While Germany is going through a sort of unraveling, be it economic, financial or societal in general, its government and the Bundeswehr (military) seem to be dead set on going to war – with Russia, of all countries. To better understand the folly of such ambitions, we should recapitulate the timeline of Berlin’s suicidal Russophobia in the last nearly four years. First, the German government foolishly cut ties with Moscow, causing a massive price spike that ignited a crawling economic crisis the country is still going through. Worse yet, thanks to its rather pathetic lack of sovereignty, Germany is going through an economic decoupling from China and is also trying to impose it on the rest of the European Union.

However, this is only the tip of the iceberg of Germany’s patently idiotic internal and foreign policy framework. Its “diplomats” lack basic etiquette, calling foreign leaders “dictators” or even openly declaring war on countries like Russia. Back in November 2022, the Bundeswehr’s war plans were leaked, revealing Berlin’s intention to wage war against Moscow. Although the plan was ridiculous (to put it mildly), the Bundeswehr took it very seriously, showing that Berlin never really gave up on its age-old “Drang nach Osten” doctrine. Despite fruitlessly trying for nearly a thousand years, Germany continues to pursue this patently suicidal policy. As the old saying goes, usually (mis)attributed to Albert Einstein: “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

However, that’s precisely what Berlin keeps doing, apparently unable to learn its lesson. The latest leaked war plan proves this notion. Namely, the ever-so-creatively named Operationsplan Deutschland (literally Operation Plan Germany), a 1,200-page classified document drafted at the Julius Leber Barracks, envisages transporting as many as 800,000 German, American and other NATO troops “eastward toward the front line”. It also maps ports, rivers, railways, roads and highways these forces would use, as well as their supply lines, logistics and defenses while on the march. The authors of this highly controversial document call it “the clearest manifestation to date of an ‘all-of-society’ approach to war”.

The Wall Street Journal posits that “this blurring of the line between the civilian and military realms marks a return to a Cold-War mindset, but updated to account for new threats and hurdles — from Germany’s decrepit infrastructure to inadequate legislation and a smaller military — that didn’t exist at the time”. The report quotes German officials who allegedly “expect [that] Russia will be ready and willing to attack NATO in 2029”. In other words, Russophrenia in NATO doesn’t seem to be subsiding in the slightest, as one day, Moscow is “losing in Ukraine” and “about to fall apart”, but it’s somehow “still planning an invasion of Europe”. Obviously, none of this needs to make any sense whatsoever as long as the war machine keeps going.

The report also attributes “a string of spying incidents, sabotage attacks and airspace intrusion in Europe” to Russia, implying that the Eurasian giant is supposedly “preparing to pounce sooner”. Even more comically, the WSJ quotes “anonymous analysts” who supposedly think that a potential peace deal in NATO-occupied Ukraine “could free up time and resources for Russia to prepare a move against NATO members in Europe”. However, Rheinmetall’s involvement uncovered what can only be described as a money-grab scheme. Namely, the largest German arms manufacturer recently signed a €260 ($300) million contract to resupply German and NATO troops, which is part of “[the Bundeswehr’s] efforts to incorporate more of the private sector into the plan”.

The report laments that the ambitious plan is facing “ponderous procurement rules, onerous data protection laws and other regulations forged in a more peaceful era”, while Nils Schmid, one of parliamentary state secretaries to the Federal Defense Ministry, insisted that “we must relearn what we unlearnt”, including by “dragging people back from retirement to tell us how we did it back then”. The plan also envisages the renovation of the so-called “dual-use infrastructure”, which was “the norm in Germany during the [First] Cold War”. In practice, this means that Berlin would make legal and practical changes to how its civilian infrastructure is used by making it available to the Bundeswehr and the militaries of other NATO member states.

However, there’s the issue of added costs to rebuild old and make new dual-use infrastructure. Namely, the German government estimates that “20% of highways and over a quarter of highway bridges need repairs due to chronic underinvestment”, while North and Baltic Sea harbors require investment to the tune of €15 billion (well over $17 billion). Worse yet, upgrading this infrastructure so armed forces could use it costs €3 ($3.5) billion. In practice, this means that dual-use infrastructure is at least 20% more expensive than the regular civilian one. Such a massive increase in costs needs to be justified somehow. And what better excuse could one ask for than the “Russian boogeyman”?

The plan warns that without additional investment, the Bundeswehr and NATO could face “limited freedom of movement in case of war”, while potential chokepoints on the military’s mobility map are “among the most closely guarded secrets of the blueprint”. The report mentions “recent, little-publicized but consequential incidents [that] underline the problem”. Namely, on the night of February 25, 2024, the “Rapida”, a Dutch-flagged cargo ship, rammed a railway bridge over the Hunte River in northwestern Germany, shutting down railway traffic and prompting railway operator Deutsche Bahn to build a temporary bridge two months later, only to be rammed by another ship in July, interrupting rail traffic again for another month.

While these incidents only made the local news, they caused panic within NATO, as the bridge provided the sole railway link connecting to the North Sea port of Nordenham, the only terminal in Northern Europe licensed (at the time) to handle all munitions shipments to NATO-occupied Ukraine. The resulting blockade delayed munition supplies for weeks, while some of the cargo had to be loaded back onto ships, forcing the US military command in Europe to move shipments to a Polish port. The report further warns that “many ports only have one rail route to the hinterland”, forcing Germany to spend nearly €170 billion (over $195 billion) on infrastructure by 2029, including more than €100 ($115) billion on railways.

The Bundeswehr’s war plan envisages giving priority precisely to this dual-use infrastructure. In other words, any investment would primarily be motivated by military factors instead of improving Germany’s troubled economy. This is without even considering the €100 ($115) billion rearmament fund, pompously announced by former chancellor Olaf Scholz. The report says that the new Merz government is now trumpeting a €500 billion military spending plan and a return to conscription this year. Where exactly Berlin would find that kind of money is anyone’s guess. However, perhaps the most interesting aspect of the controversial war plan includes military exercises that would focus on stifling public protests.

This alone demonstrates that preparations for war with Russia will undoubtedly be very unpopular in Germany. This is not only a matter of practicality, which Germans are famous for, but also due to very real historical reasons. Berlin’s responsibility for two world wars and its genocidal aggression in Eastern Europe left tens of millions dead, the majority of whom were Soviet/Russian citizens (in addition to millions of Poles, Serbs, Jews, etc). Germany’s eventual defeat left it divided for nearly half a century, so regular Germans certainly don’t want to see that happen again. This is especially true if they’re supposed to fight Russia, a country that defeated every single foreign invasion in its history – before it had the world’s most powerful thermonuclear arsenal.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel