On Thursday, the 27 foreign ministers of the EU member states formally gave the green light to conducting military training of the European military in Mali. The mission, which will last 15 months, will involve about 200 soldiers from the EU. Former Inspector General of the Bundeswehr Klaus Naumann believes that Europe is getting involved in a protracted conflict.
- Chancellor Angela Merkel said that "free and democratic states cannot agree to let the north of Mali become a stronghold of international terrorism." Can you say that this justification is enough to use the Bundeswehr?
- The statement by the Chancellor was clear and unambiguous. On this occasion, there is a relevant UN Security Council resolution, which is the legal basis for EU decisions on missions of military training in Mali and, most importantly, the participation of West African countries in the fight against the Islamists. It is unfortunate that the EU has wasted so much time before making the decision. In such crises speedy actions are required, and in this case events on the ground were ahead of the EU's plans. The fact that France alone has dared to intervene militarily to prevent the entire territory of Mali from being under the control of Islamists is the right decision. It is good that the government of Germany has welcomed the move.
- Do you think Europe should respond faster? Protests in Mali began in March of 2012...
- Of course, this is more evidence of the immaturity of Europe as an effective force in the resolution of such crises. North Africa is on the outskirts of Europe, and when there is a threat there, Europe must act. The events in Libya have shown that the time when the Americans pulled the chestnuts out of the fire for the Europeans, as they have done since the 1990s, is over.
- Was the period from March 2012 used for finding a political solution to the crisis?
- It's hard to assess, because I do not know what political consultations were held. But, given the current circumstances, a period of 10 months during which there was no visible initiative launched seems to me unusually long. Everyone knew what was at stake, and everyone knows that this whole area - the regions to the south of Morocco up to the regions to the south of Egypt – threatens to become a source of continuing instability in Europe.
- Should Germany also intervene at military level?
- Formally and legally Germany already had a military intervention in Mali by sending two transport aircraft there. Everything else depends on the further development of the situation. Germany cannot leave France in a difficult situation. And the EU cannot just watch the destabilization of northern Africa from the sidelines. If military intervention by the EU is necessary, Germany will have to act on behalf of its partners. So we cannot pre-declare our unwillingness to take "all possible measures". Unfortunately, this was the first reaction of Berlin.
- What should the reaction of Berlin be?
- It is necessary to offer assistance within our capabilities. In this crisis, in addition to the allies, we must also keep in mind the other two parties: the people in the country who are under threat and the Islamists. The former need to know that they will get assistance, and the second should hear that the entire EU will support France in its fight against them. When one of the allies comes up with a reason for not participating in the campaign and says that logistical and humanitarian aid is sufficient it weakens the effect of the EU actions aimed at settling the conflict.
- Is there a danger that Germany will be dismissed by its partners?
- Germany is an important partner of the EU and NATO, but doubts about its reliability since the Libyan campaign have not completely gone. In this crisis there is no accounting balance about who is now implementing different international missions. The bottom line is who has contributed anything to the effective resolution of the crisis. I believe that the continued interest in Germany is related to the fact that it is seen as a reliable partner of the EU and NATO. This should be a guiding light for the government in making its decisions.
- Besides transport aircraft, the government of Germany in the near future is going to send military trainers to Mali. How long can their mission last?
- It's difficult to say. The French president prepared his country for a long combat mission, so the stay of military trainers in Mali cannot be customized to the doctrine of "to start faster to finish faster." The military briefing also implies that trainers should be prepared for the fact that they may be accompanied by their trained troops in combat operations. In addition, after a possible victory over the Islamists, which in itself is a challenge, it is necessary to stabilize the region. All missions since 1991 show that this period is usually very long. Fighting in Kosovo ended in 1999, but German soldiers are still there.
- And in Afghanistan too. Incidentally, in 2001 it was also said that "we should prevent Afghanistan from becoming a stronghold of international terrorism." Can the mission in Mali become a second Afghanistan?
- Those who fought in Afghanistan had enough time to learn the mistakes committed there, so as not to repeat them now in Mali. The beginnings of both campaigns are really similar to each other, because again the goal is to deprive terrorists of their areas to retreat and bases. The fact that Al Qaeda is looking for new areas for its activities after the entry of NATO forces into the Hindu Kush has been known for a long time. We have seen this process in recent years in Somalia and North Africa. "Al-Qaeda" is alive, and its determination to fight against the West has not disappeared. We have to tune in to getting involved in a prolonged conflict. We cannot know where this campaign will lead, but the military intervention of France supported by the UN and the EU should be connected with the confidence that we will bring this mission to a successful end.
- Is there an exit strategy from the military mission in Mali?
- I cannot know that, but I am sure that those who took the French decision to launch a military intervention in Mali thought over the final question of how to get out of the story. In fact, in this situation, we can leave the country only when a democratically-elected government is able to control the entire country on its own and guarantee the prospects for success.
- In addition to Mali, the Bundeswehr is also entrusted with a mission in Turkey. At the same time, now there is the restructuring of the military apparatus of Germany. Does this overload all the army?
- I do not think so, and the minister also would not admit it. But Mali once again shows the total weakness of Europe: the Europeans have about 1.7 million soldiers. The U.S. has 1.7 million soldiers. When we compare what they do, and what can make Europe surrender, something goes wrong. Just imagine: the whole of Europe spends 200 billion euros on defense, but it can use only 10 percent of its military forces. And this fact must be taken seriously by politicians. Europe must come up with new and better solutions to organize its own security. In the future there will be more conflicts of this kind, adding to existing ones. Therefore, the EU and NATO must find a better solution on how to protect the people of Europe from the threats they face with the current costs.
