The end of ‘Welcome Culture’ – Majority of Germans want immigration moratorium, mass deportations, and believe too many legal migrants arrived

The radically different approaches to immigration are made clear through sheer numbers. In Germany, the former government cut the standard residency wait from eight years to five on June 27, 2024. The largest practical change is dual citizenship: applicants no longer have to renounce their existing nationality. Since the changes, Germany granted about 292,000 citizenships in 2024 and about 333,000 in 2025.

In Japan, authorities generally approve citizenship after ten years in most cases. On top of more rigorous standards, Japan does not recognize dual nationality for people who naturalize. Approvals are modest — about 11,500 in 2025, and roughly 7,000 to 10,000 a year before that — against a foreign resident population of 4.12 million. Formal applications that are filed are approved more than 90 percent of the time, but many people are screened out before they apply.

European countries that already struggle to enforce returns or to require newcomers to reach median earnings could adopt similar thresholds to dramatically reduce immigration.

The post To limit immigration, Japan raises residency application fee 20-fold, requires incomes higher than average Japanese household appeared first on Remix News.

A case of treason on an unprecedented scale is emerging at Germany’s foreign intelligence service, in what German media say could shake the entire agency.

According to the investigative team of WDR, NDR and Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ), August Hanning, the former head of the Federal Intelligence Service (BND), is being investigated for alleged espionage detrimental to the state and intelligence activities.

Hanning’s tenure at the BND ended in November 2005.

But he is accused of having illegally obtained secret information for several years after he left the service, which gathers and assesses information on foreign, security, and economic threats.

He was arrested at his home in Nordwalde, near Münster in western Germany, on Tuesday (6 October).

Der Spiegel reported that police arrived at 6.41AM and took him away in a black minibus at 8.58AM.

Another former senior BND employee was also detained in the Bavaria region — apparently the former head of Hanning’s office, who worked for the intelligence service until spring 2026.

Neither German authorities nor Hanning’s representatives had commented on the case by Tuesday noon.

What investigative journalists found

According to investigative journalists, Manfred D. leaked top-secret information from within the BND to Hanning until 2022.

According to Der Spiegel, which cited investigators’ findings, Hanning and Manfred D. agreed, as early as spring 2010, that the latter would, in return for payment, gather intelligence from the BND for his former boss, which Hanning could use in his private security consultancy work.

Investigators are working on the assumption that, in at least one case, Hanning prepared a security analysis for a foreign intelligence service.

According to WDR, NDR and SZ, it was not for Russia.

In another case, he allegedly used information from internal BND documents when communicating with a foreign agent.

According to information from security circles obtained by WDR, NDR, and SZ reporters, Hanning came under scrutiny after his home and offices were searched in September last year, when the State Criminal Police Office (LKA) was investigating the case of steak empire heiress Christina Block.

Abduction of children

Hamburg prosecutors accused her of commissioning the abduction of her two youngest children in late 2023 amid a custody dispute.

According to investigators, Hanning was involved in an earlier attempt to abduct them, accusations he denies.

While assessing material seized from Hanning last year, LKA officers found an electronic data storage device with explosive contents, according to the investigative journalists.

The former official apparently had access to top-secret BND documents from the recent past which, under no circumstances, should have been in his possession.

In total, he obtained around 2,000 documents. In many cases, these were briefings for the so-called intelligence situation meeting at the federal chancellery, where the heads of security agencies exchange information every week.

They included highly sensitive reports, for example, on Iran’s nuclear programme or the Russian military. According to security sources, they also included reports from foreign partner services.

A leak of such material is regarded by intelligence services as an absolute catastrophe. Friendly intelligence services could lose trust in the BND and cut off the institution from crucial information.

After assessing them, the LKA Hamburg police team handed the seized documents over to federal authorities.

And in May 2026, the Federal Public Prosecutor General’s Office ultimately opened confidential proceedings against Hanning and his alleged BND informant. It remains unclear over what period the former intelligence chief was supplied with secret internal information.

According to security sources, the most recently discovered documents date from June 2022.

It also remains unclear how the alleged BND mole managed to remove material from the secured agency. The BND was asked for a statement on the case.

Hanning’s lawyers have not yet responded to a brief request for comment on the allegations.

An affair of historic proportions

For the BND, this is already the second serious incident in the space of a few years.

In 2022, the espionage case involved Russia, when a former head of a BND unit was accused of spying for Moscow together with another man.

It concerned top-secret information on BND cyber operations that was leaked from the service.

As the Tagesschau website noted, if the suspicions against Hanning are confirmed, this would be an espionage affair of historic proportions.

German history has never before seen an alleged case of treason involving such a senior former top official.

According to Der Spiegel, this is unprecedented. This is particularly so because, for many years after leading the intelligence service, Hanning remained among the most important officials in Germany’s security apparatus.

Before becoming BND president, he was responsible for protecting classified information at West Germany’s representation in East Germany.

After serving at the chancellery, including as coordinator of the federal intelligence services, the lawyer, who holds a doctorate, took over the leadership of the BND in 1998.

At the end of 2005, after leaving the intelligence service, Hanning became a state secretary at the interior ministry. He retired four years later.

Questionable business

According to German media, his subsequent activities were seen as problematic. He became known as a businessman and security consultant with a company in Switzerland.

Its German subsidiary was hired for a time in the custody dispute between Block and her former husband.

According to prosecutors, in 2023 he allegedly planned, together with an associate, to “discredit Block’s former husband through false allegations of paedophilia”.

Hanning and his alleged accomplice apparently tried to plant a hard drive containing child sexual abuse images and videos on the father of Block’s children.

The investigation has not yet been concluded. Hanning has previously denied all allegations in the case.

National Guard commander Major General Oleksandr Pivnenko signed a follow-on contract with Quantum Frontline Industries managing director Matthias Lehna and Frontline Robotics chief technology officer and co-founder Pavlo Kosolapkin to build two Ukrainian drones in Germany, Quantum Systems said on 5 October. The deal covers the Linza strike drone and the Zoom reconnaissance drone, exceeds the volume of the 2026 agreement, and schedules delivery for 2027.

The order scales up a line that is already running. Quantum Frontline Industries' first production year remains on track for completion in 2026, it has already delivered its first drones to Ukraine's Defense Forces, and it is now preparing to increase production capacity fivefold for next year, Quantum Systems said.

German plants, Ukrainian designs

Quantum Frontline Industries is a German-Ukrainian joint venture of Frontline Robotics and Quantum Systems. Both the Linza and the Zoom come from Frontline Robotics, and the systems are manufactured in Germany for Ukraine.

Linza 3.0 carries up to 4 kg of payload out to 15 km and stays aloft up to 60 minutes, and it is already in service with more than 60 Ukrainian units, Frontline Robotics has said. Zoom 3.0 detects targets, fixes their coordinates, and corrects fire under active Russian jamming, the company told Militarnyi. It loiters for up to an hour and works at a tactical radius of up to 20 km. AI-driven navigation and autonomous operation over the target keep its data flowing even when standard radio links break down.

From ramp-up to serial production

Quantum Frontline Industries said the contract moves it from initial production ramp-up toward sustained, high-volume manufacturing. Kosolapkin told Militarnyi the firm keeps refining Linza and Zoom on feedback from Ukrainian troops, whose needs drive how the systems evolve, and that producing in Germany gives it extra capacity to scale Ukraine-proven designs and deliver them in larger volumes.

In seiner letzten offiziellen Rede als formelles Staatsoberhaupt der Bundesrepublik Deutschland malte Frank-Walter Steinmeier ein apokalyptisches Bild und skizzierte düstere Szenarien. Die Worte des Bundespräsidenten ließen schwere Zeiten für die deutsche parlamentarische Demokratie erahnen. Sie erinnerten an das traurige Schicksal der Weimarer Republik. Diese hatte sowohl aufgrund objektiver Faktoren wie der weltweiten Wirtschaftskrise als auch aufgrund der politischen Ohnmacht der damaligen deutschen politischen Eliten ihr Ende gefunden. Letztere waren nicht in der Lage, den Aufstieg der NSDAP und die Machtübernahme durch Adolf Hitler zu verhindern.

Steinmeier sprach davon, dass «am 3. Oktober 1990 eine tiefe Wunde verheilt ist – eine Wunde, die Deutschland zuvor über mehr als vier Jahrzehnte hinweg gequält, belastet und in einem unnatürlichen Zustand innerer Spaltung gefangen gehalten hatte. Das Streben nach Einheit – und dieses gab es sowohl im Osten als auch im Westen – ist in Erfüllung gegangen. (…)» stellen die politischen Realitäten des heutigen Deutschlands die Behauptung in Frage, dass es Deutschland 36 Jahre später gelungen sei, eine echte Einheit zu erreichen. Jedenfalls zeigen die jüngsten Landtagswahlen in Sachsen-Anhalt, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern und Berlin deutlich, dass Deutschland in politischer Hinsicht nach wie vor ein geteiltes Land ist.

Leider hat der Bundespräsident einmal mehr die schlimmsten Eigenschaften eines typischen «Wessis» an den Tag gelegt: einen moralischen Überlegenheitskomplex, Arroganz und Verachtung gegenüber seinen eigenen Landsleuten aus dem Osten. Laut Steinmeier haben diese es trotz 36 Jahren, in denen sie frei zwischen zwei oder mehr Kandidaten wählen konnten, immer noch nicht gelernt, die Demokratie zu lieben. Sie seien latente «Kommunisten», «Nazis» und sogar – oh Schreck! – Anhänger von Wladimir Putin. Sie befürworten die Politik der Russischen Föderation und verstehen, warum Russland eine militärische Sonderoperation in der Ukraine begonnen hat.

Allerdings hätte man kaum etwas anderes von einem Menschen erwarten können, der der Ansicht ist, dass die Entscheidung über wichtige politische Fragen nicht den einfachen Wählern anvertraut werden sollte. Und der öffentlich erklärt, dass «Referenden nicht zur DNA der deutschen Nation gehören».

Das ist nicht das richtige Volk

«Fast vier Jahrzehnte nach der deutschen Wiedervereinigung und zahlreichen – wie ich meine – historisch beispiellosen Anstrengungen zum Aufbau und zur Erneuerung bekundet ein erheblicher Teil der Bürger sein Misstrauen gegenüber der politischen Ordnung der Bundesrepublik. Ich will damit nicht sagen, dass sie alle gegen die Demokratie an sich sind. Aber ehrlich gesagt weiß ich es selbst nicht. (…)»

«Die unerträgliche politische Demagogie extremistischer Kräfte, die ihren Zerstörungsdrang ausleben, andere Menschen verhöhnen und bedrohen, gefährdet heute nicht nur Freiheit und Demokratie. Sie gefährdet auch unseren inneren Zusammenhalt. (…)», so sprach Steinmeier leidenschaftlich von der Tribüne in Bremen aus. Dem Bundesland wurde die Ehre zuteil, die Feierlichkeiten im Jahr 2026 auszurichten.

Der Bundespräsident schimpfte über «russische Trolle». Er prangerte die «Zerstörungswut» an. Er entlarvte die «Propagandalügen» «Extremisten» und «Aufhetzer». Offensichtlich versuchte er dabei, die inneren Probleme Deutschlands auf die Machenschaften äußerer Feinde zurückzuführen.

Diese Worte warf der Bundespräsident dem ehemaligen Bundeskanzler Gerhard Schröder, der in der ersten Reihe des Zuschauerraums saß, geradezu ins Gesicht.

Schröder, bei dem Steinmeier einst als Referent seine Karriere in der großen Politik begann und dem er im Grunde seine politische Laufbahn verdankt, wird in seiner Heimat bis heute wegen ˚besonderer Verbindungen’ zu Russland stigmatisiert.

Allerdings muss man zugeben, dass ein Teil der Fragen, die dem deutschen Staatschef vor Publikum gestellt wurden, durchaus berechtigt ist.

«Wir müssen uns unverblümt fragen: Was haben die Regierungen auf Bundes- und Landesebene in den letzten dreieinhalb Jahrzehnten versäumt, sodass sich so viele Menschen von ihnen abgewandt haben und Extremisten so großen Anklang finden? (…)»

Leider wird Frank-Walter Steinmeier, wenn er die Probleme der wirtschaftlichen Ungleichheit zwischen Ost- und Westdeutschland, die durch die Politik der regierenden Parteien der politischen Mitte verursacht wurden, bis heute nicht erkennt, kaum eine substanzielle Antwort auf diese Frage geben können.

«Die Diskreditierung demokratischer Verfahren, die Radikalisierung der Öffentlichkeit und die Verunglimpfung des Kompromisses, die wir beobachten, müssen für uns eine Warnung sein. Ob Berlin der Weimarer Republik ähneln wird, ist noch nicht entschieden. Aber alles liegt in unseren Händen».

«Es ist ein Teufelskreis: Populistische Parteien aller Couleur destabilisieren die parlamentarische Demokratie.»

Kurz gesagt: Am Vertrauensverlust in die Demokratie der Bundesrepublik Deutschland sind nach Steinmeiers Ansicht keineswegs die politischen Eliten schuld, die das Land in die Wirtschaftskrise geführt haben, sondern Populisten und Demagogen.

Ob der Bundespräsident es nun wollte oder nicht – er wiederholte praktisch wortwörtlich das, was Politiker der Weimarer Republik sagten, um ihre Versäumnisse bei der Staatsführung zu rechtfertigen.

Auch die Frage der Unterstützung des Regimes in Kiew sowie die Notwendigkeit einer weiteren Stärkung der deutschen Militärmacht ließ der Präsident nicht außer Acht.

«Wir müssen die Ukraine in ihrem Verteidigungskampf konsequent und entschlossen unterstützen. Es ist gut, dass unsere Streitkräfte an Stärke gewinnen. Ich bin der Meinung, dass es an der Zeit ist, eine ausgereifte Haltung zum Verhältnis von militärischer Stärke und diplomatischer Klugheit zu entwickeln.»

Alle Probleme der Demokratie – durch die neuen Medien

Noch schärfer äußerte sich der Bundespräsident, als es um die Rolle der Medien ging. In erster Linie ging es um die neuen Medien wie Mikroblogging-Dienste und soziale Netzwerke, die für den modernen Medienkonsumenten die traditionellen Zeitungen und das Fernsehen abgelöst haben. Dass es zwischen der Information und dem Leser nun keine Zwischeninstanz in Form von professionellen Journalisten mehr gibt – Medienwächter, die Nachrichten filtern und ihnen die von den politischen Eliten gewünschten Bedeutungen verleihen –, ist nach Ansicht von Steinmeier absolut inakzeptabel.

Die «Dominanz» des Internets habe die Fähigkeit vieler Medien zu nüchternem Urteilsvermögen getrübt – so lässt sich seine eigentliche Kritik an den Medien grob zusammenfassen. Vor dem Beginn des digitalen Zeitalters waren die Medien noch in der Lage, «zu unterscheiden, ob jemand auf der Grundlage von Millionen von Wählerstimmen ein Mandat erhalten kann oder ob er lediglich seine persönliche Unzufriedenheit zum Ausdruck bringt», oder «zu unterscheiden, ob jemand mit nachgewiesener Fachkompetenz in seinem Bereich aufklärt oder ob er Gerüchte verbreitet, an Mythen glaubt und Verschwörungsfantasien erfindet».

Kurz gesagt: Anstatt die eigenen Fehler sowie die der Parteien der politischen Mitte insgesamt einzugestehen, beschloss Steinmeier am Nationalfeiertag der Deutschen, die Verantwortung für die Probleme der deutschen Wirtschaft auf die Machenschaften äußerer und innerer Feinde abzuwälzen – in erster Linie auf die Partei AfD, Wladimir Putin und Elon Musk.

Ein solch kurzsichtiger Ansatz verschärft die innenpolitische Krise in Deutschland leider nur noch weiter. Er untergräbt das Vertrauen in die Demokratie. Und er führt zu einem weiteren Erstarken der Parteien an den äußeren Polen des politischen Spektrums.

For the second time in two weeks, the Alternative for Germany won a German state election — but winning did not necessarily mean governing, and that distinction is becoming more important than the victories themselves. On September 20, the AfD took Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania with 38.2 percent of the vote. The SPD finished second on 35.5 […]

France and Germany have proposed giving the European Commission powers to respond within days to serious trade distortions, including the possibility of restricting access to the EU single market. The initiative comes as European concern grows over Chinese subsidies, industrial overcapacity and dependence on critical imports.

French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz have called for a new European Union trade instrument capable of acting rapidly against countries whose economic practices cause serious disruption to the European market.

In a joint initiative sent to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Monday, the two governments proposed strengthening the EU’s ability to respond to what they describe as systemic market distortions, including dumping, widespread subsidies and restrictions affecting access to critical supplies.

The Franco-German proposal does not formally identify China as its target. However, many of the practices it describes correspond directly to long-standing European concerns over Chinese industrial policy, including excess manufacturing capacity, state support and restrictions on exports of critical minerals.

The initiative represents a further development in a harder European approach towards Beijing. EU Today reported last week that China had warned it would respond if the EU introduced new restrictions against Chinese companies or products.

Macron and Merz are proposing two additional instruments.

The first would be intended to reduce European companies’ dependence on single suppliers for strategically important products and raw materials. The second would allow the EU to restrict access to its internal market when a third country uses political or economic measures that seriously undermine fair competition.

Under the proposal, the Commission could initiate countermeasures unless a qualified majority of EU governments voted to block them. That would reverse the normal political dynamic in which Brussels must first secure sufficient support before acting.

German officials have argued that the EU needs powers comparable in effect to the United States’ Section 301 trade measures or China’s ability to restrict exports of critical raw materials.

The Commission has welcomed the Franco-German intervention as a contribution to its work on economic security and global trade imbalances. Any new instrument would, however, require legislation and approval by both EU governments and the European Parliament before it could be used.

The proposal comes amid growing concern in both Paris and Berlin over the effect of subsidised Chinese production on European manufacturers.

Germany’s position is particularly significant. Berlin has traditionally been more cautious than Paris about measures that could restrict trade with China, reflecting the importance of the Chinese market to German carmakers, engineering companies and chemical producers.

That position has shifted as German industry faces increased competition from Chinese electric vehicles, machinery and other manufactured goods.

EU Today has previously examined the emerging Franco-German alignment on tougher China trade defences and demands from German manufacturers for broader European action rather than product-by-product investigations.

The new proposals go considerably further by seeking a mechanism capable of dealing with entire sectors and acting much more quickly than conventional anti-dumping proceedings.

Chemicals, PET plastics and hybrid vehicles are among sectors identified in the Franco-German document as areas where additional action may be required.

The timing is also significant. EU leaders are due to discuss trade relations with China at their summit in Brussels on 15–16 October, while Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is expected to hold talks with Chinese officials beforehand.

The Commission is already attempting to balance two objectives: maintaining Europe’s access to the Chinese market while reducing strategic dependencies that could be used as political leverage.

The Franco-German plan would give Brussels another instrument at the more coercive end of that policy. Its eventual importance will depend on whether governments agree to create it and how readily they would permit the Commission to use it against a major trading partner.

RT | October 5, 2026

Swiss police are investigating a sprawling fraud operation with suspected links to Ukrainian scam call centers, an industry said to be worth billions to corrupt officials in Kiev, Neue Zurcher Zeitung (NZZ) has reported, citing law enforcement officials.

According to a report on Sunday, NEDIK, the police network coordinating Switzerland’s fight against digital crime, recently recorded an increase in fraud offenses suspected of having links to Ukraine. The network declined to provide nationwide figures “for tactical reasons,” but noted that at least four fraudulent call centers in Ukraine have been identified in international investigations involving Swiss authorities, with Swiss and German citizens among their main victims.

One investigation by Bern authorities, reportedly underway for years, concerns a man suspected of operating several call centers in Kiev. On just one platform allegedly linked to the operation, reported losses in Switzerland amounted to nearly 4 million Swiss francs ($4.8 million).

Several Ukrainian nationals have also recently been arrested in Swiss cantons for allegedly acting as cash collectors in telephone scams. In St. Gallen in early September, a person posing as a bank employee called a 93-year-old man and instructed him to withdraw and hand over a large sum of money. Police later arrested a 38-year-old Ukrainian who allegedly collected the cash.

Police in Aargau have similarly reported a growing number of suspected cash collectors holding Ukrainian citizenship. Authorities, however, have not established whether they are being directed by call centers in Ukraine or acting independently. NZZ noted that it remains unclear to what extent Ukraine-based operations are connected to fraud networks and cash collectors operating in Switzerland.

While Russians have long been portrayed as the main targets of Ukrainian scammers, sources cited by NZZ challenged that narrative. Brian Lee, head of the Eurasia Observatory at the Geneva-based Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime (GI-TOC), said Russians accounted for just 10%-15% of targets even at the height of the so-called “patriotic fraud” narrative, under which young Ukrainians were recruited into scam networks on the pretext of taking revenge for Moscow’s military operation against the Kiev regime. Victims have been identified in at least 29 countries, with scam centers increasingly targeting Europe and the US, according to a GI-TOC report published earlier this year.

Lee also reported that bribing Ukrainian officials for protection is central to the business model, saying GI-TOC investigations found that criminal elements “operate seamlessly and efficiently alongside law enforcement agencies, public officials and the private sector.” Such protection reportedly costs scam operators $10,000-$15,000 per month.

Scam networks and state structures

Corruption has long plagued Ukraine, with high-level scandals including last year’s $100 million Energoatom kickback scheme, reportedly led by Timur Mindich, a former business partner of Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. Western-backed investigators have since uncovered further graft involving Ukrainian officials.

The scam call center network reentered the spotlight last month after Ukrainian Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko – a key pillar of Zelensky’s increasingly fragile governing structure – resigned amid the exposure of an industrial-scale network across the country with alleged links to senior figures in Kiev. Ukraine’s Western-backed National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) accused Sergey Kropiva, head of the cybercrime unit at the Prosecutor General’s Office, of leading a ring that collected protection payments from notorious Ukrainian scam call centers. NABU said it identified assets worth almost $1 million allegedly purchased with proceeds from the scheme.

The sums involved in Ukraine’s wider scam industry are reportedly far larger. Ukrainian media earlier estimated that roughly 2,000 scam offices were operating nationwide as of early August, about half paying protection money to corrupt officials. Such payments were estimated at $240 million annually, while the industry itself has been valued at up to $1 billion a month.

The scam industry has also been linked to powerful security structures under Zelensky’s government. In September, personnel from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and military intelligence (HUR) exchanged fire in Kiev in a confrontation that left three servicemen injured. The clash centered on Stepan Kaplunov, a member of an HUR-linked armed unit detained by the SBU. A law enforcement source cited by Ukrainian outlet Strana said Kaplunov may have been involved in operating scam call centers, pointing to a broader struggle between rival security agencies over the lucrative industry. Ukrainian journalists have also reported that proceeds from criminal operations help finance parts of the HUR’s activities.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has described phone scams as a key tactic employed by Kiev to extract money from Russian citizens, suggesting the practice has effectively become state policy. Moscow considers the industry a national security threat and claims Ukrainian scam networks operate in coordination with the country’s intelligence services.

Russian forces have recently intensified strikes on Ukrainian telecommunications infrastructure, mobile operators, and data centers in response to Kiev’s botched “pressure campaign” of drone attacks on civilian infrastructure deep inside Russia. The strikes have disrupted internet access, digital television, and other services, including by hitting data centers in Kiev that Moscow says were used by Ukrainian military and intelligence services. Media reports late last month also claimed a Russian strike hit one of the scam call centers in Dnepropetrovsk.

BND chief Martin Jaeger’s claim comes as his agency pushes for more funding and expanded powers

RT | October 5, 2026

Martin Jaeger arrives to speak in the annual open hearing of Germany’s three intelligence services at the Bundestag in Berlin, Germany, October 5, 2026 © Getty Images ; Sean Gallup

Germany could become “embroiled in a violent conflict with Russia,” the country’s foreign intelligence chief has warned, claiming that a mysterious drone incident at Leipzig airport is an example of the “real and imminent” threat posed by Moscow.

Speaking to lawmakers at a parliamentary hearing on Monday, Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) head Martin Jaeger declared that “the confrontation we are facing with Russia has taken on a new, more dangerous dimension.”

“Germany is in danger ​of becoming embroiled in a violent conflict with Russia – the attempted attack in Leipzig ⁠is just one example,” he continued, referring to the discovery of an explosive-laden drone next to a Ukrainian transport plane at the city’s airport in August.

German authorities have not released any evidence linking the incident to Russia, and Moscow has described the episode as a “hastily cobbled-together provocation” serving “exclusively the aims of Kiev and the militaristic wing of the European political class.” It is “obvious that Germany is pursuing a further course of escalation,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said last month.

Nevertheless, Jaeger claimed that Russia is “waging a shadow war,” and that there is a “real and imminent” threat of attacks against targets in Germany. “No other country currently poses such a direct, comprehensive, and concrete threat to Germany,” he added.

Jaeger is one of dozens of Western political, military, and media figures to accuse Russia of waging a “hybrid war” or “shadow war” against Europe in recent weeks. The accusations are, by their nature, impossible to verify, and Moscow has written them off as pretexts to deepen Western involvement in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, justify military spending hikes, and expand surveillance and persecution of domestic opponents.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has explicitly and without evidence described the country’s most popular political party, the right-wing AfD, as “Russia-backed.” Martina Rosenberg, the head of Germany’s Military Counterintelligence Service (MAD), alluded to this claim during Monday’s briefing, telling lawmakers that the country is “threatened by diverse dangers from both outside and within.”

Jaeger, Rosenberg, and domestic intelligence (BfV) chief Sinan Selen all praised Merz’s recent efforts to grant the BND greater offensive powers, and called for further strengthening of the MAD and BfV’s capabilities.

Despite their allegations of “hybrid war,” European leaders have repeatedly stressed that they do not believe Russia to be planning any actual attacks on NATO territory. The BND has seen “no indication of an imminent large-scale Russian attack on NATO territory,” Jaeger added on Monday.

Amid an unprecedented escalation in the West’s rhetoric toward Russia, RT is tracking the statements, accusations, and threats in our ongoing ‘Escalation Watch’ special. Keep an eye on it here as we sort the facts from the propaganda and debunk the psyops in real time.

Austrian remigration activist and CEO of the Institute for Remigration Martin Sellner stated on Sunday that a rap video circulating on Instagram calls for him to be hunted. He contrasted the clip’s availability online with restrictions he says platforms have placed on the accounts of those on the anti-immigration right.

Sellner posted the roughly 26-second clip on X. In the video, several migrant men stand in a graffiti-marked underpass under colored lights and make a number of threats and statements opposed to Germany

Mystery meat migrant rappers are calling to hunt me.

This song is not censored, while we are deplatformed everywhere.

The only thing more embarrassing than their "rap" is, that their corny radical chic is platformed by all media and indirectly funded by state money.

— Martin Sellner (@MartinSellner_) October 4, 2026

English text overlaid on the rap video includes, “Martin Sellner is in danger from today,” “We are shootin’ with AKs” and “I am hunting Martin Sellner.”

In addition, the rappers claim that “Germany has no right to exist,” 

Other on-screen text refers to streets burning and to bombs “like in Dresden ’45.” Dresden was firebombed by the Allies at the end of the Second World War, resulting in at least 25,000 German civilians losing their lives.

In response to the video, Sellner wrote: “Mystery meat migrant rappers are calling to hunt me. This song is not censored, while we are deplatformed everywhere. The only thing more embarrassing than their ‘rap’ is that their corny radical chic is platformed by all media and indirectly funded by state money.”

German criminal law treats certain public threats as offenses independent of whether they are carried out. Artistic freedom may not serve as a defense in this case when the threats are specific, directed at an individual, and describe violent acts.

German employee fired for attending Martin Sellner remigration reading reaches settlement in court

Section 241 of the German criminal code related to threats penalizes threatening a person with a crime against sexual self-determination, bodily integrity, personal freedom or property of significant value. The penalty rises if the threatened act is a felony or if the threat is made publicly or by distributing content, with maximum terms reaching three years in the aggravated public cases. 

Section 126 penalizes threatening specified serious crimes, including murder, aggravated assault or certain explosives offenses, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace, with a maximum of three years’ imprisonment.

Austrian law contains a parallel offense of dangerous threat under Section 107 of the Austrian Criminal Code when a person is menaced with death, serious injury or other grave harm in a way that is capable of causing reasonable fear.

In recent years, German public figures and politicians have brought thousands of Germans into court for various statements online that were not direct threats, but instead mere insults. In some cases, these social media users only sharply criticized these politicians. 

After German house raids for ‘insults’ and ‘racist memes’ shock the world, Elon Musk responds: ‘Thank the Lord that America has freedom of speech’

Sellner, 37, led the Identitarian Movement of Austria for years and has promoted large-scale returns of migrants. Most recently, he founded the Institute for Remigration. Germany and Switzerland have at times imposed entry bans on him tied to public-order concerns. Some of those measures were later limited or overturned by courts. 

Austrian identitarian leader Martin Sellner calls for remigration after highlighting sex crimes committed by migrants

The post ‘Mystery meat migrant rappers are calling to hunt me’ – Austrian remigration activist Martin Sellner faces ‘hunting’ threats in new rap video appeared first on Remix News.

Merz caminó por Kiev. Hay una foto de él andando por ahí en una calle. Pero no es sólo él. En sus zapatos resopla toda la frustración de toda la Alemania neonazi.

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , X y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

No hay mejor tranquilizante que un Martini seco. Lo leí en una revista femenina. […] Desafortunadamente estos vasos no son los correctos, los estilos cambian.

Para un Martini seco, lo ideal es una copa en forma de cono.

Obispo: He oído que es un país magnífico: la Gran Cordillera, las pampas…
Embajador: La pampa está en Argentina, monseñor.
Obispo: La pampa. Por supuesto. […] Había fotos de tus antiguas pirámides.
Embajador: No tenemos pirámides en Miranda.

Luis Buñuel 1972 “El discreto encanto de la burguesía” Fragmentos.

Friedrich Merz, actual canciller alemán, con lazos y devociones por el nazismo, -como su abuelo paterno Josef Paul Sauvigny, quien fuera afiliado al Partido Nacionalsocialista Alemán (National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei NSDAP) del partido Nazi y que también estuvo en las S.A. (Sturmabteilung – sección de asalto) así como su padre, Joachim; soldado de la Wehrmacht- caminó por Kiev este pasado domingo cuatro de octubre, mismo día en que su país celebra ‘la unidad alemana’.

En un arrebato desesperado entre su propia realidad de fracaso en las urnas y el delirio de la revancha nazi que se le escapa de las manos en el frente ucraniano contra la Federación Rusa, heredera del triunfo soviético de 1945, Merz, uno de los peores políticos que riñe en mediocridad con otros como Macron, Meloni, Sánchez y los incontables primeros ministros ingleses, arribó a decirle a Zelensky que contara con Alemania, o sea, con el dinero de los alemanes en quiebra energética y que deben cumplir con el sagrado mandamiento dejado por Angela Merkel de pagar cuotas mensuales a migrantes africanos para que vivan mejor que los ciudadanos alemanes.

Pero, ¿contar con cuál Alemania? – se podría preguntar el propio Neonazi Zelensky. De hecho, de paso le dijo que solo podría entrar Ucrania a la Unión Europea en calidad de observador. Zelensky respondió que, o entran como socios con plenos derechos o no entran.

Merz viajó al menos dos veces como líder de la oposición a Kiev y tan pronto fue nombrado primer ministro -como lo hizo su par inglés, Andy Burnham- fue a Kiev en visita oficial a ofrecer más armas, dinero, cooperación industrial para desarrollo de drones y apoyo. Todo ello bajo el mantra de: ‘Rusia quiere invadir Europa’, o, ‘si no ayudamos a Ucrania, seremos los próximos’.

En otras ocasiones cuando iban de visita altos funcionarios europeos, Rusia mermaba las hostilidades y la capital ucraniana descansaba de los bombardeos; tal como señaló Zelensky durante la visita de Steve Witkoff y Jared Kushner en el mes de septiembre. Tales bombardeos intensificados como retaliación rusa a los ataques a civiles y centros energéticos en la Rusia profunda.

Es claro que los viajes a Ucrania de Merz, así como de otros europeos con herencias nazis, implica una peregrinación santa a esa punta de lanza que logrará, con la ayuda de las almas de todos los nazis bien muertos, sepultos e insepultos entre 1939 y 45, derrotar a los eslavos herederos soviéticos, a esos ‘orcos’ como suelen llamarles a los rusos.

Esta peregrinación es mística. Además, es el reto a ser un mártir por aniquilación de algún drone Geran, un misil Kinzhal, tal vez por un Skander M y por qué no, ser atomizado por un Oréshnik. Esto es una posibilidad latente. Los altos mandos rusos instaron a no viajar a Ucrania. Ya hay bombardeos a los puentes de Kiev. Quedará cerrada como una isla al otro lado del Dniéper. Es posible que esta sea la última vez que un europeo vaya a Kiev y salga vivo.

Así, Merz, un derrotado pronazi de hueso colorado se paseó una vez más por la capital ucraniana. La escena es tan absurda y cosmética como las escenas de la película de Buñuel, El discreto encanto de la burguesía, con las que inicio este escrito.

Aquella comedia hecha por un renombrado surrealista, utiliza la sátira y el refinamiento sobreactuado de burgueses que cada vez que intentan cenar juntos son interrumpidos por situaciones absurdas. Como señalan en el análisis crítico de la película:

Cada vez que están a punto de sentarse a la mesa, algo absurdo o inquietante interrumpe el acto: confusiones de horario, la muerte del dueño de un restaurante, un pelotón militar, un obispo que aparece de repente, sueños que se confunden con la realidad, etc.

La película no tiene una trama lineal clásica. Es una sucesión de intentos fallidos de cenar, intercalados con sueños de los personajes y situaciones cada vez más surrealistas. El acto de comer (símbolo de civilización, placer y status) se convierte en algo imposible. […]

Pero es precisamente esto lo que la obra señala en última instancia: la vida que llevan los individuos que forman parte de la alta burguesía es irreal, un espejismo, un islote en medio del océano de la verdadera realidad. A pesar de que su aislamiento propicia el empobrecimiento del resto del mundo, ni siquiera de este modo logran ser felices y esta frustración se ve reflejada en especial en la imposibilidad de conseguir lo que con más ímpetu desean, simbolizado aquí por la comida que no consiguen disfrutar nunca y por la inconveniencia de practicar sexo cuando y con quien desean.

Merz vive el discreto ‘desencanto’ de encarnar a un nazi de tercera generación sin chance de ganar lo que tampoco ganaron abuelo y padre. Merz es como una película que además de hablar de la mediocridad y la derrota, es de bajo presupuesto, reforzando por inercia la idea de derrota y mediocridad.

Se pasea por Kiev, una vez más, con el anhelo y el espejismo febril, nada discreto de triunfar sobre Rusia.

Lo que en la película es para los burgueses el deseo frustrado de ser felices en una cena, como hecho imposible lo es para Merz el no ser un nazi triunfando sobre un heredero de los padres y abuelos soviéticos. Además, Merz en realidad ha encarnado ya la personificación del desfase, de la ubicuidad errática: ¿Por qué sale de Alemania el día que allí celebran el día de la unidad alemana?

Merz sale de allí porque esa Alemania, esa que lo derrotó en las urnas hace unas semanas, no sustenta a la nación germana de su imaginación. Aquel campo onírico de Buñuel toma sentido en este ‘loco’ transeúnte por Kiev. Lo que danza en la amplia frente de Merz está hecho de esvásticas, columnas enormes, águilas imperiales, runas, antorchas, cuerpos esculpidos a imagen del ario que soñó su ídolo, Adolfo.

El día de la unidad alemana, habrá negros y musulmanes, quizá latinos, fornicando con las mujeres alemanas. Eso sí, a la luz de ‘antorchas’, debido a la crisis energética que asumieron Olaf Schulz y su gobierno de abyectos, al avalar el ‘Ka boom’ del Nord Stream.

Cada vez que quiere sentarse a la mesa con Zelensky, éste le recuerda que es el monstruo que creó la Unión Europea y EE.UU. y que le han subestimado como un simple histrión. Entonces, la cena fracasa. El ‘duende verde’ acosado por los neonazis de Azov sólo repite los mantras de ‘más dinero’, ‘pago a funcionarios’’, dinero para la guerra’, ‘escudo antimisiles’, ‘ingreso a la OTAN y a U.E.’ etc. La cena se frustra, pero es necesaria la esperanza para continuar con la trama, el anhelo por lograr la gran cena final: derrotar a Rusia.

Como en la descripción de la película, la vida de estos capitalistas, tecnócratas, burgueses neonazis empobrece a sus sociedades. Mientras, la cena anhelada que costará mucho dinero, se escapa entre el realismo de la incapacidad alemana por un rearme eficiente y donde sus jóvenes no desean prestar servicio militar, no hay dinero y su base industrial está rezagada al menos quince años detrás de la rusa.

Siempre que Merz se quiere sentar a cenar sabe que algo pasará y está pasando: Rusia sigue avanzando hacia occidente, para ubicarse allí, en esas calles donde aún él y el neonazi Volodómir caminan. Sólo queda un 9% del Donbás en manos de los ucronazis respaldados por la OTAN. El sueño húmedo de este nazi está por finalizar.

Al igual que la forma en que Buñuel dispuso ese ‘encanto’ burgués, la trama hecha por Merz, y toda su camarilla europea sufre de confusiones de horario, no linealidad y coherencia en el discurso, lo que deviene en la eterna frustración de no lograr lo que con tanto ímpetu desean.

Por ejemplo, el señor Friedrich ha señalado varias veces que Rusia es débil y va perdiendo la guerra y que por eso es clave apoyar a Ucrania. Por otro, dice que de ganar Rusia avanzará hacia Europa. Entonces, o es débil y puede ser derrotada o es fuerte y puede avanzar hacia Europa. No puede ser las dos cosas.

En cuestión de tiempos, tampoco le da o les da a los nazis y europeos colaboradores de éstos. No hace falta sino ver las más de treinta mil sanciones impuestas a Rusia para comprender cómo sus cálculos de tiempo sobre una Rusia que caerá, cada vez de manera definitiva, han fracasado. Más de veinte veces la cena surrealista, la cena antropofágica devoradora de rusos y Rusia se ha frustrado.

También han apostado a que, con el tiempo, el presidente Putin perdería apoyo de la sociedad y, por el contrario, su partido Rusia Unida, lideró y aumentó posiciones en la pasada jornada electoral, que fue acechada por drones y ataques ucronazis. De nuevo, el burgués nazi no comió.

Las declaraciones de Merz acerca de Rusia nunca han sido amables. El gobierno alemán se encuentra en pie de guerra con los puños apretados, impotente y alucinando. En la asamblea anual de Naciones Unidas, la parte alemana solicitó a los rusos una reunión. La misma duró veinte minutos, tiempo suficiente para insultar al canciller Lavrov y fijar ultimátum a Rusia:

El contenido de la conversación se centró en la guerra en Ucrania y las relaciones bilaterales. Wadephul exhortó al Kremlin a “abandonar la peligrosa senda de escalada frente a Alemania, Europa y la OTAN (Organización del Tratado del Atlántico Norte)”, citó una fuente alemana recogida por Reuters y AP. El ministro germano también insistió en que Rusia debe facilitar un acuerdo para reactivar las exportaciones de cereales por el mar Negro, afectadas por ataques a infraestructuras y barcos de ambos países.

No obstante, Lavrov aseguró que “no surgió nada nuevo” tras el diálogo, y posteriormente aprovechó su discurso ante la Asamblea General para reforzar la postura rusa sobre la guerra e intensificar las críticas contra Occidente, incluida Alemania. El ambiente previo al encuentro estuvo marcado por señalamientos bilaterales: Wadephul denunció crímenes de guerra rusos en Ucrania y abogó por incrementar la presión internacional sobre Moscú, al tiempo que expresó desconfianza sobre la voluntad real del Kremlin de negociar la paz.

Es una clara ofensa al canciller y el pueblo rusos, citar a éste a una reunión en donde le exige lo que se vio en los párrafos anteriores. Los alemanes neonazis quieren cenar y no pueden. Se frustran y explotan a su pueblo.

En contra eso sí de cualquier libreto surrealista de Luis Buñuel, quien no tuvo tanta creatividad o no conocía ni imaginaba este tipo de burgués, los alemanes mientras izan su brazo derecho con los dedos puestos como una saeta para saludar el alma de Hitler, de una esvástica o a la raza blanca superior, entregan los vientres de sus mujeres y los impuestos de sus ciudadanos a comensales no arios. Otra escena absurda de esta película de bajo presupuesto.

Merz caminó por Kiev. Hay una foto de él andando por ahí en una calle. Pero no es sólo él. En sus zapatos resopla toda la frustración de toda la Alemania neonazi; el discreto y terrible desencanto de ser perdedores, para fortuna del mundo una vez más en menos de cien años y nuevamente gracias a Rusia. Ojalá ahora desaparezcan para siempre. ‘Good Bye Merz’.

Merz è un uomo già condannato. La paura e il bellicismo non fanno guadagnare voti.

Segue nostro Telegram.

Dopo aver imparato a proprie spese cosa significa ricevere uno schiaffo in faccia alle elezioni in Sassonia-Anhalt, la CDU ha subito una vera e propria disfatta il 20 settembre nel Meclemburgo-Pomerania Anteriore (Meck/Pomm) e a Berlino.

Analizzando innanzitutto i dati del Mecklenburg/Pomerania Anteriore, l’affluenza alle urne è stata del 78,1%, circa la stessa registrata in Sassonia-Anhalt con il 77,8%.

Il risultato finale ufficiale, seppur ancora provvisorio, può essere considerato una piccola sorpresa rispetto a quello della Sassonia-Anhalt, ma comunque illuminante. Quattro partiti occuperanno dei seggi nel parlamento regionale.

AfD 38,2% = 32 seggi

SPD 35,5%, con il ministro-presidente uscente che punta a rimanere in carica = 29 seggi

Die Linke (Sinistra) 6,5% = 5 seggi

Die Grüne (Verdi) 5,7% = 5 seggi

Il parlamento statale è composto da un totale di 71 seggi.

Ora la parte interessante: CDU 4,9%, zero seggi grazie alla soglia del 5%; così come FDP 1,0%, anche in questo caso zero seggi.

Ora cerchiamo di inquadrare la situazione in una prospettiva più ampia.

L’AfD ha vinto le prossime elezioni, anche se non con un margine così ampio come in Sassonia-Anhalt, ma si tratta comunque di una vittoria.

Manuela Schwesig, attuale presidente del partito dal 2017, appartiene all’élite dell’SPD. In precedenza, dal 2013 al 2017, ha ricoperto la carica di Ministro dell’Istruzione, della Famiglia, degli Anziani, delle Donne e dei Giovani a livello federale, e un incarico analogo nel parlamento regionale del Mecklenburg dal 2008 al 2013. Ha attraversato un periodo difficile quando l’SPD si è allontanato dall’essere un partito dei lavoratori per intraprendere le cosiddette riforme sociali che hanno drasticamente ridotto il sistema di sicurezza sociale, cercando di attenuare il più possibile gli effetti negativi dei tagli. Il suo ruolo in politica è sempre stato caratterizzato da sincerità e attenzione, dando l’impressione di essere una persona onesta.

Lei appartiene alla ristretta cerchia di politici dell’SPD da cui ci si aspetta un futuro più roseo per il partito, ma sembra intenzionata a rimanere al suo posto nel Mecklenburg/Pommarding, almeno per il momento.

I Verdi e la Sinistra hanno ottenuto ciò che ci si aspettava da loro: i Verdi in difficoltà, e la Sinistra ancora impegnata a risollevarsi dopo un periodo di turbolenze interne seguito all’abbandono del partito da parte di Sahra Wagenknecht, che ha fondato il suo movimento, BSW, portando con sé alcuni elettori di sinistra.

I Verdi, nati come partito pacifista, si opposero al riarmo militare e al degrado ambientale. Dal 2022, tuttavia, sono diventati uno dei principali sostenitori del regime ucraino e del riarmo tedesco ed europeo, talvolta superando persino i conservatori tradizionali. Questo ha comportato una perdita di consensi tra gli ambientalisti, soprattutto tra i giovani elettori. I sostenitori della pace si sono rivolti all’AfD e, in una certa misura, alla Sinistra, gli unici partiti che propongono una soluzione più pacifica e diplomatica.

La vera sorpresa di queste elezioni non è l’FDP. Al momento non ha un ruolo di rilievo, essendo stato in numerosi governi di coalizione dal 1949, aiutando sempre i due partiti principali a raggiungere le maggioranze necessarie. Sembra aver perso la propria identità, cercando di allearsi con gli avversari in campagna elettorale e finendo per smarrire la strada.

Il problema principale è che la CDU, il partito di governo a livello nazionale, ha ottenuto un misero 4,9% ed è stata quindi estromessa dal parlamento statale. È una sconfitta enorme. Il signor Merz è praticamente un uomo morto che cammina, e il suo destino è segnato per tutti.

Gli ex stati della Germania dell’Est si sentono ancora abbandonati e traditi dopo la riunificazione. I programmi istituiti per modernizzare e risanare la vecchia DDR hanno beneficiato soprattutto aziende e istituzioni della Germania occidentale. Gli appalti furono truccati e centinaia di imprese finirono in amministrazione controllata, per poi essere vendute a prezzi stracciati a investitori occidentali.

Questo è uno dei problemi di fondo ancora presenti nella mente degli ex cittadini della DDR e viene spesso addotto come spiegazione di tali risultati elettorali. Tuttavia, questa giustificazione è valida solo come pretesto per nascondere le carenze dei partiti tradizionali, ignorando i veri problemi come lo spopolamento dei villaggi, la mancanza di infrastrutture adeguate per assistere una popolazione che invecchia, le scarse opportunità di lavoro, le problematiche legate ai migranti e la sfiducia nei confronti dei partiti al potere. La forza trainante al momento della riunificazione era la CDU, le cui promesse non si sono avverate. Pertanto, le opzioni disponibili all’epoca erano un programma socialista o, in alternativa, un programma conservatore.

A prima vista, le elezioni a Berlino non hanno colpito la CDU con la stessa intensità degli altri due Länder tedeschi. Tuttavia, essendo Berlino la capitale, i risultati assumono un’importanza particolare. Anche qui, i partiti di governo hanno subito perdite significative a favore dei partiti di sinistra, AfD e Linke. I risultati sono i seguenti, con l’aggiunta di guadagni e perdite a scopo di chiarezza:

Die Linke 25,7% 47 seggi +13,5%

CDU 18,8% 34 seggi −9,4%

AfD 16,3% 29 seggi +0,1%

Grüne 14,3% 26 seggi −4,1%

SPD 12,1% 22 seggi −10,1%

BSW 4,7% sotto la soglia del 5%, nessun seggio

FDP 2,5% sotto la soglia del 5%, nessun seggio

La partecipazione è stata del 74,2%.

Il parlamento statale ha 158 seggi e la maggioranza si ottiene con 80 seggi. Ciò significa che ci sarà sicuramente un governo di coalizione. Al momento, tutti gli indizi puntano a una coalizione tra Linke (Sinistra), SPD e Verdi.

L’AfD non è riuscita a ottenere gli stessi risultati delle precedenti elezioni. Ciò è dovuto principalmente a due fattori.

Berlino ha un ambiente urbano e, come tale, un elettorato più concentrato, con una popolazione più giovane e composta da molti nuovi residenti provenienti da altri stati tedeschi.

Il secondo problema riguarda le enormi difficoltà specifiche di tali contesti. La disponibilità di alloggi a prezzi accessibili è una delle questioni centrali. L’AfD non ha esperienza nella gestione urbana e non propone concetti innovativi sufficientemente diversi da convincere gli elettori a votare per l’AfD.

È sorprendente che partiti con perdite così ingenti come l’SPD riescano comunque ad arrivare al potere. A parte la CDU, i partiti che hanno subito le maggiori sconfitte in queste elezioni finiscono comunque al governo. Questa è la bellezza di una coalizione.

Il partito di sinistra Linke non gode di grande fiducia da parte dei partiti tradizionali e degli elettori conservatori, poiché aleggia ancora intorno ad esso un’aura di comunismo. Ciononostante, i risultati elettorali sono chiari e sarà interessante vedere come Linke riuscirà a tradurre in realtà i temi della sua campagna elettorale, incentrata principalmente sul problema abitativo. Gli altri partner della coalizione faranno del loro meglio, quindi non sono previsti cambiamenti troppo radicali.

Anche in questo caso si può constatare che i partiti al governo a livello federale hanno ricevuto un messaggio chiaro, e le sconfitte dipingono un quadro desolante. Sarà un’impresa ardua cambiare l’opinione pubblica in tempo per le prossime elezioni di aprile. Ascoltando le dichiarazioni di questi partiti, sembra più che probabile che questi risultati si ripeteranno nella primavera del 2027, e a quel punto governare la Germania diventerà un’impresa pressoché impossibile.

Qualunque cosa accada, una cosa è ormai chiara. Una politica di paura e guerrafondaia, di fronte a un futuro con tagli drastici ai sistemi sociali, alla sanità e alle pensioni, e a una situazione economica che sembra peggiorare costantemente, non porterà il consenso degli elettori. Soprattutto quando non c’è una nuova visione da affrontare e risolvere, ma solo tagli e riduzioni, spacciati per riforme.

Il cancelliere tedesco, subito dopo la chiusura dei seggi, si è presentato davanti alla stampa e ha dichiarato: la stagione elettorale del 2026 è finita. Sembrava sollevato.

In fin dei conti, la CDU ha poche alternative. Se Merz fa marcia indietro sulle sue “riforme”, sembrerà debole e si arrenderà all’SPD, rafforzandola ulteriormente.

Se si avvicinasse maggiormente all’AfD, cercando di sottrarre voti, non gli sarebbe d’aiuto, dato che l’AfD è nata inizialmente da membri scontenti della CDU.

Se continua così, è assolutamente chiaro che Merz e la CDU non vinceranno le prossime elezioni federali, e Merz avrà un compito arduo per far sì che il governo segua la linea della CDU. Se l’SPD non riuscirà a dimostrare quanto sia realmente diverso dalla CDU, anche loro andranno incontro al disastro. I pericoli di essere un partner minore nelle coalizioni. Una lezione che l’FDP ha imparato a sue spese.

Nascondere la mancanza di una visione o persino di un piano chiaro per il futuro non ha mai giovato a nessun partito al governo, soprattutto nel momento in cui idee alternative, proposte da un forte partito di opposizione, guadagnano terreno a ogni elezione.

Se le prossime elezioni dell’aprile 2027 dovessero avere lo stesso esito delle ultime due, all’interno della CDU la paura si trasformerebbe in panico, e si potrebbero persino tenere elezioni federali alla fine della primavera. L’esito è imprevedibile. Tuttavia, tentare di mettere al bando l’AfD significherebbe la fine di un partito politico un tempo glorioso e la fine della democrazia come la conosciamo in Germania.

Production: By Europod, in co-production with Sphera Network.

EUobserver is proud to have an editorial partnership with Europod to co-publish the podcast series “Briefed” hosted by Léa Marchal. The podcast is available on all major platforms.

Find the full transcript below: 

Germany shut down its last nuclear power plants in 2023, bringing Angela Merkel’s nuclear exit policy to its conclusion. But now, nuclear power is making a strong comeback everywhere in Europe. Will Germany return to nuclear policy?

Until now, German chancellor Friedrich Merz had been reluctant to bring the nuclear topic on the table, partly because there was no agreement within his coalition. He has even said that Germany’s nuclear phase-out was irreversible. But that position is not shared by everyone in his own party.

And as support for the far-right AfD (Alternative for Germany) grows — a party that is strongly in favour of nuclear power — nuclear energy is becoming less politically taboo in Germany.

According to a non-public document sent by Berlin to other EU member states and reported by the media Euractiv (currently Rapporteur), the German government wants nuclear energy to be taken into account when the EU sets its climate targets for 2040.

For now, those discussions focus on renewable energy. Germany is not proposing to abandon renewable-energy targets, but rather to leave room for other low-carbon technologies, including nuclear power and carbon capture.

The logic is similar to the debate over the EU’s 2035 target for new cars: the overall objective remains, but countries could have more flexibility over how they achieve it.

And that proposal is likely to be welcomed in France. But could they convince a majority of EU countries? The picture across Europe is changing.

Many EU countries already operate nuclear power plants, while others are building new reactors or considering a return to nuclear. Italy, for example, is looking to revive a nuclear industry after abandoning nuclear power following the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.

Poland has never operated a nuclear power plant, but it is now developing its first one. And several other countries that currently have no reactors are seriously considering building them.

Only a small group of EU countries remain opposed to developing nuclear power, including Austria, Portugal, Luxembourg and Malta.

So why has nuclear power become more politically acceptable again? The legacy of Chernobyl and Fukushima still matters. But Europe’s energy crisis following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has also changed the debate.

The shock of soaring fossil-fuel prices has encouraged governments to look for energy sources that can provide electricity without relying on fossil fuels — and nuclear power is increasingly being presented as one of them. Although there are major questions around that argument.

Nuclear power can provide large amounts of low-carbon electricity once a reactor is operating. But building and renovating reactors is extremely expensive and can take decades.

Take France’s Flamanville reactor: its final cost has been estimated at around €23bn , compared with an initial estimate of around €3bn.

There are also questions over nuclear waste, the risk of accidents, and the security of uranium supplies. European countries remain partly dependent on foreign suppliers, including Russia, for uranium.

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has warned that political division and disinformation are placing growing pressure on the country’s democratic institutions after a succession of state elections weakened Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democrats and strengthened parties outside Germany’s traditional political centre.

Speaking during German Unity Day celebrations, Steinmeier compared the present political climate with divisions associated with the Weimar Republic, while stopping short of saying that Germany had reached such a point.

His intervention follows a difficult September for Merz.

Alternative for Germany won 43.8 per cent in Saxony-Anhalt, while in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania the AfD finished first with 38.2 per cent. Merz’s CDU recorded just 4.9 per cent in the latter state, leaving it outside the regional parliament for the first time.

Berlin produced a different winner but a similar problem for the established parties, with Die Linke taking first place.

The combined results have accelerated the fragmentation of a party system that for much of the post-war period revolved around two large political blocs.

EU Today examined that shift after the September elections, arguing that Germany’s political centre was losing voters in several directions at once.

Steinmeier did not confine his warning to electoral arithmetic.

He criticised the use of political demagoguery and warned that organised disinformation was damaging democratic debate. He referred to material originating from Kremlin-linked actors, domestic extremists and other networks using digital platforms to amplify manipulated information.

The remarks come during an increasingly difficult period for Merz.

The Chancellor took office promising to restore economic momentum and political stability. Instead, Germany continues to face concerns about industrial competitiveness, living standards, energy costs and the ability of its political system to absorb an increasingly fragmented electorate.

The pressure is particularly evident in eastern Germany.

Before September’s elections, EU Today noted that Merz was approaching a political reckoning in the east, where the CDU was losing ground while the AfD converted dissatisfaction over migration, energy, economic policy and distrust of established institutions into electoral support.

The subsequent results were worse for the CDU than many in the party had anticipated.

In Saxony-Anhalt, the AfD finished more than 26 percentage points ahead of the CDU. In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the CDU failed even to cross the threshold for parliamentary representation.

The consequences extend beyond German domestic politics.

Germany remains the EU’s largest economy and one of the principal states shaping European decisions on Ukraine, defence, migration, fiscal policy and industrial competitiveness. Political instability in Berlin can therefore affect negotiations in Brussels as well as the domestic legislative programme.

Economic policy is central to the dispute.

Germany’s manufacturing sector has faced stronger competition from China, while the rupture of the previous economic relationship with Russia has increased costs for energy-intensive industries. Russia’s continuing war against Ukraine has simultaneously required Berlin to spend more on defence and provide substantial assistance to Kyiv.

The German cabinet’s 2027 budget reflects that change. The government has approved federal expenditure of €555.4 billion, including €109.7 billion for the Defence Ministry and €11.6 billion for continued support to Ukraine.

The political difficulty is that higher security expenditure comes alongside pressure to invest in infrastructure, public services and an economy struggling to recover stronger growth.

The rise of the AfD has consequently become more than a debate over whether other parties should maintain the so-called firewall preventing formal co-operation with it.

The more difficult question for Germany’s established parties is why voters are abandoning them and whether economic and political dissatisfaction can be reversed through government policy rather than coalition arrangements designed chiefly to exclude competitors from office.

Steinmeier’s intervention places that argument inside a historical frame familiar to Germans.

The Federal Republic’s post-war institutions were deliberately designed to avoid the failures of the interwar period. But constitutional safeguards alone cannot prevent political fragmentation if large groups of voters cease to regard established parties as capable of responding to the issues that concern them.

Germany enters the final months of 2026 with that question moving from the margins of its politics to the centre.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has announced a new package worth more than €1.3 billion for Ukraine during a visit to Kyiv, combining additional military assistance with support for the country’s damaged energy infrastructure as German-Ukrainian industrial co-operation expands.

Merz visited the Ukrainian capital on Sunday while Russian drone attacks continued against Kyiv.

According to the Ukrainian presidency’s account of the meeting, the package includes more than €1 billion for defence and additional financing for the energy sector ahead of winter. Separate reporting put the energy component at approximately €350 million.

The visit also produced an extensive group of bilateral agreements involving governments and companies.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Ukraine and Germany had concluded 15 agreements and documents, most concerning security co-operation, production, procurement, orders for German industry and joint projects in Ukraine. He put the total value of the agreements reached during the visit at more than €8.5 billion.

A narrower set of industrial agreements reported during the visit was valued at about €6.6 billion and included air-defence, radar and drone projects.

The visit went beyond another transfer of military aid.

Germany and Ukraine are increasingly constructing a defence relationship based on procurement, industrial production and the transfer of Ukrainian battlefield experience to European manufacturers.

At the Ukrainian-German Business Forum, Zelenskyy said the new security package would strengthen Ukraine’s armed forces immediately while industrial agreements were intended to build longer-term production capacity.

The direction corresponds with a wider shift in European support for Ukraine.

Military assistance is increasingly moving away from transfers of existing national stocks towards contracts financing new weapons production. In July, the EU released €3.47 billion for Ukrainian defence procurement, including financing intended for drones, missiles, air defence and combat aircraft requirements.

Kyiv has since asked European partners to accelerate further financing as the demands of the war outpace scheduled disbursements. EU Today reported in September that Ukraine was seeking early access to part of its 2027 EU funding to close a military budget gap.

The German agreements add a bilateral industrial track to that European system.

They also reflect changes on the battlefield.

Russia has continued to expand large-scale drone and missile attacks, increasing the importance of interceptor production, radar coverage and lower-cost methods of destroying unmanned aircraft. Ukraine’s air-defence problem is increasingly an industrial one: inexpensive attack drones cannot sustainably be countered only with scarce and costly surface-to-air missiles.

EU Today has previously examined how Ukraine’s air-defence battle has become an industrial equation, determined as much by production rates and cost ratios as by the technical performance of individual systems.

German-Ukrainian co-operation is increasingly being shaped by that requirement.

Merz has presented continuing support for Ukraine as a direct German and European security interest, rather than assistance based solely on solidarity with Kyiv.

The argument has acquired greater force as German authorities investigate Russian-linked sabotage and hybrid operations on German territory.

In September, investigators reportedly traced the attempted bombing of a Ukrainian cargo aircraft at Leipzig/Halle Airport to a suspected Russian military-intelligence organiser, with EU Today reporting details of the alleged GRU-linked logistics network.

For Berlin, support for Ukraine is now increasingly seen as part of Germany’s own security.

Merz’s visit also carries a domestic political dimension. His government is committing Germany to considerably higher defence expenditure at a time when the CDU has suffered severe electoral setbacks in eastern Germany and voters remain concerned over public finances and economic performance.

Yet Germany’s military and industrial engagement with Ukraine is continuing to expand.

The new package announced in Kyiv is important in itself, particularly as Ukraine prepares for another winter of Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure. The wider development, however, lies in the growing number of defence-production agreements accompanying it.

European governments have spent much of the war debating how to replenish their own weapons stocks while sustaining Ukraine.

The German approach increasingly points towards a different model: Ukrainian operational experience, Ukrainian procurement requirements and European industrial capacity being brought into the same defence-production system.

Germany and California parade as climate superpowers – yet both import energy, destroy industry and hand supply chains to Beijing. Western virtue, says Tilak Doshi, is made in Chinese coal-fired factories.

The post Beijing’s Useful Idiots: Germany, California and the Green Road to Chinese Supremacy appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

Rekord-Spritpreise, Geheimdienst-Zugriff auf Krankenakten, Millionen für die NGO eines CDU-Abgeordneten – und immer derselbe Reflex: Verantwortung liegt stets woanders.

Es gibt Regierungspressekonferenzen, die sich um ein Thema drehen, und solche, die sich um ein Prinzip drehen. Die Sitzung vom Montag gehörte in die zweite Kategorie. Das Prinzip lautete: Verantwortung liegt stets anderswo – bei globalen Märkten, bei Moskau, beim Bundeskartellamt, bei der Europäischen Kommission, bei der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Lage.

Das Auswärtige Amt eröffnete mit der Reise des Außenministers nach München und Genf und nutzte die Gelegenheit für ein Bekenntnis zur Arbeit der Goethe-Institute in fast hundert Ländern. Die Schließung der Institute in Russland stellte die Sprecherin dabei als Bruch einer kulturellen Brücke dar, der in einem „sehr repressiven Raum“ geschlagen worden sei.

Nicht nur hier öffnete sich unmittelbar ein Raum für Nachfragen.

Schließung der Goethe-Institute: Reaktion ohne Ursache

Denn was in dieser Darstellung fehlte, war der Anlass. Diese Zeitung fragte nach, weshalb das Ministerium den Vorgang so präsentiere, als sei er einseitig von russischer Seite ausgegangen – obwohl ihm die Schließung des Russischen Hauses in Berlin vorausgegangen war. Die Antwort blieb bei der Formel, die Darstellung entspreche den Tatsachen; die russische Reaktion sei „ungerechtfertigt“, die deutschen Schritte hingegen „notwendig und maßvoll“ gewesen.

Damit bestätigte die Sprecherin implizit genau das, was sie zuvor nicht erwähnt hatte: dass es sich um eine Reaktion handelte. Auf die Nachfrage, ob das Amt von der Reziprozität überrascht worden sei, folgte keine Antwort, sondern eine Zurückweisung der Schlussfolgerung. Ob die Konsequenz antizipiert wurde, blieb offen – eine für die Bewertung der eigenen Entscheidung nicht unerhebliche Frage.

Explodierende Spritpreise: Ursachen ohne Urheber

Der zweite Schwerpunkt war der Rekordanstieg bei Diesel und Benzin. Der Regierungssprecher führte ihn auf die „Zuspitzung der Situation im Nahen Osten“, Angriffe auf Ölpipelines und die Blockade von Seewegen zurück – ausdrücklich nicht auf Entscheidungen der Bundesregierung.

Auf die Frage dieser Zeitung, welche Länder und Akteure hinter dieser Zuspitzung stehen und wen die Bundesregierung als Hauptverantwortliche benennt, verweigerte der Sprecher die Auskunft: Es sei „nicht mein Job, irgendwelche Verantwortlichkeiten zu verteilen“. Bemerkenswert ist die Selektivität dieser Zurückhaltung. In derselben Pressekonferenz benannte derselbe Sprecher Russland ausdrücklich als Urheber gezielter Angriffe auf das ukrainische Eisenbahnnetz. Die Zuschreibung von Verantwortung ist offenbar keine Frage des Amtsverständnisses, sondern der geografischen Richtung.

Auch die zweite Frage dieser Zeitung blieb faktisch unbeantwortet: Warum fallen die Preissteigerungen in Deutschland deutlich stärker aus als in den Nachbarstaaten? Das Wirtschaftsministerium verwies auf unterschiedliche Steuersysteme und Maßnahmen – ohne zu erläutern, warum Deutschland jene Maßnahmen, die 23 von 27 EU-Staaten ergriffen haben, nicht ergreift. Ein Kollege hielt den Vergleich mit Polen entgegen: rund 50 Cent Differenz pro Liter.

Hier wurde der zentrale Widerspruch der Sitzung sichtbar. Wenn die Preise, wie der Regierungssprecher betont, ausschließlich globalen Marktkräften folgen, lässt sich die erhebliche Spreizung innerhalb des europäischen Binnenmarktes schwerlich erklären. Wenn sie hingegen maßgeblich von nationalen Steuer- und Abgabenstrukturen abhängt – wie das Wirtschaftsministerium einräumt –, ist die Preisbildung sehr wohl politisch gestaltbar.

Das Finanzministerium löste dieses Dilemma rhetorisch, indem es den Schwarzen Peter an die Mineralölkonzerne weiterreichte: Von „Abzocke“ und „Krisenprofiten“ war die Rede. Das Instrument der Wahl ist eine europäische Übergewinnsteuer, für die sich der Minister beim Ecofin einsetzen will. Auf die Frage, warum keine nationale Lösung erfolge, hieß es, man wolle „kein komplexes juristisches Neuland betreten“. Dass ein Instrument, das eine Einigung aller Mitgliedstaaten und einen Kommissionsvorschlag voraussetzt, schneller wirkt als eine nationale Maßnahme, erschließt sich nicht ohne Weiteres. Der Direktauszahlungsmechanismus, über den Entlastungen ausgezahlt werden könnten, erreicht derzeit ohnehin nur 19 Prozent der Steuerpflichtigen.

Geheimdienste und das Arztgeheimnis: Anwälte bleiben tabu, Therapiegespräche nicht

Ein von der übrigen Presse kaum beachteter Aspekt der geplanten Reform des Nachrichtendienstrechts betrifft das ärztliche und psychotherapeutische Berufsgeheimnis. Während das Mandantenverhältnis bei Anwälten absolut geschützt werden soll, gilt für Ärzte und Psychotherapeuten lediglich eine Abwägungslösung – Verfassungsschutz und BND könnten künftig legal auf Krankenakten und vertrauliche Therapiegespräche zugreifen.

Auf die Frage dieser Zeitung nach dem sachlichen und verfassungsrechtlichen Grund dieser Ungleichbehandlung antwortete das Innenministerium mit drei Argumenten, die in unterschiedliche Richtungen weisen. Erstens: Die Regelung entspreche bestehenden Vorschriften der Strafprozessordnung und sei „nichts Neues“. Zweitens: Psychotherapeuten seien ohnehin „kein primäres Aufklärungsziel“, die Regelung habe daher „höchstwahrscheinlich nicht besonders viel Relevanz“. Drittens: Im Einzelfall werde zwischen Aufklärungsinteresse und Berufsgeheimnis abgewogen.

Eine Begründung für die Ungleichbehandlung enthält keines dieser Argumente. Der Verweis auf die Strafprozessordnung erklärt nicht, warum der Gesetzgeber die dortige Systematik auf Nachrichtendienste überträgt, die ohne Tatverdacht und ohne richterliche Anordnung im Einzelfall operieren. Und das Argument der geringen praktischen Relevanz wirft die naheliegende Gegenfrage auf, warum eine Befugnis geschaffen wird, die man kaum zu nutzen gedenkt.

Die Nachfrage dieser Zeitung, ob der Entwurf den Zugriff auf Praxisverwaltungssysteme und die elektronische Patientenakte eindeutig ausschließt, blieb unbeantwortet. Solange diese Frage offen ist, steht die Empfehlung der ePA als geschützter Raum für hochsensible Gesundheitsdaten auf tönernen Füßen.

KI: Paradigmenwechsel mit Selbstbeschränkung

Vergleichsweise auskunftsfreudig zeigte sich das Digitalministerium beim Thema Künstliche Intelligenz. Man nehme die Warnungen von KI-Entwicklern ernst; wenn Modelle aus Testumgebungen ausbrächen und eigenständig in andere Systeme eindrängen, liege ein „völlig neues Bedrohungsszenario“ vor. Das nationale KI-Sicherheitsinstitut habe die Arbeit aufgenommen, der Nationale Sicherheitsrat habe sich bereits zweimal befasst.

Eine Drosselung der Entwicklung lehnt die Bundesregierung ab – mit Verweis auf digitale Souveränität. Damit folgt sie genau derselben Argumentation wie US-Präsident Donald Trump, der Forderungen nach einer Verlangsamung oder strengeren Regulierung der KI-Entwicklung (wie sie etwa von Anthropic oder OpenAI gefordert wurden) strikt zurückweist. Ganz seinem Motto folgend: „Wer bei KI gewinnt, gewinnt.“

Eine NGO, die niemand kennt

Zum Schluss die Frage dieser Zeitung nach der erneuten Bundesförderung des Abrahams Accords Institute für 2026, dessen Trägerverein vom CDU-Abgeordneten Armin Laschet geführt wird und bei dem personelle Überschneidungen mit dem Abgeordnetenbüro dokumentiert sind. Aus der ersten Förderperiode in Millionenhöhe liegen verspätete und nach Einschätzung des Bundesverwaltungsamts nicht nachvollziehbare Abrechnungen sowie nicht umgesetzte Projektbestandteile vor.

Die Antwort der Bundesregierung: Weder der Vorgang noch die Vorhaltungen seien bekannt. Bei einer Förderung, die der Beauftragten für Kultur und Medien im Bundeskanzleramt zuzuordnen ist, ist das eine Auskunft, die den Vorgang nicht aufklärt, sondern lediglich verschiebt.

Die andere Hälfte

Vier Themen, vier Ressorts, ein Muster. Die Schließung der Goethe-Institute erscheint als Akt ohne Vorgeschichte, die Spritpreise als Naturereignis ohne Urheber, der abgeschwächte Schutz ärztlicher Gespräche als Regelung ohne praktische Bedeutung – und eine Förderung aus dem Kanzleramt als Vorgang ohne Zuständige. Nichts davon ist falsch im engeren Sinne. Es ist nur jeweils die Hälfte. Die andere Hälfte zu liefern wäre Aufgabe einer Regierungspressekonferenz; sie einzufordern bleibt Aufgabe derer, die dort fragen.

Originalbeitrag Berliner Zeitung

Wehretat, Wehrdienst und neue Kontrollbefugnisse verändern nicht nur die Bundeswehr, sondern auch die Republik. 

“Wir müssen bis 2029 kriegstüchtig sein.” Der Satz, mit dem Boris Pistorius seine Sicherheitspolitik begründet, ist im Wortlaut so unauffällig, dass sein historischer Defekt regelmäßig übersehen wird: Deutschland sei nicht kriegstüchtig, müsse es aber dringend werden.

Wer das ausspricht, behauptet im selben Atemzug, zwei Jahrzehnte Hindukusch, über 90.000 deutsche Soldatinnen und Soldaten in Afghanistan, 59 Gefallene, die Einsätze in Mali, im Kosovo, am Horn von Afrika und in Litauen sowie das Gefecht von Kundus, in dem die Bundeswehr unter Beschuss kam wie keine deutsche Truppe seit 1945 — all das sei keine Kriegstüchtigkeit gewesen.

Den Hinterbliebenen der Gefallenen ist man eine genauere Antwort schuldig. Sich selbst ist man die Frage schuldig, warum eine Behauptung, die einer historischen Prüfung nicht standhält, zur Voraussetzung einer Politik werden konnte, die das ganze Land verändern soll.

Die Erklärung liegt nicht in einer fehlerhaften Erinnerung des Verteidigungsministers, sondern in der Funktion seiner Sprache. “Kriegstüchtigkeit” ist kein deskriptiver Begriff, sondern eine rhetorische Maschine, die einen Ausnahmezustand erzeugt: Indem das Frühere als militärisch unzureichend disqualifiziert wird, wird das Spätere von demokratischer Rückfrage befreit.

Das Muster lässt sich an drei Indikatoren ablesen, die zusammen ein erstaunlich konsistentes Bild ergeben. Der zwanzigste Rüstungsbericht, der 2025 hätte erscheinen sollen, ist schlicht ausgeblieben.

Die neue Geheimschutzordnung des Bundestages vom 17. Oktober 2025 erklärt zentrale Angaben zu Rüstungsaufträgen zu Verschlusssachen. Und der Wehretat 2026 liegt bei 108,2 Milliarden Euro — gut die Hälfte davon kreditfinanziert über das Sondervermögen und die Schuldenbremsen-Ausnahme, mit einem Aufwuchspfad bis zu rund 153 Milliarden Euro im Jahr 2029.

Ein Staat, der so viel Geld bewegt und so wenig Rechenschaft ablegt, verwaltet nicht Verteidigung, sondern politische Unkenntnis.

Wer trägt die Last der Aufrüstung?

Die ökonomische Last dieser Architektur tragen, wie immer, nicht die Profiteure, sondern die Schwächsten. Am 25. März 2026 erklärte Lars Klingbeil bei der Bertelsmann Stiftung, die Gesellschaft müsse “insgesamt mehr arbeiten”, weniger Teilzeit, später in Rente, das Ehegattensplitting auf den Prüfstand, längere Befristungsmöglichkeiten, schwächere Transferentzugsraten.

Diese Aufforderung fiel in eben jene Woche, in der die Bundesregierung den höchsten Verteidigungshaushalt seit dem Ende des Kalten Krieges beschloss. Die Choreografie war perfekt: Der Vizekanzler bittet die Lohnabhängigen um Opfer, während sein Kabinett dem Rüstungssektor das größte Auftragsvolumen seit Generationen zuteilt.

Rheinmetall meldete 2025 einen Auftragsbestand von 63,8 Milliarden Euro; die US-amerikanische Rüstungsindustrie gab allein 2023 mehr als 139 Millionen Dollar für Lobbyarbeit aus und beschäftigte 904 registrierte Lobbyisten. Friedenspolitik verfügt über keine vergleichbare Infrastruktur — keine Werkshallen, keine Aktienkurse, keine regionalen Arbeitsplätze, keinen Bundesverband.

Friedenspolitik weist nur einige recht allgemein gehaltene Aussagen im deutschen Grundgesetz auf, deren Intention eigentlich das verhindern will, was zur Zeit passiert. Hinzu tritt das stille Interesse derselben Lobby an fossilen Energien, weil sich Diesel, Kerosin und Schweröl im Ernstfall logistisch robuster mobilisieren lassen als dezentrale Erneuerbare — eine Vorliebe, deren Preis die deutsche Handelsbilanz auf der Energieseite weiter verschlechtert.

Was als “Investition in unsere Zukunft” verkauft wird, ist eine Umverteilung im Tarnanzug: von oben investiert, von unten finanziert.

Medial erzeugte Narrationen der Kriegstüchtigkeit

Damit die Bevölkerung diese Differenz zwischen Pathos und Praxis nicht bemerkt, braucht es ein zweites Element: ein Narrativ, das jeden Zweifel in die Rechtfertigungsposition drängt. Das Muster war am 2. März 2026 bei “Hart aber fair” zu besichtigen, als Michael Wolffsohn dem SPD-Außenpolitiker Ralf Stegner mit jener kühlen Höflichkeit, die ein Gespräch ins Insinuierende zieht, mitteilte, seine Argumentation für das Völkerrecht sei “der AfD sehr ähnlich”.

Das ist die saubere Pointe des Kriegs-Hufeisens: Wer auf die UN-Charta verweist, gilt plötzlich als nützlicher Idiot der Autokraten; wer angesichts von 108 Milliarden Euro Wehretat nach Belegen fragt, stört den nationalen Ernst. Der Sicherheitsforscher Johannes Varwick, der von sich sagt, er sei kein Pazifist, beschreibt die Tonlage der Debatte als einen “Kriegstüchtigkeitsrausch”, der nicht auf Verteidigungsfähigkeit ziele; der Spiegel raunt in der Ausgabe 12/2026, die ganze Nation müsse kriegstüchtig gemacht werden.

Selbst Carlo Masala räumt auf Nachfrage ein, sein Russland-Invasions-Szenario stehe nirgendwo geschrieben, erscheine ihm aber wahrscheinlich, weil Putin gerne provoziere — eine empirische Grundlage für Milliardenbeschlüsse, die nüchtern betrachtet ein Offenbarungseid ist.

Dass die Nato Russland konventionell haushoch überlegen ist, dass Moskau seine Ziele in der Ukraine kaum erreicht, dass jede Aufrüstung ein Sicherheitsdilemma auslöst, in dem die unterlegene Seite zu nuklearer Kompensation getrieben wird — und dass Ramstein und Büchel dann zu den ersten Zielen zählen würden — wird in dieser Erzählung nicht erwähnt. Es passt nicht ins Genre.

Das Wehrdienst-Modernisierungsgesetz als Schleuse zur Militarisierung

Wer Wehrdienst-Modernisierungsgesetz, das seit dem 1. Januar 2026 gilt, nüchtern liest, erkennt schnell, dass es militärisch nicht aufgeht. In sechs Monaten Grunddienst werden alle Wehrdienstleistenden ausschließlich zu Wach- und Sicherungssoldaten ausgebildet; erst ab zwölf Monaten ist laut BMVg eine Verwendung “in der gesamten Breite der Streitkräfte” überhaupt möglich.

Für die Laufbahnen, die das einundzwanzigste Jahrhundert wirklich verlangt — IT-Spezialistinnen, Cyber-Analysten, Drohnenoperateure, Nachrichtentechniker — liegt die Mindestverpflichtungszeit bei sechs bis zwölf Jahren. Ein halbjähriger Kurzdienst ist für die moderne Kriegsführung mit unbemannten Systemen, Counter-UAS, elektronischer Kampfführung, Datenfusion und KI-gestützten Funktionen kaum mehr als ein folkloristisches Element.

Er ergibt aber sehr viel Sinn, sobald man fragt, was er nicht-militärisch leistet. Er ist die Einstiegsschleuse, die einen ganzen Jahrgang in Musterung und Uniform zieht und so jenes Reservepotenzial sichert, mit dem Generalinspekteur Breuer rechnerisch auf 460.000 Soldatinnen und Soldaten kommen will.

Was hier als Streitkräfte-Modernisierung firmiert, ist in Wahrheit ein Gesellschaftsprogramm, das Verfügbarkeit mit Fähigkeit verwechselt: Masse ist nicht Kompetenz, und Erfassung ist nicht Verteidigung.

Pistorius selbst beschreibt das Ziel mit einer Klarheit, die seine Apologeten ungern zur Kenntnis nehmen: Der Platz der Bundeswehr sei “in der Mitte der Gesellschaft”, sichtbar, präsent und getragen von ihr (Beförderungsappell zum ersten Veteranentag, 15. Juni 2025).

Der reaktivierte §3 des Wehrpflichtgesetzes verlangt für männliche Personen ab dem siebzehnten Lebensjahr — also vor der Volljährigkeit — eine Genehmigung der Bundeswehr für Auslandsaufenthalte über drei Monate; eingeführt per Generalverweisung im neuen Wehrpflichtgesetz, politisch verkauft als “freiwilliges Modell”, praktisch nur deshalb derzeit nicht angewendet, weil das Ministerium die Norm per Verwaltungsvorschrift “als erteilt geltend” aussetzt — eine Konstruktion, deren rechtsstaatliche Bedenklichkeit selbst wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiter führender Hochschulen offen aussprechen.

Hinzu kommen die verpflichtende Befragung des Geburtsjahrgangs 2008 mit Bußgeldandrohung, der schrittweise Wiederaufbau einer Pflichtmusterung zum 1. Juli 2027 in 24 neuen Musterungszentren, die automatische Einbindung der Wehrdienstleistenden in die Reserve und schließlich, am 16. Januar 2026, die Erweiterung der Befugnisse des Militärischen Abschirmdienstes zu Telekommunikationsüberwachung, V-Personen-Einsatz und Observation auch außerhalb militärischer Liegenschaften — gegen den dokumentierten Einspruch der Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer, die von einer massiven Beschädigung des Mandatsgeheimnisses sprach.

Wer dieses Bündel betrachtet — Datenregister, Verfügbarkeitserfassung, Genehmigungsvorbehalte, soldatisches Ethos als Normalform staatsbürgerlicher Haltung, ausgeweitete militärische Inlandsaufklärung —, erkennt eine Form von Staatlichkeit wieder, die in Deutschland bereits zweimal gescheitert ist.

Einmal im nationalen Heldenepos, das vom Hermannsdenkmal über das Niederwalddenkmal bis Tannenberg reicht und dann in der DDR mit ihrer Wehrerziehung, ihren vormilitärischen Laufbahnen und ihrem Kult um die Nationale Volksarmee.

Der neue Obrigkeitsstaat kommt nicht in Stiefeln. Er kommt im Fragebogen, im Datensatz, im Verschlusssachenstempel.

Militarisierung bereitet autoritären Kräften den Boden

Hier schließt sich die gefährlichste Schleife der ganzen Operation. Die Rechtsradikalen täuschen derzeit Pazifismus vor, weil sie wissen, dass man so schneller an die Macht kommt — kein deutsches Unikat, sondern derselbe Mechanismus, mit dem Donald Trump 2024 antrat, alle Kriege zu beenden, um wenige Monate später unter dem Codenamen “Epic Fury” ohne Kongressmandat, ohne völkerrechtliche Grundlage und nach Auskunft seiner Sprecherin “aus einem Gefühl heraus” einen Krieg gegen den Iran zu führen.

Hitler versprach Autobahnen und Arbeit, Trump versprach Frieden — die Macht wird über Wohlfühlversprechen erworben, der Krieg beginnt danach.

In den aktuellen Werten des Politbarometers (INSA, Stand 12.9.2026) liegt die AfD bei 28,6 Prozent und damit deutlich vor der Union (20,1 Prozent); in Sachsen-Anhalt erreichte sie 43,8 Prozent und ging als stärkste Kraft aus den Landtagswahlen hervor (CDU: 17,2 Prozent). Niemand kann seriös garantieren, dass sicherheitspolitische Schlüsselressorts auf Dauer ausschließlich in den Händen rechtsstaatlich sensibler Akteure verbleiben.

Genau deshalb ist es brandgefährlich, eine weitgespannte Wehrpflicht- und Erfassungsarchitektur zu errichten, ohne sich Rechenschaft darüber zu geben, wer sie eines Tages erbt.

Im Anschluss an die deutlich gewonnene Wahl der AfD in Sachsen-Anhalt im September 2026 äußerte sich deren Spitzenkandidat Ulrich Siegmund zur Frage, wie er zur Aufrüstung stehe, wie folgt: Er verteufele keine Aufrüstung, “weil wir bei (einer) späteren Remigrations- und Abschiebeoffensive natürlich auch entsprechende Hilfsmittel brauchen”.

Siegmunds Begründung für eine weitere militärische Aufrüstung beinhaltet also den Einsatz militärischer Waffengewalt für die Durchsetzung der Remigration. Zu remigrieren sind aber möglicherweise Millionen Menschen in Deutschland, Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund, insbesondere Asylbewerber, und diejenigen, die sie unterstützen.

Auch die SPD-Regierungsmitglieder Pistorius, Klingbeil und Bas verkennen den Charakter dessen, was sie bauen. Sie helfen dabei, die Verwaltungsarchitektur, die Datenregister, die Geheimschutzordnungen, die MAD-Befugnisse und die Kreditermächtigungen umzusetzen— und sie errichten sie in einer politischen Landschaft, in der sie nicht kontrollieren, wer sie eines Tages verwaltet. Die AfD wird möglicherweise dieses Geschenk dankend annehmen.

Militarisierung einer Gesellschaft bedeutet aber auch, dass die Bundeswehr in die Schulen gehen und für den Militärdienst werben kann. Militarisierung bedeutet ebenfalls die mediale Diskreditierung und öffentliche Zerstörung unliebsamer Personen, die hier Zweifel anmelden.

Originalbeitrag Telepolis