Herbert Remmel
Part One: A War Economy
Dear reader, please forgive me if I introduce a small bit of German lexicology right at the start. I do so for the following reason: day in, day out, all the leading German media outlets—radio, press, and television—address us with one voice: they’re all saying the same: it’s all about “War”. Of course it’s not just the word War on its own: there are various permutations, but they all speak as one: the German people must make itself “combat-ready”: the reason being that, lurking in the East, is the aggressive Russian enemy!
German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius first used the phrase, “combat-ready”, on 5th June 2024 in a speech to the Federal Parliament.
With the end of World War 2, some 80 years ago, words like “combat-ready”, “war-capacity”, “war-worthy”, and “battle-ready”, pretty well dropped out of use in every-day language. Indeed, Duden—the official reference source for correct German usage—for many decades even refused to carry the word Kriegstüchtig [combat-readiness]. It also rejects other blend-words which include the word, ‘war’!
It seems that this year the term Kriegstüchtig qualifies for the non-word of the year!
Of course the twelve years of fascist dictatorship were the high point for these war-related terms here. On 9th July 1944, when the defeat of the German Army could no longer be postponed, the Nazi weekly paper, Das Reich [the realm] led with a front-page Editorial by Propaganda Minister Goebbels: “As Combat-ready As Ever [“Kriegstüchtig wie eh und jeh]”!
But now we see the rebirth of Combat-Readiness—both this historically-loaded term, and its derivatives! It is Boris Pistorius, the Social Democratic Minister for Defence in the Coalition, who is the guilty party here!
It is a fact that anyone talking of combat-readiness is determined to have a war!
There can be no doubt that this determination to fight sums up the policy objectives guiding the Federal Government. And it has to be said that this Social Democrat/Christian Democrat Coalition makes no secret of its intent. It is set out in the Federal Government Policy Document, “Defence Policy Guidelines”, where it is said that the Federal Army must be made “battle-ready”—thereby setting out its orientation: war with Russia.
Given this lead from political leaders, it is hardly surprising that every day we see leading Germany military figures adding their own aggressive and ominous clamour to the mix—always with the same deadly focus, War.
Carsten Breuer is the Senior Inspector General of the German Armed Forces—as the Defence Chief is known in Germany. In somewhat strained German he freely speaks of: “a war we have to want to win, because we must win”. And the oh so very wise Defence Chief knows for sure that—“…an end of the War in Ukraine will not lead to the restoration of peace on the continent of Europe”! That is why, our General continues: “we must have deterrence”. He then adds, using half English, half German: “Credible deterrence is not a “nice to have”, but a “must have”.”
General Alexander Sollfrank is the Commander of the newly created Operational Command Headquarters of the Federal German Armed Forces (about which we have already reported in Irish Political Review). He says frankly, with no fear of contradiction: “We are no longer at peace”. And our ‘Senior Inspector’, General Breuer, adds: “If it comes to a military conflict [with Russia], we cannot come off second best”.
And it has to be reiterated that the leading German media outlets have taken up this bellicose language with hardly an exception—and with not a hint of objective reporting. One might almost speak of thought control and manipulation.
Even German history tells us that Language can condition people mentally and ideologically: prepare them for war. Renate Dillmann, a German journalist and reference book author, has even written a work sub-titled: On The Road To War-Readiness. This analyses the current impact of official terminology in Germany. She writes:
“Anything set out in press releases and background briefing material issued by Government, Military and Companies is uncritically accepted in the main. Thus they transmit “official terminology” to their public, which is to say: the current economic, political, national ideologies and enemy stereotypes.”
But, let us leave sociology and get back to politics: and in particular to a newly-created military formation.
The “Home Defence Force”
The German political Establishment, with its focus on war, has set itself the task of further militarising German civil society. In preparation for a possible war on Russia, the Federal Government is building up a comprehensive Military Reserve. This entails combining the current Home Guard Regiments into a new 6th Regiment, thus creating a Home Guard Division. This Division will be the 4th Army Unit of the German Army.
We quote below the official Federal Ministry of Defence press release, issued in English, about the foundation of the Home Guard Division:
“The Heimatschutzdivision will be formed in Berlin tomorrow [this was in April 2025 HR]. This will make it the fourth division of the army and unites the six Heimatschutzregimenter. Its mission in a state of tension or defense is, among other things, to protect critical infrastructure like railroad facilities, ports, freight handling areas or important roads and bridges. They therefore play an important role in defending Germany and our alliance territory in the event of an emergency.”
A recruitment campaign for the Home Guard has now started, predominantly aimed at young men and women working in the private sector of the economy. After military training they can be called up for military service in the Home Guard. Army Reservists, ex-soldiers, have also been targeted because they are already fully-trained.
By means of this Civil/Military structure the Civil Defence Force functions as a connecting link between the Defence Forces and Civil Society. What we see here is a further militarisation of Civil Society—and it is being pursued with great urgency.
The Government explanation for the need of a ‘Home Guard Division’ is that, in the event of a war against Russia, the bulk of the German Army will be deployed on the Eastern Front. The defenders of the Home Front will secure the Home Front as an operational base and hub for NATO.
It is monstrous that a German Government is once more speaking of an “Eastern Front”: and in a matter-of-fact way, with no inhibitions! There is no thought of the slaughter which must follow! Even now: some 85 years since the last Eastern Front—the Front of the Fascist German Army against Russia—the losses are remembered by practically every adult German citizen. It was their grandfathers, their fathers, their brothers, and, and, and . . . who died in the slaughters ‘over there’—outside Moscow, Stalingrad, and Kursk, and so on.
With more than three million fallen German soldiers, there is scarcely a German family unaffected—not to mention the over five million Russian soldiers that fell!
Yet there hasn’t been a hint of public protest here in Germany against this unfeeling, ahistorical actualisation of the ‘Ostfront’!
Chancellor Merz On A Promotional Tour . . .
Given these developments, it’s hardly surprising to find Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz [Christian Democrat] recruiting for the Home Guard Division. After all, his boast is that he and his Government will make the Bundeswehr the “strongest conventional army in Europe”!
Merz—a former functionary of BlackRock in America—needed no second invite from the Federation of German Industry (Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie—BDI) to participate in its Looking Ahead Conference. He told the entrepreneurs in a good-humoured kind of way that he would be “making use of” them for all sorts of tasks. And, on occasion, employers would find themselves having to release young people in their employ for a week or two, to take part in Reserve Exercises.
Companies, according to Merz, would be “playing an active, creative role” in the expansion of the Federal Forces, and he appealed to the industrialists to co-operate, as “the growth potential of the armed forces” could not be achieved without their support.
To make up for the disruption entailed, the Chancellor promised reduced bureaucracy, tax cuts, and monetary recompense!
And naturally the President of the BDI—representing his interest group of Industrial Capital—had to make a speech in response. He spelled out ‘who was the cook and who was the waiter!’ (roughly meaning: who was calling the shots).
Industry would deliver “the necessary Hardware and the Software to build the defence capacity of Europe”, said BDI President Peter Leibinger. But more could be done than “merely… utilising the factories”. Politics must “more strongly set in motion” the “capacities of the entire industrial ecosystem” of the Federal Republic in order to ensure a “permanently high operational readiness” of the Federal Armed Forces.
He said that the Industry Federation had recently published a Position Paper challenging the German State to forge “close cooperation between the economy and civil society”. (In this respect he was representing the capital-interests of the Data Management company, D.V.). He continued:
“Building up military strength is not enough on its own; for that reason security policy and industrial policy must there be considered together. Germany needs a strong social consensus [against] internal and external threats: the dichotomy between war and peace is outdated”.
This exhortation makes it apparent that Capital is the driving force behind German politics! And its focus is on aggression, war and profit!
Part Two: Maritime Peace?
The Baltic—Mare Nostrum Of NATO?
How does the German Federal Republic—the most powerful European partner of NATO—reconcile the concept of “Defence” with the veiled drive to war of that alliance?
Because Germany has a Baltic Sea coastline, with several ports in the Federal Province of Mecklenburg-Vorpomern, I will first approach this question by examining recent events on the Baltic Sea. The first striking thing is that, with the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organisation] in February 2024, all the countries bordering on the Baltic are now members of NATO—except for Russia!
Because the alliance now dominates the Baltic—and with Russia as an immediate (and self-evidently hostile!) neighbour—NATO is intent on making the Baltic Sea into its “Mare nostrum” [our own sea]—to be under its exclusive control!
In short, NATO members—in order to defend the ‘Free Western World’, and in the light of the escalating tensions with Russia, which they themselves brought about—have agreed to restrict the access of non-NATO members to the Baltic Sea, and make it their own exclusive preserve. To further this militarisation of the Baltic, NATO swiftly stationed a Naval Command on the North coast of Germany, under German command.
This is a clear breach of theTwo Plus Four Agreement, under which East Germany was permitted to unite with West Germany with the proviso that no NATO military forces were to be stationed in the territory of former East Germany (DDR).
This is no minor breach! Having set up a combined Naval Command at the beginning of 2025, there followed a major manoeuvre, Baltops [an abbreviation of Baltic Operations, ed.] which was held in June. Fifty warships, along with 25 aircraft from 17 NATO States, participated—Direction East!
And the mission objective was certainly not the preservation of peace!
Mission Baltic Sentry—A Deadly Danger!
A while before the Baltops marine manoeuvres, at the beginning of the year, NATO members founded Mission Baltic Sentry as a marine mission. Its principal object was to defend critical under-sea infrastructures and to deter potential aggressors and saboteurs in the Baltic. Among the measures agreed were enhanced Vigilance Activities. The overall objective was to further strengthen the NATO presence in the Baltic.
The most recent focus of Baltic Sentry has been to track and ‘deter’ the ‘Russian’ “shadow fleet”. This lurid term has been devised to describe tankers belonging to legitimate international shipping companies which carry ‘sanctioned’ Russian oil. Here it must be mentioned that these ‘sanctions’ have not been imposed by any legitimate international authority. In the light of this, we immediately have to note that it is principally Germany which is carrying out wild breaches of maritime law, and acting in the most treacherous manner.
Here is an example: it concerns the way the German authorities treated the oil-tanker, Eventin: because of engine failure, the ship went out of control and started to drift in the Baltic Sea. With the consent of its Captain, a German tug towed it out of international waters into a harbour on the island of Rügen, where it was repaired with no further complications. However, the ship was loaded with thousands of tons of Russian oil which, because of Sanctions, could not be delivered to Germany.
However, at this point the German authorities declared that the ship would not be allowed to leave German waters, as it had entered illegally. After that the ship, along with its cargo of oil, was declared to be German property. The vessel’s foreign owners then filed a legal action against the German authorities, and the matter remains to be settled in court. But it must be noted that ship and cargo are worth millions of Dollars.
It is an absolute mystery why NATO—and Germany in particular—is playing such an entirely unnecessary and provocative game with Russia in this instance. The Russians, however, are well able to cope with such tactics. In May of this year, the Estonian Navy attempted to halt a tanker from the so-called Russian ‘Shadow-Fleet’ outside Estonian territorial waters. The response of the Russian authorities was to ‘buzz’ the tanker!
It is clear that Russia will no longer tolerate the breach of safe passage of ships to and from Russia through international waters.
An Update On The Eventin
The Federal Government has decided to expand its remit and hold on to the Russian tanker—even though such confiscation has been over-ruled in Court!
However experts in jurisprudence believe that, in this attempt to establish a precedent, Berlin is probably in breach of International Law. And experts in maritime law speak of a “significant escalation”, and even of open “Piracy” !
Conclusion
The focus in all the German media, with hardly an exception, is on Defence, on War, on Armaments, on military capability and the like. Example:
Sunday last [17th August], was the last day of “Hanse Sail” in the Baltic harbour town of Rostock. This was the 34th anniversary of the biggest annual get-together of traditional sailing boats in the Baltic. A festival of sea-faring folk! This year’s collection of 20 gaff fenders and galets, of cutters, Kogen barges, and other craft with masts, offered a maritime performance of top-rank quality: 500,000 visitors attended the Hanse Sail this year.
The Schweriner Volkszeitung, the local paper of the author, carried a full-page spread and resumé about the event, under the following headline: “Popular Festival Cum Defence Contract: Navy Shows The Flag At Hanse Sail”. And, right at the start of the newspaper report, we read: “…among the customary sail-boats ranged the grey rump of the ‘Nordrhein-Westfalen’, one of the most modern frigates of the German Navy”.
The story goes on to say that “In the Baltic” the warship will bring “deterrence—a clear signal to Russia” .
The report did not bother to further mention a past event at Hanse Sail. Up to only three years ago, the Russian Sailing Vessel, Towarischtsch (Comrade) would sail into the harbour, and it was always greeted with acclamation!
It is now three years since any Russian galleon has been invited!
A Last Word!
A kind of War Fever has taken hold, right across the political and economic spectrum, also encompassing a large segment of the German media. And a considerable section of the German citizenry also appears to have been overcome. How far that is really the case will be reviewed by this Column after the next major official Federal Opinion Poll.
Herbert Remmel
PS: Day in day out, the media is full of reports about Ukraine, and future war on Russia. Hardly a word about Israel’s murderous assaults on Gaza!
Operation Shamrock: From Cologne To Ballinlough, A German And Irish Boyhood In WWII and Post-War Years by Herbert Remmel. 172pp. Copious illustrations, including colour. Index. ISBN 1 903497 53 1. Aubane Historical Society, 2009. €18, £15
The Finnish authorities are seeking jail terms for the officers of the ship it accused of deliberate sabotage of undersea cables.
This recent sensitivity to undersea cable damage is part of the propaganda push to invest Russia with evil intent. But what nobody explains is why would Russia be interested in undertaking such activity? And if Russia was indeed interested in such activities why could it not just get its agents to use hired yachts and destroy these cables? After all we are told that this is how the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was destroyed and a gas pipeline is a hell of a bigger challenge than destroying undersea cables.
Baltic cable damage was just an accident, says shadow fleet tanker captain
Master pleads innocence in interview with Finnish broadcaster
Published 22 August 2025
The master of the shadow fleet tanker accused of intentionally damaging subsea cables off Finland says he is innocent.
Georgian Davit Vadatchkoria and two other senior officers face trial on Monday at Helsinki District Court over the Christmas Day incident last year involving the 74,000-dwt Eagle S (built 2006).
“We are innocent, it’s just a marine accident,” the captain told Finnish broadcaster YLE.
He said the product tanker was asked by the Finnish Coast Guard to check its port anchor, which had dragged behind the vessel for 90km.
The master stopped the ship and raised the anchor.
Then “60 or 70 soldiers” boarded by helicopters, Vadatchkoria said, as if there were “terrorists” on board.
The next day, authorities claimed spying equipment had been found on board, a claim they later retracted.
The captain called this “bullshit incorrect”.
The Georgian told YLE the crew had not noticed the anchor dragging along the seabed, blaming bad weather.
He also said the boarding operation was dangerous: “It was a serious breach of maritime safety. We followed all their orders. They had no reason to be so aggressive.
“I trust the Finnish court,” the captain concluded.
The master and first and second officers have remained in the country under suspicion since the incident.
They have been charged with aggravated criminal mischief and aggravated interference with communications.
The Cook Islands-flagged Eagle S, owned by United Arab Emirates-based Caravella, is suspected of damaging the Estlink 2 cable connection from Finland to Estonia, as well as internet lines.
The defendants deny the offences and argue that Finland lacks jurisdiction
In March, Finnish authorities released the ship, which was later sanctioned by the European Union.
—
Irish Political Review 