The defence committee’s chair, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, who is also the deputy leader of Germany’s Free Democratic Party, sits on the DWT’s board. Also on the board is Lockheed Martin’s vice-president for Central and Eastern Europe, Dennis Göge, who used to work as an adviser to the defence ministry.
In recent months, Strack-Zimmermann has successfully pushed for Germany’s Tornado fighter planes to be replaced with Lockheed Martin’s F-35s. This was surprising, as many German and EU politicians have publicly backed the Eurofighter to be the Tornado’s sole replacement. In 2019 the debate caused a ruckus in the government when it was widely reported that the head of the German air force, Karl Müllner, had been fired by then defence minister Ursula von der Leyen for being too outspoken in support of the F-35. So that the government last month announced its decision to procure the F-35 perhaps demonstrates the influence the American company has on German decision-makers.
Strack-Zimmermann and the defence ministry did not respond to openDemocracy’s requests for comment.
While von der Leyen has moved on to become the president of the European Commission, Karl Müllner has recently made a comeback as a lobbyist, working for undisclosed defence companies.
Meanwhile, Dirk Niebel, who served as the minister for economic cooperation and development from 2009 to 2013, is now the chief lobbyist for German arms company Rheinmetall, another likely big winner of the spending bonanza.
Europe’s militarisation
At the European level, it seems arms trade lobbyists also have the ear of those in the corridors of power in Brussels. The amount the arms industry spent on lobbying the EU almost doubled between 2012 and 2017, and a huge increase in European military spending has since occurred. Defence budgets are mushrooming: a new €8bn European Defence Fund, for example, will for the first time make EU public money available for the research and development of high-tech military equipment, while the Orwellian-sounding European Peace Facility, an off-budget initiative beyond the scrutiny of the European Parliament, finances the provision of lethal weapons to countries outside the EU.
The response to the war has been primarily a militarised one and large amounts of sophisticated weaponry has been sent in. This happened on the back of policies developed as a result of arms industry lobbying and positioning themselves as experts. It is likely that this trend will be further entrenched during the war, with arms companies using it as an opportunity not just to boost their profits, but to bolster their roles as key and necessary expert advisers on Europe’s security strategy.
100 billion better ideas
Military spending will make the owners of arms companies richer, but it won’t make us any safer. As we enter the third year of the pandemic – and after much heel-dragging – the German government has finally approved spending €1bn on bonuses for healthcare workers. The amount now looks ridiculous compared with what the military will receive.
It’s for reasons like this that, the weekend before last, activists took to the streets across Germany to protest this unprecedented military spending by presenting '100 billion better ideas' on how the money should be spent. Suggestions included investment in healthcare, a just climate transition, and search and rescue missions for refugees at sea, among others. In the interest of a peaceful and secure future, we must push back against militarism and prioritise these ideas instead.
Comments
We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.