A growing chorus of voices within Germany is challenging the nation’s staunch adherence to the Ottawa Treaty, the international convention banning landmines, citing a shifting geopolitical landscape dominated by Russian aggression. The debate, spearheaded by CDU defense policy expert Bastian Ernst and military historian Sönke Neitzel, represents a potentially seismic shift in German defense and foreign policy, one that risks straining relations with longstanding allies while potentially bolstering deterrence capabilities.
Ernst, in comments published by “Welt” acknowledged the politically sensitive nature of the discussion, conceding it is unlikely to yield electoral success or international accolades. However, he emphasized the paramount importance of ensuring Germany and its allies possess credible deterrents, particularly in the volatile Baltic and Scandinavian regions. These nations, he argued, increasingly view landmines and other defensive systems as crucial components of a robust defense posture.
The reconsideration of Germany’s position comes as several countries, including Finland, Poland and the Baltic states, have initiated processes to withdraw from the Ottawa Convention. This exodus reflects a growing recognition that the treaty’s restrictions may impede national security in an era of heightened conflict risk.
Neitzel cautioned against dismissing the potential ramifications of a treaty breach – reputational damage and international condemnation being foremost among them. “We could say we adhere to the letter of the convention, do not supply mines, fail to protect our troops with such barriers- and risk losing the war. Then we would have lost morally clean. But is that our target?” he questioned, emphasizing the need to prioritize the protection of NATO territory. He accused the current German debate of frequently overlooking this essential military pragmatism.
Drawing a parallel to the contentious debate surrounding the deployment of German Heron drones, Neitzel warned against prioritizing abstract moral considerations over strategic military realities. He pointed to the years of protracted ethical discussion surrounding the drones, a debate that ultimately masked a critical technological lag as other nations rapidly advanced their drone warfare capabilities. “We are now realizing how far behind we are-because we had discussions that had little to do with military reality” he stated.
Beyond merely reassessing Germany’s treaty obligations, Ernst proposed a proactive step: rebuilding domestic industrial capacity for landmine production. He reasoned that reliance on Baltic and Scandinavian states, or an overdependence on the United States, creates vulnerabilities. “We will probably not deploy these systems in Germany first. But we must be able to provide them to our partners – and integrate our own armed forces in such a way that we don’t suddenly have to improvise on the ground in a country like Lithuania”. This suggestion underscores a desire for greater strategic autonomy and a willingness to assume a more assertive defense role within the transatlantic alliance. The emergence of this debate signals a potential reckoning for Germany’s long-held pacifist stance and a move toward a more hard-edged assessment of European security.
