As of: February 2, 2024, 4:36 p.m
By: Tadhg Nagel
Comments
Press
Split
A former paper from the Union of Values has come to light.
In it she calls for “negotiated peace for Ukraine” – and supports Trump.
Berlin - When asked about possible cooperation between the Union of Values and the Alliance Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW), the Union of Values likes to justify the exclusion of the cooperation with, among other things, Sahra Wagenknecht's alleged proximity to Russia.
However, as a leaked document shows, the position of the right-wing conservative splinter group of the Union on the Ukraine war is similar.
The document, posted on the social media platform Reddit on Friday, is titled “AK Security Policy on the Ukraine Conflict: Negotiated Peace for Ukraine” and is dated November 7, 2022.
It is signed “On behalf of the SiPol working group;
Daniel Bornholdt, Eugen Radtke, Marion Köhler, Jan-Christian Lewitz”.
The document originally comes from the Union of Values website.
It is no longer available there;
In the internet archive “Wayback Machine”, however, it does.
The Union of Values around Hans Georg Maaßen calls for “negotiated peace for Ukraine” in the document – and stands behind Donald Trump.
© IMAGO/
Union of Values calls for an “immediate stop to the spiral of escalation” - and stands behind Donald Trump
The first sentence already gives rise to suspicion.
The Security Policy Working Group of the Union of Values, it says, supports the demands of “Harald Kujat (n-tv, October 12, 2022), Hans Georg Maaßen, Donald Trump” as well as “the Swiss National Council and Weltwoche boss Roger Köppel”.
Like the people mentioned, they want an “immediate stop to the spiral of escalation in the Ukraine conflict”.
They are also in favor of “establishing a ceasefire”, “freezing the conflict” and a “subsequent negotiated peace”.
Its basis should be the “Istanbul Conference without NATO membership of an independent Ukraine”.
The now deleted position paper of the Union of Values.
© ValuesUnion
Donald Trump has distinguished himself in many ways when it comes to the Ukraine war.
However, by no means in a way that deserves the support of a sub-group of a party in the Bundestag that acts in the interests of the Federal Republic.
When Vladimir Putin's troops invaded Ukraine in the spring of 2022, the former US president said it was "brilliant".
Putin is “a man who is very clever,” which is shown not least by the fact that he declared a large part of Ukraine independent and sent “peacekeepers” there.
At the same time, Trump claimed: “This would never have happened to us.”
Joe Biden, on the other hand, would fail when dealing with Russia.
Humanity facing “nuclear annihilation” – the Union of Values has its own security concerns
Given the possibility of Trump's second term in office, it seems even more strange that the Union of Values, which now wants to become its own party, supports the former president's foreign policy statements.
During his first term in office, Trump almost caused NATO to collapse at the alliance's summit in Brussels in 2018.
“It is doubtful whether the military alliance would survive a second Trump term in office,” writes the
ARD Tagesschau
.
To do this, the ex-president does not even have to withdraw from the alliance, which he described as “obsolete”.
It is enough if he leaves doubts as to whether the USA would intervene in the event of an alliance.
After all, the alliance is largely based on the promise of protection from its most powerful member.
My news
Martens and leopards: Ukraine is building a “German” tank brigade
Survey hammer for AfD: Wagenknecht party on the rise – traffic light continues to be read deeply
Ukraine model boat “Magura V5” sinks Russia’s warship – read “Like Kill Bill”.
Direct hit against Putin's Crimean troops: Ukraine achieves unique air strike reading
Heavy losses for Russia: tank fleet is easy prey for Ukraine
22 mins ago
Free Voters Minister does not speak at a demonstration against the right - and criticizes reading “Gschmäckle”.
For the Union of Values, however, other security concerns are at the forefront of the document.
“After the absorption of eastern Ukrainian regions into the Russian Federation,” it reads, “a new level of escalation in the Ukraine conflict was reached with the blowing up of the Crimean bridge and the subsequent retaliatory strikes.”
This would mean that these areas “officially fall under the Russian defense policy military doctrine,” which does not rule out the use of nuclear weapons in the event of “an existential threat.”
“Never before in history” has “humanity been so close to nuclear annihilation.”
Ukraine war is “not Germany’s war” – Union of Values sees Germany in the role of mediator
A world war, even a “conventionally waged one”, should “not be accepted for geostrategic considerations of the West (and the East)”.
“Based on its historical experience as a middle power, Germany has always played the role of mediator” – a sentence that is only true if two world wars are completely ignored.
In any case, it is clear that the Union of Values must continue there in order to put “diplomacy back in the foreground”.
Under no circumstances should it become “a war of the NATO defense alliance”.
After all, the Union of Values said in the letter, the conflict in Ukraine “is not Germany’s war”.
“The longer this cruel conflict continues, the more the people of Ukraine, Russia and the rest of Europe will suffer,” the document said.
However, Germany and the EU have lost their international credibility, which is why “the levers to ease the situation” no longer lie with them - a statement that is in strong contradiction to Germany's required role as a mediator.
The conflict can only end, the Values Union concludes, if “the USA and Russia are also prepared to negotiate”.
Even if the last sentence is true, more than a year later there have still been no ceasefire negotiations.
On the one hand, the position of the Union of Values ignores the fact that Ukraine must also be ready for negotiations.
On the other hand, there is no peace solution of any kind in sight.
There is much to suggest that a long war of attrition is more realistic than early negotiations.
Is that why the Union of Values deleted the paper?
(tpn)