WIf he is attacked, he is allowed to defend himself. If the law does not protect against existential threats, then it is only law in form. That is why the United Nations Charter speaks of the “natural right of individual or collective self-defense” in the event of an armed attack. Just as every person who defends themselves against an unlawful attack is not committing illegal vigilante justice but is upholding the law, no state has to accept a violation of its integrity. Because it's about the whole thing.
Of course, it also applies: How you react to aggression is also an expression of self-determination. But the defense against an attack can be effective. Israel does not have to limit itself to intercepting Hamas rockets and eliminating terrorists encroaching on its territory. It may eliminate the source of ongoing attacks – but at the same time not make civilians the target of its attacks. The situation in the densely populated Gaza Strip reveals a dilemma, but does not change Israel's right to self-defense.
The battle in Ukraine, which has now lasted almost two years and has largely turned into a trench warfare, has also led to a trench warfare of opinions. However, in their own interest, no people or state should forget that freedom and self-determination, sovereignty and integrity and – and last but not least – human rights are defended here. If the Moscow regime's flagrant and ongoing violation of international law were to be tolerated and made permanent, it would affect the entire international community and the existence of every state.
It is the right of all civilized nations to prevent the expansion of hostilities and to prevent greater bloodshed. But one should not act as if the law prevents assistance for a victim who has been attacked. Ukraine is of course allowed to meet Russia on Ukrainian territory occupied by Moscow, which, by the way, still includes Crimea. But it is also allowed to attack military targets in Russia itself, which Kiev has already done without acting in any way obviously disproportionately. Any state can come to Ukraine’s aid. Also Germany.
Trust Ukraine
It would be highly questionable to interpret the Basic Law, i.e. this alternative to the criminal Nazi state, as if it prevented the defense of a victim of totalitarian politics of conquest. Now, the supply of weapons and training of armed forces are undoubtedly different from the deployment of German soldiers in Ukraine or the programming of targets by German soldiers in this war.
And yet the endless Taurus debate misses the point of view of what is important. The constitutional reality has long since moved beyond the stage that the Bundeswehr can only be used internally to defend one's own country and under certain conditions.
Innovatively and with a view to the changed world situation, the Federal Constitutional Court also approved deployments of the Bundeswehr within the framework of, as the Basic Law states, “systems of mutual collective security”, provided that the Bundestag approves in individual cases. Anyone who does not want to deploy the Bundeswehr, with the result that the Bundestag would not have to deal with it either, should trust Ukraine and let it select the target for the cruise missiles. Ukraine is already being defended with German weapons – the federal government's fears that Leopard battle tanks would be sent to Moscow have proven to be unfounded.
Prevent wars of aggression
Anyone who wants to deliver Taurus but doesn't trust the Ukrainians shouldn't be afraid. The Bundestag would probably agree. And the Federal Constitutional Court? A system of collective security does not necessarily have to be consolidated in an alliance. The right to collective self-defense enshrined in the UN Charter also applies. Furthermore, Germany has a constitutional obligation to prevent wars of aggression. Should the defensive German basic order really be interpreted in such a way that one cannot provide military support to a European state against an aggressor?
The crux of the problem is the federal government's lack of will to provide Kiev with what it can and what is desperately needed. Germany's contribution so far is more than considerable – especially in relation to France and Great Britain. If help is not given, the Russian madness of conquest will continue. Therefore, the peace mandate of the United Nations and the Basic Law should be taken seriously. Against a merciless aggressor, against whom even Gandhi would probably have offered more than just unarmed resistance, peace must be achieved with weapons.
#Ukraine #War #Creating #peace #German #weapons