Reform of the Bundeswehr: Defense Policy Choices for the Next German Administration

References

• Hans Binnendijk, "A Trans-Atlantic Division of Labor Could Undermine NATO," International Herald Tribune, April 7, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Some confusion may exist between the ESDI and ESDP, as a report correctly states. "The first originated in the decisions taken by the Atlantic Alliance in Berlin (1996), aimed at giving the European members of NATO the possibility of using the resources and capabilities of the Atlantic Alliance or crisis management. The second is a political project that the European Union has been trying to achieve. That said, these two different approaches share the same goal, i.e. to enable Europe to take on responsibilities on the international stage," See The Development Of A Common European Security And Defense Policy (CESDP) By the European Union And Its Possible Consequences For Switzerland, (Geneva Centre For Security Policy, September 15, 2001), p. 5.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid., p. 10.
   Google Scholar
• See Griephan Briefe, Vol. 36, No. 50, Bonn, December 11, 2000, p. 1.
   Google Scholar
• A point which is also rightly made in Redefining German Security: Prospects For Bundeswehr Reform, p. 26.
   Google Scholar
• Agüera, "Germany's Goal: Systems Compatibility."
   Google Scholar
• Holger Mey, "Mission Impossible," Die Welt, December 8, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Both MUNGO and TERRIER are also armored personnel carriers but they do vary from the DINGO either in how many personnel they can carry or how much protection they offer. See Agüera, "Germany Seeks New Light Armor for Fast New Force."
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera, "German Leaders To Focus on Main Battle Tank Replacements," Defense News, September 10-16, 2001, p. 44.
   Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium der Verteidigung, Bestandsaufnahme. Die Bundeswehr an der Schwelle zum 21. Jahrhundert, (Bonn, May 3, 1999), p. 83.
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera, "Italy, Germany To Pick Maritime Aircraft Contractor," Defense News, November 26-December 2, 2001, p. 6.
   Google Scholar
• Jürgen Koppelin, "Reform der Bundeswehr wurde vertan. Fehlende Mittel verhindern volle Handlungsfähigkeit," Die liberale Depesche, No. 4, June 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium der Verteidigung, Bestandsaufnahme, p. 58.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid.
   Google Scholar
• See Griephan Briefs, Vol. 37, No. 40, Bonn, October 1, 2001, p. 2.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid.
   Google Scholar
• Rob de Wijk, "The Limits of Military Power," The Washington Quarterly, 25:1, (Winter 2002), p. 75. This is also a major lesson drawn in the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review, which was published only weeks after the terrorist attacks on the U.S. See Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review, Washington, D.C., September 30, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• For a good overview on this topic, read Kristin Kolet, "Asymmetric Threats to the United States", Comparative Strategy, Vol. 20, No. 3, July-September 2001, pp. 277-292.
   Google Scholar
• See Rob de Wijk, "The Limits of Military Power," pp. 76-78.
   Google Scholar
• Craig Hoyle, "Europe's A400M gets off the ground at last," Jane's Defence Weekly, July 31, 2000, http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/jdw/jdw000731_l_n.shtml. [accessed November 17, 2001].
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera and Christina MacKenzie, "Memorandum Boosts A400M's Future," Defense News, June 25-July 1, 2001, p. 20.
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera, "German A400M Participation Awaits Purchase Decision," Defense News, August 6-12, 2001, p. 7.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas Barrie and Martin Agüera, "Britain Pushes Germany on European Air Transport," Defense News, September 3-9, 2001, p. 3.
   Google Scholar
• On the parliamentary hurdles, read Martin Agüera and Douglas Barrie, "German Delays May Stall A400M for Partners. Target Date Out of Reach for Parliament," Defense News, November 5-11, 2001, p. 6.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Defense, "Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS)," Fact Sheet, Washington D.C., July 1995, p. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander Szandar, "Angriffe aus Schurken-Staaten. Auf Drängen der USA sollen die Deutschen viele Milliarden in neue Waffen zur Raketenabwehr stecken. Der Nutzen ist zweifelhaft," Der Spiegel, April 17,2000, http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/nfA), 1518,75277.00.htm 1 [accessed December 29, 2000].
   Google Scholar
• Hermann Hagena, Hartwig Hagena, Niklas von Witzendorff, Eine Raketenabwehr für Europa ? Probleme und Erfahrungen mit den Systemen MEADS und PAC-3, (Working Paper 3122, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, Ebenhausen, March 2000), p. 23.
   Google Scholar
• Gopal Ratnam, 'Technology-sharing Plan Beset By Skepticism," Defense News, May 15, 2000, p. 3 and Colin Clark, "Germany, U.S. Resolve Meads Tech Dispute," Defense News, May 29, 2000, p. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Holger H. Mey, "View from Germany: A European Security and Defense Identity-What Role for the United States?," Comparative Strategy, vol. 14, no. 3, July-September 1995, p. 311.
   Google Scholar
• Read Brooks Tigner, "NATO Faces New Political Hurdles in Europe," Defense News, December 18, 2000, p. 10.
   Google Scholar
• On this topic, also see Mary Elise Sarotte, German Military Reform and European Security, Adelphi Paper 340, London: The International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Lothar RühI, "Die Bundeswehr-Reform aus bündnispolitischer Sicht Die gewandelten politischen und strategischen Rahmenbedingungen," Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, B43/2000, pp. 6-7.
   Google Scholar
• Remarks of Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen at the Bundeswehr Commander's Conference, Hamburg Congress Center, Hamburg, December 1, 1999, http://www.defenselink.mil/ speeches/1999/sl9991201-secdefl.html [December 26, 2001]
   Google Scholar
• The official decision to seize the Bundeswehr to 280,000 soldiers is debatable. In its report, the Weizsäcker-commission concluded that, actually, homeland-defense is of rather secondary importance for Germany at the present time. Therefore, it suggested to decrease the number of soldiers to a total of 240,000. In the event of major scale war, Germany would have the time to increase that military potential, the commission argued. That proposal, however, was rejected by the German government. See Franz-Josef Meiers, "The Reform of the Bundeswehr: Adaptation or Fundamental Renewal?" European Security, Vol. 10, No. 2 Summer 2001, pp. 1-11.
   Google Scholar
• See Bernhard Fleckenstein, "Bedingt einsatzfähig: Der lange Weg zur Neugestaltung der Bundeswehr," Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, B43/2000, p. 15
   Google Scholar
• See also Hans-Dieter Lemke, "Bundeswehrreform. Schwachpunkt Krisenfähigkeit;" SVVPaktuell, No. 66, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, Ebenhausen, November 2000, pp. 1-4.
   Google Scholar
• Henning Bartels, "Eine neue Bundeswehr," Europäische Sicherheit, September 2000, p. 13.
   Google Scholar
• Read, for instance, Martin Agüera, Germans Eye Vehicle Mine Threat as Balkans Loom. Existing Fleet Built To Counter Warsaw Pact Invasion," Defense News, August 20-26, 2001, p. 26.
   Google Scholar
• "Materiallage zwingt zur Improvisation," Die Bundeswehr, No. 7, July 2001 ,p. 17.
   Google Scholar
• See Redefining German Security: Prospects For Bundeswehr Reform, German Issues, 25, (American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, The Johns Hopkins University, Washington, D.C., 2001), p. 16.
   Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, "Bedingt einsatzfähig," p. 14.
   Google Scholar
• These numbers are given in Hans-Jürgen Leersch, "Raketen gegen Terror aus der Luft. 6. Serienteil: Die neuen MEADS-Flugabwehrraketen sind heutigen Systemen überlegen," Die Welt, September 29, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera and Gopal Ratnam, "MEADS Fosters Teamwork. Project Forges New Model for Trans-Atlantic Cooperation," Defense News, August 6-12, 2001, p. 1/4.
   Google Scholar
• Gopal Ratnam and Martin Agüera, "Partners Face Hard Choices on MEADS Design Phase. Germany, Italy, U.S. Must Determine Specifics of Missile-Defense Program," Defense News, August 27-September 2, 2001, p. 10.
   Google Scholar
• Horst Kilügel, "Die Rolle des Eurofighter in der zukünftigen Luftwaffe," Soldat und Technik, June 2001, pp. 25-26.
   Google Scholar
• "Die transatlantische Partnerschaft Neue Trends in den deutsch-amerikanischen militärischen Beziehungen," Griephan Special, No. 3, August 2001, p. 2.
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera, "Readiness Failures Cripple German Air Force. Years of Underfunding Relegates Pilots to Secondary Role in NATO Excercises," Defense News, April 30, 2001, p. 1/34.
   Google Scholar
• See Press Notice on behalf of the Defence Ministries of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom, "European governments and industry to cooperate on future capabilities and technologies for combat air systems", Brussels, November 19 2001.
   Google Scholar
• "Die Bundeswehr braucht Hilfe beim Helfen," Yahoo! Schlagzeilen, Berlin, Dec. 16, 2001, http://de.news.yahoo.eom/011216/3/2gblp.html [accessed December 22, 2001]
   Google Scholar
• Christoph Schwennicke, "Scharping wehrt sich gegen Eichels Spardiktat," Süddeutsche Zeitung, September 9, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Dieter WeI lershoff, "Richtige Lagebeurteilung--unzureichende Konsequenz. Eine wichtige Station der Bundeswehr auf dem Weg in eine Ungewisse Zukunft," Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, July 5, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• General Harald Kujat, Material-und Ausrüstungskonzept für die Streikräfte der Zukunft (MatKonz), Berlin, March 16, 2001. Although the content of the concept was dubbed "confidential (GE: VS-NfD)," at the lowest level, major parts of the content have been published in various newsletters and journals in the meantime.
   Google Scholar
• Karl Feldmeyer, "Scharpings Prinzip Hoffnung," Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, October 12, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• "Milliarden-Projekt in der Rüstung. Sieben Staaten unterschreiben Vorvertrag für neues Transportflugzeug," Süddeutsche Zeitung, July 28, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• See Griephan Briefe, Vol. 37, No. 44, Bonn, October 29, 2001, p. 2. Krauss-Maffei Wegmann officials, the producers of the DINGO, have told the author the price for the first 56 DINGOS was 42 million Marks. See Martin Agüera, "Germany Seeks New Light Armor for Fast New Force," Defense News, May 14, 2001, p. 16.
   Google Scholar
• See The Military Balance 2001/2002, London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2001, p. 56.
   Google Scholar
• Tom Canahuate, "Poland Still Interested in German Tanks," DefenseNews.com, December 28, 2001, http://www.defensenews.com [December 28, 2001]
   Google Scholar
• Read Martin Agüera, "Germany's Goal: Systems Compatibility," Defense News, Aug. 27-Sept. 2, 2001, p. 28.
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agäera, "German Companies Pursue Unmanned Vehicles. Government Funds Scarce for Projects," Defense News, January 22, 2001, p. 14 and Martin Agüera, "Money Still Tight for German Armed Force Despite Tax Increases," Defense News, October 15-21, 2001, p. 12.
   Google Scholar
• Frank E. Lippold, "Im Tiefflug. Die vertrackte Situation der Bundeswehr," Berliner Morgenpost, May 21, 2001, p. 2.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Defense, Report on Allied Contributions to the Common Defense, Washington, D.C., March 1998, http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/allied_contrib98/allied98_1.html [December 25, 2001]
   Google Scholar
• Christoph Schwennicke, "Scharpings Rechnung mit Unbekannten. Trotz der Einigkeit mit Eichel ist die Finanzierung der Bundeswehr-Reform so unsicher wie nie zuvor," Süddeutsche Zeitung, June 15, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• "Summary. A Fundamental Renewal," Common Security and the Future of the Bundeswehr, Report of the Commission to the Federal Government, May 23, 2000, p. 16.
   Google Scholar
• Johannes Varwick, "Die Reform der Bundeswehr. Konturen und Defizite einer nicht geführten Debatte," Gegenwartskunde, 3/2000, Fall 2000, p. 321.
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera, "Germany Plans Spending Increases," Defense News, November 5-11, 2001, p. 3.
   Google Scholar
• Martin Agüera, "German Greens Reignite Conscription Debate," Defense News, Aug. 27-Sept. 2, 2001, p. 34. This point is also made in "Die Bestandsaufnahme der Bundeswehr. Kritisches und Nachdenkliches," Griephan Special, No. 3, Bonn, June 1999, p. 2.
   Google Scholar