Will Germany's Army Ever Be Ready for Battle?

Freiwillige · 06-27-09, 05:50 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190657000

On June 15, the German army's General Wolfgang Schneiderhan found himself in front of an audience of politicians and senior officers defending military policy - on sleeping bags. Many German soldiers "are whingeing to high heaven," Schneiderhan said at a reception thrown by the parliamentary army ombudsman, complaining about everything from being sent on yet another overseas tour of duty to the "unsuitable" sleeping bags they are given for their deployment in the Congo. Then Schneiderhan did some complaining of his own, noting the tendency for his officers to delegate blame, with no-one taking responsibility for their actions. "We can't guarantee an all-round, feel-good experience for our soldiers," he said.
Schneiderhan's blunt comments do a good job of portraying the German army, or Bundeswehr, as a bunch of whining softies. But there's a serious side to his exasperation. The German army as it stands today is a relatively young creation, born after a period of demilitarization following the end of World War II. A defensive army, the Bundeswehr has become increasingly engaged in international missions and is coming under pressure to step up its involvement in out-and-out warfare. After what Schneiderhan said last week, however, many are wondering whether it's up to the task. (See pictures of East Germany making light of its dark past.)
That question is especially urgent in Afghanistan. Germany is the third-biggest troop contributor to the NATO-led international peacekeeping force there, with 3,700 German troops serving in Kabul and in northern Afghanistan, around Mazar-e-Sharif, where Germany heads the northern regional command. More German soldiers are now being sent to Afghanistan in the run-up to the elections in August, bringing the total number to 4,200 by late summer. There are also plans to send 300 more German troops to the country to help support NATO's deployment of surveillance aircraft.
Germany's Afghan mission is governed by a parliamentary mandate that limits most troops to peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts in the relatively peaceful north of Afghanistan. Even so, at least 35 German soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since early 2002, most recently on Tuesday, when three died near the northern town of Kunduz after their patrol came under fire. The mission is very unpopular back home, but Germany has been feeling pressure from its NATO allies to pull more of its weight and send troops to the south, the scene of fierce battles with Taliban insurgents.
"The German public is still reluctant to accept a combat role for the Bundeswehr," Henning Riecke, an analyst at the German Council on Foreign Relations, tells TIME. "But Germany should become more active in Afghanistan and allow troops to go into combat, if needed even in the south of the country. It's time for Germany to be more flexible in Afghanistan."
That's easier said than done. The legacy of Germany's Nazi past has led to military limits being written into the country's constitution. Germany was demilitarized after World War II ended in 1945, and the process of remilitarization has only developed over time. The Bundeswehr was formed in 1955, when West Germany joined NATO, but the constitution held that the role of Germany's armed forces would be strictly defensive. Initially, the German army's main job was to work with its NATO allies to prevent any attack that might come from Warsaw Pact members.
According to Dieter Krüger, a military historian at the Institute for Military History in Potsdam, it was only after France left NATO in 1966 that Germany's military role became stronger. "In the past, there was no idea of deploying German troops abroad, except in specific cases, like helping in natural disasters," he says. "Up until the end of the Cold War, Germany had a well-trained army, but it was more used to bureaucratic procedures."
Since the 1990s, after reunification, German forces have become more involved in military missions abroad, but there are caveats. The German parliament has to give the green light for any foreign deployment, which it usually does only after long debate. There are currently 247,000 soldiers enrolled in the Bundeswehr and German troops are now serving all over the world, in places such as Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia and Lebanon.
But some say the Bundeswehr, which is a conscript army, is too bureaucratic and ill-equipped to deal with the modern-day challenges of combat. "Germany's armed forces are often overstretched. There are too many bases in Germany, too many personnel and the equipment is often old-fashioned," says Riecke of the German Council on Foreign Relations. "There is long overdue reform underway to make the Bundeswehr leaner. It should be easier to deploy forces quickly abroad," he adds, referring to far-reaching plans to modernize the army's equipment and scale back troop numbers.
In the meantime, General Schneiderhan may have to steel himself for more complaints. U.S. President Barack Obama has pledged to beef up the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, but will he be able to persuade NATO allies, including Germany, to increase their own efforts there? The German parliamentary troop mandate that limits the army mostly to peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts runs out in December, after the federal elections. When that happens, German soldiers could find that uncomfortable sleeping bags are the least of their problems.

Skybird · 06-27-09, 06:28 AM

No conscripts are ordered to international oversea missions, just voluntary professionals go there. And these hardly are whining about sleeping bags. Their complaints are more substantial and relevant. For example the lack of airtransport capacity of German troops in Afghanistan, lacking mine protection in early vehicles that went to Afghanistan, idiotic ROEs etc.

However, since months the Germans are engaged in hours-long firefights in the north now, almost every day. The holiday in the North is over, and the enemy no longer targets the Germans indirectly only, but engages them openly, face to face, and no longer with roadside bombs only, but infantry assaults and long firefights. And it seems the troops on location have learned that they are fighting in a real war. A message that people and politicians at home still have not learned, unfortunately. While the troops are almost completely absorbed by defending themselves and fighting, politicians still give it an appearance as if they are spending all their time with building schools and drilling wells. But that was the past. the present is something very different.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=152786

Schroeder · 06-27-09, 07:17 AM

I think that article is very biased. It leaves out quite a lot of things.
The modernization of the Bundeswehr is already well under way. We will receive new IFV this year (or the next, I'm not sure anymore), the soldiers have G36 rifles, the Leopard2 is regarded by some as the best all round tank, the Luftwaffe has it's Eurofighter Typhoons and Tornadoes, the army flyboys have the new Tiger helicopters and the navy is the proud owner of some hydrogen submarines. So to point at the German army and call it all out outdated and ineffeective is simply wrong.
The main problem is that a lot of the heavier stuff (tanks, IFV) simply is not sent to Afghanistan for reasons that elude me. Another problem is that a lot of rather cheap material is outdated or even non-existent. When I served in 2001/2002 our radios for example where a total disaster. Many soldiers even had to buy their own night vision equipment because they didn't get any when going abroad (at least it has been like that a few years ago maybe something was done about that by now).

And finally, as Skybird already stated, we cant send conscripts to foreign countries. There is a paragraph in our constitution that forbids that. That paragraph should make sure that Germany can never again start a war (it's difficult to raid your neighbours if most of your soldiers have to stay home

). Only professional soldiers can be sent over there.

Skybird · 06-27-09, 08:00 AM

However, there are problems for sure. Logistics, airlifting capacity. The Transalls are becoming extremely old and worn-out. The Airbus replacement is in doubt, and heavily delayed at least. the new IFV is under fire, apperently not as good as it was planned to be. The navy is undersupplied and just two years or so ago still needed to take spare parts from two vessel in order to get a third one operational and ready to travel. The German Tiger has not the same combat capacity as the Spanish and French version. The fleet of transport helicopters is aging.

The main problems come from the political field, assisted by the different role for and perpection of the military in Germany. It is argued that if they would label the war in Afghanistan a war in Afghanistan, they would violate the constitution by participating in that war in Afghanistan. Which makes it a very schizophrenic and unreasonable decision to have gone there from the very beginning. Politicians - always dealing with their delusions instead of realities. They all are thimbleriggers.

Thomen · 06-27-09, 09:37 AM

While I whole heartly agree with you guys, it should not be forgotten that the Bundeswehr does not only gets shafted by the politicians, but also by the population as a whole, which is very unfortunate. Many see the armed forces as a waste of money, hobby nazis or worse. Conscripts are given the impression that what they are doing is worthless and a waste of time and money. In my opinion alot or all of it comes from indoctrinating the Germans how bad they behaved in the past and military service is nothing to be proud of.

Even in the armed forces it self, conscripts were often seen (before my time and during I was there) as the foot man, underlings, servants and often as rather worthless. A very bad thing when it comes to moral in an army.

IMO, the worst thing they could do was shorten the service time for the drafties and reducing the budget.

I know of a lot of drafties that thought about volunteering for the international missions, but unfortunately and as it was said before, the public perception and the political support for those missions is rather limited.
Just to give you an example: When I was in the Bundeswehr, the Somalia deployment was abuot to go into full swing. I was considering volunteering and extending my service time, but my parents werent quite happy with it, and my Dad told me bluntly, he would disown me if I go.

I bet, if the public perception would swing to support those mission, the politicians will follow and provide the funds and support needed to make the Bundeswehr able and more logisticly indipendent from the other participating nations.

Freiwillige · 06-27-09, 01:22 PM

It is a sad and unfortunate series of events that the once most powerful and strongest of military's has been reduced to this. Although globally all western nations once proud forces are in a state of decay. America's included.

Jimbuna · 06-27-09, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

It is a sad and unfortunate series of events that the once most powerful and strongest of military's has been reduced to this. Although globally all western nations once proud forces are in a state of decay. America's included.

When was this?

And if so, for how long?

Raptor1 · 06-27-09, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

when was this?

And if so, for how long?

1870-1871, 1914, 1939-1941...

Jimbuna · 06-27-09, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor1

1870-1871, 1914, 1939-1941...

Highly debatable:

1870's...I doubt the military capability was equal to that of the British Empire.

1914...I seem to recall Paris never fell.

1939...On land perhaps, but only for a short while and only because they prepared in advance. What say ye regarding control of the skies and the seas?

Now 1815 and the Prussians helping at Waterloo, I would readily concede

Raptor1 · 06-27-09, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Highly debatable:

1870's...I doubt the military capability was equal to that of the British Empire.

1914...I seem to recall Paris never fell.

1939...On land perhaps, but only for a short while and only because they prepared in advance. What say ye regarding control of the skies and the seas?

Now 1815 and the Prussians helping at Waterloo, I would readily concede

Oh, though he meant land army...Hmm, even then, they were always outclassed in one way or another, the French had a bigger army in 1940, the Soviets had better tanks and so forth...

06-27-09, 04:38 PM

Quote:

It is a sad and unfortunate series of events ......

Hold on , ain't you the fella that thought neo nazi politicians were a good thing?

Dowly · 06-27-09, 04:40 PM

And here we go.

Jimbuna · 06-27-09, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor1

Oh, though he meant land army...Hmm, even then, they were always outclassed in one way or another, the French had a bigger army in 1940, the Soviets had better tanks and so forth...

No problem.......Rule Brittania

NealT · 06-27-09, 06:39 PM

In my days with the service, I got to know quite a few German military personnel - Army and Air Force types. I would have gladly had any one of them covering my back in a firefight or coming to lay waste to those trying to do me in from the air.

Without question...

Jimbuna · 06-27-09, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly

And here we go.

Behave yersel

06-27-09, 05:50 AM	#1
Freiwillige The Old Man Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Phx. Az Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	Will Germany's Army Ever Be Ready for Battle? http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009062...08599190657000 On June 15, the German army's General Wolfgang Schneiderhan found himself in front of an audience of politicians and senior officers defending military policy - on sleeping bags. Many German soldiers "are whingeing to high heaven," Schneiderhan said at a reception thrown by the parliamentary army ombudsman, complaining about everything from being sent on yet another overseas tour of duty to the "unsuitable" sleeping bags they are given for their deployment in the Congo. Then Schneiderhan did some complaining of his own, noting the tendency for his officers to delegate blame, with no-one taking responsibility for their actions. "We can't guarantee an all-round, feel-good experience for our soldiers," he said. Schneiderhan's blunt comments do a good job of portraying the German army, or Bundeswehr, as a bunch of whining softies. But there's a serious side to his exasperation. The German army as it stands today is a relatively young creation, born after a period of demilitarization following the end of World War II. A defensive army, the Bundeswehr has become increasingly engaged in international missions and is coming under pressure to step up its involvement in out-and-out warfare. After what Schneiderhan said last week, however, many are wondering whether it's up to the task. (See pictures of East Germany making light of its dark past.) That question is especially urgent in Afghanistan. Germany is the third-biggest troop contributor to the NATO-led international peacekeeping force there, with 3,700 German troops serving in Kabul and in northern Afghanistan, around Mazar-e-Sharif, where Germany heads the northern regional command. More German soldiers are now being sent to Afghanistan in the run-up to the elections in August, bringing the total number to 4,200 by late summer. There are also plans to send 300 more German troops to the country to help support NATO's deployment of surveillance aircraft. Germany's Afghan mission is governed by a parliamentary mandate that limits most troops to peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts in the relatively peaceful north of Afghanistan. Even so, at least 35 German soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since early 2002, most recently on Tuesday, when three died near the northern town of Kunduz after their patrol came under fire. The mission is very unpopular back home, but Germany has been feeling pressure from its NATO allies to pull more of its weight and send troops to the south, the scene of fierce battles with Taliban insurgents. "The German public is still reluctant to accept a combat role for the Bundeswehr," Henning Riecke, an analyst at the German Council on Foreign Relations, tells TIME. "But Germany should become more active in Afghanistan and allow troops to go into combat, if needed even in the south of the country. It's time for Germany to be more flexible in Afghanistan." That's easier said than done. The legacy of Germany's Nazi past has led to military limits being written into the country's constitution. Germany was demilitarized after World War II ended in 1945, and the process of remilitarization has only developed over time. The Bundeswehr was formed in 1955, when West Germany joined NATO, but the constitution held that the role of Germany's armed forces would be strictly defensive. Initially, the German army's main job was to work with its NATO allies to prevent any attack that might come from Warsaw Pact members. According to Dieter Krüger, a military historian at the Institute for Military History in Potsdam, it was only after France left NATO in 1966 that Germany's military role became stronger. "In the past, there was no idea of deploying German troops abroad, except in specific cases, like helping in natural disasters," he says. "Up until the end of the Cold War, Germany had a well-trained army, but it was more used to bureaucratic procedures." Since the 1990s, after reunification, German forces have become more involved in military missions abroad, but there are caveats. The German parliament has to give the green light for any foreign deployment, which it usually does only after long debate. There are currently 247,000 soldiers enrolled in the Bundeswehr and German troops are now serving all over the world, in places such as Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia and Lebanon. But some say the Bundeswehr, which is a conscript army, is too bureaucratic and ill-equipped to deal with the modern-day challenges of combat. "Germany's armed forces are often overstretched. There are too many bases in Germany, too many personnel and the equipment is often old-fashioned," says Riecke of the German Council on Foreign Relations. "There is long overdue reform underway to make the Bundeswehr leaner. It should be easier to deploy forces quickly abroad," he adds, referring to far-reaching plans to modernize the army's equipment and scale back troop numbers. In the meantime, General Schneiderhan may have to steel himself for more complaints. U.S. President Barack Obama has pledged to beef up the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, but will he be able to persuade NATO allies, including Germany, to increase their own efforts there? The German parliamentary troop mandate that limits the army mostly to peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts runs out in December, after the federal elections. When that happens, German soldiers could find that uncomfortable sleeping bags are the least of their problems.

06-27-09, 06:28 AM	#2
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,666 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	No conscripts are ordered to international oversea missions, just voluntary professionals go there. And these hardly are whining about sleeping bags. Their complaints are more substantial and relevant. For example the lack of airtransport capacity of German troops in Afghanistan, lacking mine protection in early vehicles that went to Afghanistan, idiotic ROEs etc. However, since months the Germans are engaged in hours-long firefights in the north now, almost every day. The holiday in the North is over, and the enemy no longer targets the Germans indirectly only, but engages them openly, face to face, and no longer with roadside bombs only, but infantry assaults and long firefights. And it seems the troops on location have learned that they are fighting in a real war. A message that people and politicians at home still have not learned, unfortunately. While the troops are almost completely absorbed by defending themselves and fighting, politicians still give it an appearance as if they are spending all their time with building schools and drilling wells. But that was the past. the present is something very different. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=152786 __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

06-27-09, 07:17 AM	#3
Schroeder Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Banana Republic of Germany Posts: 6,170 Downloads: 62 Uploads: 0	I think that article is very biased. It leaves out quite a lot of things. The modernization of the Bundeswehr is already well under way. We will receive new IFV this year (or the next, I'm not sure anymore), the soldiers have G36 rifles, the Leopard2 is regarded by some as the best all round tank, the Luftwaffe has it's Eurofighter Typhoons and Tornadoes, the army flyboys have the new Tiger helicopters and the navy is the proud owner of some hydrogen submarines. So to point at the German army and call it all out outdated and ineffeective is simply wrong. The main problem is that a lot of the heavier stuff (tanks, IFV) simply is not sent to Afghanistan for reasons that elude me. Another problem is that a lot of rather cheap material is outdated or even non-existent. When I served in 2001/2002 our radios for example where a total disaster. Many soldiers even had to buy their own night vision equipment because they didn't get any when going abroad (at least it has been like that a few years ago maybe something was done about that by now). And finally, as Skybird already stated, we cant send conscripts to foreign countries. There is a paragraph in our constitution that forbids that. That paragraph should make sure that Germany can never again start a war (it's difficult to raid your neighbours if most of your soldiers have to stay home). Only professional soldiers can be sent over there. __________________ Putting Germ back into Germany.

06-27-09, 08:00 AM	#4
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,666 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	However, there are problems for sure. Logistics, airlifting capacity. The Transalls are becoming extremely old and worn-out. The Airbus replacement is in doubt, and heavily delayed at least. the new IFV is under fire, apperently not as good as it was planned to be. The navy is undersupplied and just two years or so ago still needed to take spare parts from two vessel in order to get a third one operational and ready to travel. The German Tiger has not the same combat capacity as the Spanish and French version. The fleet of transport helicopters is aging. The main problems come from the political field, assisted by the different role for and perpection of the military in Germany. It is argued that if they would label the war in Afghanistan a war in Afghanistan, they would violate the constitution by participating in that war in Afghanistan. Which makes it a very schizophrenic and unreasonable decision to have gone there from the very beginning. Politicians - always dealing with their delusions instead of realities. They all are thimbleriggers. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

06-27-09, 06:39 PM	#14
NealT Ace of the Deep Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: 2 Meters Below Jimbuna Posts: 1,060 Downloads: 4 Uploads: 0	In my days with the service, I got to know quite a few German military personnel - Army and Air Force types. I would have gladly had any one of them covering my back in a firefight or coming to lay waste to those trying to do me in from the air. Without question... __________________

06-27-09, 09:37 AM	#5
Thomen Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: West Virginia Posts: 1,207 Downloads: 14 Uploads: 0	While I whole heartly agree with you guys, it should not be forgotten that the Bundeswehr does not only gets shafted by the politicians, but also by the population as a whole, which is very unfortunate. Many see the armed forces as a waste of money, hobby nazis or worse. Conscripts are given the impression that what they are doing is worthless and a waste of time and money. In my opinion alot or all of it comes from indoctrinating the Germans how bad they behaved in the past and military service is nothing to be proud of. Even in the armed forces it self, conscripts were often seen (before my time and during I was there) as the foot man, underlings, servants and often as rather worthless. A very bad thing when it comes to moral in an army. IMO, the worst thing they could do was shorten the service time for the drafties and reducing the budget. I know of a lot of drafties that thought about volunteering for the international missions, but unfortunately and as it was said before, the public perception and the political support for those missions is rather limited. Just to give you an example: When I was in the Bundeswehr, the Somalia deployment was abuot to go into full swing. I was considering volunteering and extending my service time, but my parents werent quite happy with it, and my Dad told me bluntly, he would disown me if I go. I bet, if the public perception would swing to support those mission, the politicians will follow and provide the funds and support needed to make the Bundeswehr able and more logisticly indipendent from the other participating nations.

06-27-09, 01:22 PM	#6
Freiwillige The Old Man Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Phx. Az Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	It is a sad and unfortunate series of events that the once most powerful and strongest of military's has been reduced to this. Although globally all western nations once proud forces are in a state of decay. America's included.

06-27-09, 04:40 PM	#12
Dowly Lucky Jack Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 25,054 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	And here we go.