Bundeswehr in Syria – Back to Yugoslavian Scenario?

Approval of the decision taken by the Federal Government on December 4, 2015, on the involvement of 1200 German military men, Tornado multi-role combat aircrafts, tanker aircrafts and unmanned aircrafts with the support of the frigate of Bundesmarine in the light of confrontation of the governing CDU/CSU-SPD coalition and its opposition is the harbinger of Germany’s departure from the policy of military non-intervention cultivated since G. Schroeder was Chancellor of Germany. Moreover, according to public opinion poll taken by the influential German news agency DPA, 71% of German respondents were opposed to Germany’s participation in military action in Syria.

Approval of the decision taken by the Federal Government on December 4, 2015, on the involvement of 1200 German military men, Tornado multi-role combat aircrafts, tanker aircrafts and unmanned aircrafts with the support of the frigate of Bundesmarine in the light of confrontation of the governing CDU/CSU-SPD coalition and its opposition (the Left Party and the Alliance 90/the Green Party) is the harbinger of Germany’s departure from the policy of military non-intervention cultivated since G. Schroeder was Chancellor of Germany. Moreover, according to public opinion poll taken by the influential German news agency DPA, 71% of German respondents were opposed to Germany’s participation in military action in Syria.

In this regard, detrimental consequences and non-admission by German public opinion of illegitimate from the internationally accepted legal point of view participation of the Federal Republic of Germany in NATO’s military operation against Yugoslavia in 1999, entailing numerous casualties among civilians of this country, are worth mentioning.

By way of legal reasoning of Bundeswehr mission, stipulating lending aid to France, Iraq and a US-led coalition aimed at combating terrorist organization Islamic State (outlawed in Russia), Article 51 of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations Organization, ensuring the right to individual and collective self-defense, and also UN Security Council Resolutions 2170, 2199 and 2249, calling for anti-IS actions, are cited.

Apart from that, Berlin refers to clause 7 of Article 42 of the Treaty of Lisbon, which compels EU member states to render any possible assistance and support to their partners, provided that the latter faced armed aggression within its territory. This is the way the President of France F. Hollande defined the acts of terrorism that took place in Paris on November 13. Nevertheless, such a spontaneous measure of the German Government in the absence of the UNSC’s mandate for military intervention into Syria or the relevant official request for help of the Syria leader raises serious questions at the very least. The situation is aggravated by the fact that the UN Security Council Resolutions, to which the German Government makes references, confirm the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria and Iraq. And the statement of German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) about Germany’s non-collaboration with the Syrian Armed Forces and Russian air-space forces sounds quite bizarre.

Traces of Two-Faced Janus

Policy of the Federal Republic of Germany regarding management of conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa region is a glowing example of inconsistency of the foreign policy course of the cabinets led by Angela Merkel. For instance, in March 2011 Germany, along with Russia, Brazil, India, China and Lebanon, abstained on the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 regarding Libya, which established an air-exclusion zone over the territory of this country, that subsequently was used as cover by the military coalition member states for the purpose of rendering assistance to one of the parties to the conflict. However, after a severe reprimand for such a decision from the NATO partners, Berlin opted to win back the lost political points by means of active participation in imposing pressure on Damascus for the purpose of displacement of the then political regime in Syria.

Berlin significantly contributed to drawing up of unilateral Syria-related UN Security Council Draft Resolutions, not supported by Russia and China, which proclaimed that only the Government of Syria was liable for aggravation of the situation in the country and stipulated introduction of sanctions against official Damascus, and also the possibility of external intervention.

Unreasonable instructional reaction of Berlin to Russia and China exercising their veto power in the course of UNSC voting on the Syria-related draft resolution on February 4, 2012, is worth special attention. At the Franco-German Council of Ministers’ meeting held in Paris on February 6 of the same year, Chancellor Angela Merkel expressed her disappointment over the Russian-Chinese position and described it as a short-sighted policy. For the purpose of further search for ways to resolve the crisis in Syria outside the framework of UNSC, Angela Merkel and the then President of France Nicolas Sarkozy advocated the idea of creating a “Friends of Syria” group, whose activities were supposed to be focused on rendering all-round support to Syrian opposition. Germany became a co-chair (together with UAE) of the working sub-group for economic recovery and development of the “Friends of Syria” group, initiating the work aimed at the establishment of the trust fund for financing the opposition in the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR) for this purpose.

Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Germany Guido Westerwelle (FDP) declared at that time that exercising of the veto power by Russia and the PRC became an erroneous decision with an underlying fact that in so doing Moscow and Beijing assumed enormous responsibility for further development of the situation in the SAR.

On July 10, 2013, opening of the media office of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces took place in Berlin. The activity of the above-mentioned coalition, which was, in fact, funded from the budget of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany, had to be concentrated on coordination of rendering assistance to the Syrian opposition through German scientific production associations, and also on establishment and maintenance of contacts with political quarters, non-governmental organizations and mass media of the Federal Republic of Germany. On the threshold of this event, the ambassador and the diplomatic officials of the Embassy of Syria in Berlin were ordered to depart from the territory of Germany.

Military Component of German Activity on Syrian Track

Despite the fact that Berlin excluded the possibility of military intervention into Syria for conflict settlement for some period of time, the leadership of the Federal Republic of Germany actively supported unrelenting pressure on Damascus, including provisions for possibility of military force employment on the basis of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations Organization.

In particular, it is confirmed by the German evaluation of the chemical attack carried out on August 21, 2013, in Ghuta, on the outskirts of Damascus. Berlin, along with other Western partners, hastily blamed the situation on the Government of Syria, which marked the onset of a new propagandist wave for the purpose of imposing pressure on the UN Security Council regarding the Syrian issue. In his statement dated August 28, 2013, Guido Westerwelle appealed to all members of the UN Security Council, and especially to Russia, to support prepared by Great Britain Syria-related draft resolution “in order to elaborate a consolidated position of the global community” associated with the use of chemical weapons in Ghuta.

It must be emphasized that neither London, nor Berlin or any other concerned party provided incontrovertible evidence to the Security Council confirming involvement of the Government of Syria with the chemical attack in Ghuta at the time of submitting of the draft resolution. The text of the so-called “British” draft resolution was, in fact, similar to the UNSC resolution on Libya of 1973 (which established an air-exclusion zone over the territory of this country) later on used by the Western states as a carte blanche for initiating air-force operations in this country.

Moreover, as reported by German expert sources, the FRG has actually made every effort in order facilitate removal of Bashar al-Assad’s regime through the use of force, including by means of preparation of a military attack against the country from the very start of the Syrian conflict. Thus, the German Navy actively participated in gathering intelligence about the military actions of governmental Forces of Syria against armed opposition. German electronic intelligence ships equipped with state-of-the-art tracking devices monitored Syrian regular troops transfer in the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea. The information obtained was furthered to American and British intelligence services while the latter shared this valuable information with Syrian gunmen. Representatives of the Federal Intelligence Service of Germany located on the NATO’s military base in the city of Adana (Turkey) carried out monitoring of telephone conversations and radio communication of Syrian military command.

Apart from that, in response to Turkish address within the framework of NATO allied obligations, Germany, along with the USA and the Netherlands, deployed two Patriot air defense missile systems and up to 400 Bundeswehr’s military men for their servicing on the Syrian-Turkish border (the mandate was extended on January 7, 2015, till January 31, 2016) in accordance with the initial Bundestag decision dated December 14, 2012. Such a measure, from the perspective of the Ministry of Defense of the FRG, shall not serve as the basis for the establishment of an air-exclusion zone along the Syrian-Turkish border, and is intended “solely” for the purpose of air protection of the Turkish territory.

From the very beginning of the crisis in Syria, German expert community made persistent appeals to maintain hard attitude in relation to official Damascus. The Director of the Science and Politics foundation Volker Perthes having close ties with the German Government recommended to proceed with planning of potential actions of NATO regarding Syria depending on the circumstances that will unfold.

The remarkable fact is that the above mentioned “Science and Politics” foundation jointly with the American Institute of Peace with the participation of representatives of the Syrian opposition within an ad hoc working group, established in Berlin, have actively developed a new draft of constitution of Syria since January, 2012 and also have been engaged in discussing implementation of the reforms after the fall of the Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

On the whole, it is crucial to realize that the new status of Germany in the capacity of a full-fledged player of the hostilities theatre in Syria implies unparalleled obligations for Berlin related to prevention of potential military clash with Russian air-space forces. Against this background, statement of the German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen about Germany’s non-collaboration with the Syrian Armed Forces and Russian air-space forces looks symptomatic.

At the same time, in August German Minister of Foreign Affairs Frank-Walter Steinmeier (SDP) stated that he was opposed to the military operation in Iraq and marked with concern that the lesson wasn’t drawn from that “mistake”. Moreover, some steps were taken in Libya while their consequences were not well-though-out. “The country was destroyed, and nobody knew how to overcome the chaos that arose,” the Minister claimed.

We cannot but hope that the decision of the Federal Republic of Germany about Bundeswehr’s involvement in Syria will not cause “regrets” and further aggravation of the international situation.