Germany’s Afghan Dilemma

At home, Germany's armed forces are subject to parliamentary control and thus public opinion, which is shaped by reluctance to participate in genuine combat operations. However, Germany's engagement in NATO and other multinational institutions mandate its participation in foreign troop deployments.

These dual realities create tension. The deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan clashes with Germany's peace-building mandate. Germany contributes the third-largest contingent of soldiers (after the US and the UK) with a mandate of up to 4,500 men. Currently, Germany has 3,720 active soldiers in Afghanistan, not only to help civil reconstruction, but also to secure elections and train Afghan security forces.

Additionally, Germany is confronted with returning veterans who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to an extent not seen since World War II. The Süddeutsche Zeitung, external pagequoting the German Defense Ministrycall_made, finds that 55 traumatized soldiers returned from Afghanistan in 2006. A year later the number increased by 130 to 226 soldiers. And the public's perception is shaped more by Taliban attacks on German troops than by the schools they build in Afghanistan.

With the post-WWII aversion to the use of military power in Germany, it was only in 1994 that Germany's highest court paved the way for foreign troop deployments within the framework of collective security.

As such, German politicians stress Afghanistan’s peacekeeping aspects and continuously resist international pressure to take on more combat responsibility.

Deteriorating security situation

Only gradually Berlin is adjusting the semantics. While previously politicians spoke of “stabilization efforts,” they now increasingly adjust to the language that Afghanistan combat forces have long since used: “war,” “combat” and “killed in action.” German soldiers are now being drawn into combat.  Out of the 35 soldiers killed since the start of Germany’s engagement in Afghanistan, roughly half died in combat.

In mid-June, German forces ordered US air support for the first time since the start of their Afghan mission. Until then, the Bundeswehr had refrained from doing so because of potential civilian casualties. But increasingly, the formerly calm northern part of Afghanistan, where German troops are mainly deployed, is finding itself under attack. During the first week of June, NATO’s ISAF counted more than 400 insurgent attacks.

Parliamentary commissioner for the German armed forces, Reinhold Robbe, recently visited a German camp in Afghanistan where soldiers reported that they were not engaged in civil reconstruction but in genuine warfare, according to an article in Die Welt.

Moreover, German forces are not properly equipped for combat. Several parliamentarians familiar with the situation have long called for more armored vehicles, and the German Parliament has approved the deployment of 300 additional soldiers to assist NATO's AWAC aircraft (Airborne Warning and Control System) operations. Overall, there is a growing trend among politicians and the media to recognize the difficulties the Bundeswehr faces at the Hindu Kush.

In the light of these developments, the German Defense Ministry has awarded medals for bravery. Four soldiers were recently honored for their achievements in Afghanistan. Though such honorary medals have existed before, they were tied to the time that someone served in the army and not to specific deeds. The new bravery medals are meant to honor not only outstanding soldiers but also signify the government's recognition of the Bundeswehr's dangerous mission in Afghanistan.

But as Timo Noetzel, an expert on Afghanistan at the University of Konstanz, maintains, “The demands made by politicians now are more a reactive behavior than a real willingness to address the intrinsic questions of the Afghanistan mission. For instance, the current code of conduct for German soldiers is still based on a stabilizing operation and is not compatible with the deteriorating security situation.”

Soldiers are allowed to use firepower only when attacked or to assist third parties in distress, while NATO’s rules of engagement, on the other hand, allow the use of offensive firepower.

However, Noetzel told ISN Security Watch, “Attempts to address the code of conduct were met with no response from politicians.”

In early June, after ISN Security Watch talked to Noetzel, German Defense Ministry plans to adjust the code of conduct were finally approved in Parliament. The Ministry is currently rewriting the rules of engagement.

The Süddeutsche Zeitung quotes a defense expert of the Social Democratic Party as saying that if reconnaissance drones find armored forces ahead of German troops, “one cannot simply wait until they shoot the soldiers.”

‘Offensive defense’ must be allowed in such situations, experts say.

Prosecution dilemma

In August 2008 a German soldier shot a woman and two children after the car  they were riding in passed through a checkpoint without stopping, leading to an investigation by the district attorney's office. Though the charges were eventually dropped, German forces are subject to domestic jurisdiction and to strict rules of engagement.

Because of the changing reality in Afghanistan, representatives of the Free Democratic Party (FDP) and the Deutscher BundeswehrVerband (a special interest group of soldiers) are demanding a review of the situation, external pageaccording to a recent press releasecall_made.

The current procedure is that the district attorney's office (Staatsanwaltschaft) in Potsdam launches enquiries if a potentially penal case occurs abroad. But the public prosecution, according to the BundeswehrVerband, is not prepared to handle military cases. In the case of the German soldier, the circumstances which led to the shootings could hardly be properly reconstructed in Germany, according to an article in Die Welt.

A special district attorney with a focus on military incidents and with experts on Bundeswehr matters is therefore required, experts say.

Theexternal pageFDP in its 2009 electoral manifestocall_made also demands such an adjusted allocation of responsibilities. The German defense minister has also joined in calls for a revision of the system for such cases.

Nonetheless, as external pageDr Thomas Bulmahn notes in a 2008 reportcall_made, even though the majority of Germans has neither heard of the Afghanistan mission nor knows concrete facts about it, the greater part of the population still supports the German troop deployment to Afghanistan based mostly on the trust they have in the Bundeswehr.

Public opinion, however, tends to depend on when people are asked, rather than what they are asked. Bulmahn’s study, for instance, examines a longer period of time, but more temporary surveys that take place immediately following the death of a German soldier in Afghanistan finds less support for the mission among the public.

Nonetheless, if politics does not respond quickly to the demands of an adjusted strategy in Afghanistan, the mission is doomed to fail both on the ground and at home.