As we sit here in West Berlin this morning, we are just discussing the news about the wall - its open and may soon be no more!!!!
Amazing sights to see on the way to work this morning - DDR (East German) cars on the streets, DDR citizens everywhere, traffic jams near the wall, celebrations in the streets the whole night.
A historic day, and one to be celebrate. During the night, not only did people cross over via the border crossings, but people also climbed over the wall, danced on top of it (yes that's right) and a part of the wall was even damaged. Can you picture people dancing on top of the Berlin wall?
Congratulations to the people of East Germany.
Gunter Zschoche, Michael Brady, et al Nixdorf, Berlin
In article <8...@nixbln.UUCP>, zscho...@nixbln.UUCP (zschoche) writes: > Berlin den 10 November 1989
> Unbelievable! > Incredible! > Historic!
> As we sit here in West Berlin this morning, we are just discussing the news > about the wall - its open and may soon be no more!!!!
> Amazing sights to see on the way to work this morning - DDR (East German) > cars on the streets, DDR citizens everywhere, traffic jams near the wall, > celebrations in the streets the whole night.
> A historic day, and one to be celebrate. During the night, not only did > people cross over via the border crossings, but people also climbed over > the wall, danced on top of it (yes that's right) and a part of the wall was > even damaged. Can you picture people dancing on top of the Berlin wall?
> Congratulations to the people of East Germany.
> Gunter Zschoche, Michael Brady, et al > Nixdorf, Berlin
Congratulations to all Germans!!
(BTW, why isn't anybody in this newsgroup interested in this?)
In article <1...@cc.helsinki.fi> LEI...@cc.helsinki.fi (Teemu Leisti) writes: >In article <8...@nixbln.UUCP>, zscho...@nixbln.UUCP (zschoche) writes: >> Berlin den 10 November 1989
>> Unbelievable! >> Incredible! >> Historic!
>Congratulations to all Germans!!
>(BTW, why isn't anybody in this newsgroup interested in this?)
Couldn't agree more! Well, do many West Germans want reunification? Any East Germans on the net? (0.5*:-)) Are these events anything to do with reunification? Is reunification interesting anyway? What do you think?
Personally, I miss the objectivism debates - Come back Magnus, all is forgiven! This silence is exactly what I feared when people called for banning objectivists. You *need* people with strong faiths for a good ding-dong... :-)
=========================================================================== Stewart Tansley STC Technology Ltd +44 279 29531 x2763 London Rd, Harlow, CM17 9NA, UK d...@stl.stc.co.uk ...uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!dswt =========================================================================== If you love something, set it free. If it doesn't come back, hunt it down and kill it! ;-) (Thanks to AT) ===========================================================================
In article <2...@stl.stc.co.uk> "Stewart Tansley" <d...@stl.stc.co.uk> writes: >Well, do many West Germans want reunification? Are these events anything to >do with reunification? Is reunification interesting anyway? What do you think?
I understand from my contacts in BRD that reunification is not a big issue at the moment. It's more a case of let's wait and see - there's a long way to go yet. I think it was very insensitive of Dr. Kohl to go blundering into Berlin the way he did, talking about one Germany. It must have been very embarrassing for Willy Brandt who is much more in tune with the people of Berlin.
>Personally, I miss the objectivism debates - Come back Magnus, all is forgiven!
Actually I unsubscribed because the newsgroup seemed to have been taken over entirely by the objectivism debate. I decided to look in again because of the events in Eastern Europe.
In article <2...@stl.stc.co.uk> "Stewart Tansley" <d...@stl.stc.co.uk> writes: >Couldn't agree more! Well, do many West Germans want reunification? Any East >Germans on the net? (0.5*:-)) Are these events anything to do with >reunification? Is reunification interesting anyway? What do you think?
Just after the Berlin Wall was opened I was speaking to someone who came from West Berlin. Her reaction was "Oh no, all those East Germans with their appalling accents will be coming over"
On the subject of reunification, the next day on the Today program on BCC Radio 4 they were interviewing various "notable" people about the situation. A very interesting comment was made by some notable Frenchman that Germany has only ever been unified between ~1890 and 1945 and it wasn't exactly as runaway success then.
david shepherd INMOS ltd
>Personally, I miss the objectivism debates - Come back Magnus, all is forgiven!
d...@stl.stc.co.uk (Stewart Tansley) writes: >In article <1...@cc.helsinki.fi> LEI...@cc.helsinki.fi (Teemu Leisti) writes: >>(BTW, why isn't anybody in this newsgroup interested in this?) >Couldn't agree more! Well, do many West Germans want reunification? Any East >Germans on the net? (0.5*:-)) Are these events anything to do with >reunification? Is reunification interesting anyway? What do you think?
As I came home too late to see any news on November 9th, and didn't read a newspaper in the morning, the first time I heard about the opening of the borders was on eunet.politics. Since then I have watched this newsgroup and was really disappointed as no articles were submitted concerning this topic. However, I didn't want to start a discussion about reunification here, as I felt this should be done by non-Germans. Maybe other people in Germany thought the same way.
As far as I watched, talk.politics.* were concerned with their own business, as was soc.politics. On the german Newsgroup sub.politik ( translation of "politik" needed? ), however, a discussion began, but flaming this or that politician was the issue.
I doubt that any East German Computer is on any network, at least legally. Forgot the Cocom-agreement? But maybe guests from the GDR ar here?! If they get access to the computers... And, some days ago, a former east german computer scientist told on TV that he had found a well paid job in West Germany soon after he arrived. He now works for one of our major military-equipment companies...
Opinions about reunification are different, here in West Germany. Different generatons think differently: Older people still remember times when Germany was one state, or when the separation was much less self-evident as it is now (or was, until now). Our generation has never known any east border than that to GDR. On the other hand, both Germanies have much more in common than just the language. It is hard to say what, but I often get the feeling that they have much more in common with the west germans than, e.g., the french or the dutch. But this refers to Austrians and german-speaking Swiss' too, and no one wants really to be 'reunified' with Austria or Switzerland. In my opinion, if the borders within Germany are as open as those to Austria and Switzer- land, in both directions (currently the East Germans can easier come and go as we West Germans), and the currencies free exchangeable at a fair rate, there is no more need for reunification. Other people may think different. But I think, with a reunification there would arise some very hard problems:
>Personally, I miss the objectivism debates - Come back Magnus, all is forgiven! >This silence is exactly what I feared when people called for banning >objectivists. You *need* people with strong faiths for a good ding-dong... :-) >========================================================================== = >Stewart Tansley STC Technology Ltd >+44 279 29531 x2763 London Rd, Harlow, CM17 9NA, UK >d...@stl.stc.co.uk ...uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!dswt >========================================================================== = >If you love something, set it free. >If it doesn't come back, hunt it down and kill it! ;-) (Thanks to AT) >========================================================================== =
Hey, where's all those other Germans?! Am I all alone around here?
Well, I am from West Berlin, maybe I should comment on that German Reunifica- tion debate.
Our constitution says we all must strive for final reunification of Germany. I have always thought of that as the formation of a Republic of Germany consist- ing of and limited to the FRG, the GDR, and all of Berlin.
We should leave the "German" territory east of the Oder-Neisse border (Poland's present western border) well alone. The Poles should keep that forever.
I personally am in favour of reunification. It will solve a lot of problems we are now having with visitors and refugees (oops, they don't have to flee any more, they just come over) from the East. The come over, get those 100 DM, and start shopping. Then they go back. They bring public transportation to the brink of collapse around here. I am really happy they can come and go to their heart's content, but if they all come at once, they spell trouble.
Then they have those *nasty* stinking cars ... well, many problems.
But reunification does not depend on us alone. The East Germans must be in favour of it too. And I don't think they are, at least not right now.
My opinion is this: If we (all Germans) want it, let's do it. I get angry looking at all those false friends (US, UK, France, ...) who have been paying lip-service to the idea for four decades and have always silently (or sometimes even openly) opposed it.
If they are Western Democracies, they must favour self-determination of the German people. If they fear for their security, all right: Defend us, at as far as I am concerned, there does not have to a German army. I like that idea very much. -- \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany // || |\ /| E-mail mart...@netmbx.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!tmpmbx!netmbx!martini || || | | | ---------------------------------------------------------------- || // Voelker der Welt, schaut auf diese Stadt! \\
[ Sorry for having inadvertedly posted an uncomplete version of this Article before. #@%$!@-Computers! ]
d...@stl.stc.co.uk (Stewart Tansley) writes: >In article <1...@cc.helsinki.fi> LEI...@cc.helsinki.fi (Teemu Leisti) writes: >>(BTW, why isn't anybody in this newsgroup interested in this?) >Couldn't agree more! Well, do many West Germans want reunification? Any East >Germans on the net? (0.5*:-)) Are these events anything to do with >reunification? Is reunification interesting anyway? What do you think?
As I came home too late to see any news on November 9th, and didn't read a newspaper in the morning, the first time I heard about the opening of the borders was on eunet.politics. Since then I have watched this newsgroup and was really disappointed as no articles were submitted concerning this topic. However, I didn't want to start a discussion about reunification here, as I felt this should be done by non-Germans. Maybe other people in Germany thought the same way.
As far as I watched, talk.politics.* were concerned with their own business, as was soc.politics. On the german Newsgroup sub.politik ( translation of "politik" needed? ), however, a discussion began, but flaming this or that politician was the issue.
I doubt that any East German Computer is on any network, at least legally. Forgot the Cocom-agreement? But maybe guests from the GDR ar here?! If they get access to the computers... And, some days ago, a former east german computer scientist told on TV that he had found a well paid job in West Germany soon after he arrived. He now works for one of our major military-equipment companies...
Opinions about reunification are different, here in West Germany. Different generatons think differently: Older people still remember times when Germany was one state, or when the separation was much less self-evident as it is now (or was, until now). Our generation has never known any east border than that to GDR. On the other hand, both Germanies have much more in common than just the language. It is hard to say what, but I often get the feeling that they have much more in common with the west germans than, e.g., the french or the dutch. But this refers to Austrians and german-speaking Swiss' too, and no one wants really to be 'reunified' with Austria or Switzerland. In my opinion, if the borders within Germany are as open as those to Austria and Switzer- land, in both directions (currently the East Germans can easier come and go as we West Germans), and the currencies free exchangeable at a fair rate, there is no more need for reunification. Other people may think different. But I think, with a reunification there would arise some very hard problems:
1) The economic differences between both Germanies will, if this is not prevented, lead to a sell-out of East Germany. Literally! The course was 5DM:100M for east german money, yesterday, and it is said that some west germans are already collecting M to buy houses etc. in East Germany when the borders are completely open. I get the impression that most West Germans are not willing to spend a single DM of their personal wealth for reunification. 2) Both Germanies belong to different political blocks, and none of the blocks will let 'their' Germany go to the other one. West Germans would not want to change, too. I don't know about the East Germans. So the only solution would be a reunified neutral Germany. Other states don't seem to like this idea much. Germany can't do this without consent of her neighbours. And, if it ever comes to a war, Germany will be the battlefield, despite all neutrality.
Another point is, that in most West Germans' imagination, reunifications means merely swallowing East Germany, politically and economically.
This doesn't exclude reunification forever. If GDR has achieved a certain economic standard, and the military blocks become more and more meaning- less, and we West Germans learn to accept East Germany as a political unit herself instead of Uncle Ivan's front garden, then reunification may be on the agenda.
In another article, d...@inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd) wrote::
>On the subject of reunification, the next day on the Today program on >BCC Radio 4 they were interviewing various "notable" people about the >situation. A very interesting comment was made by some notable Frenchman >that Germany has only ever been unified between ~1890 and 1945 and >it wasn't exactly as runaway success then.
Germany was unified between 1871 and 1945. But unified does not refer to a centrally governed state, like France. Germany was always, from the early middle ages to now, except between 1935 and 1945, a federation of (more or less) souvereign states. (Hitler deprived the states of the second empire of their souvereignity.) From the 10th century to the end of the 30 years war in 1645, there was the 'Reich', the first german Empire, a collection of kingdoms and duchesies with one of the kings as emperor. His power dependet on his personal power and abilities and on the local kings and dukes, but most times he was really gouverning. This changed 1645, but the empire existed on, formally. The emperor, however, was now politically meaningless. This empire ceased to exist in 1815.
esgibtkeinausgezeichnetesinertialsystemalleinertialsystemesindgleichwertig | Oliver Bonten | From inside Germany: Lehrstuhl D f. Mathematik | mathed@rwthinf RWTH Aachen | | From outside Germany: D-5100 Aachen | F...@DACTH51.bitnet West-Germany | | The above are Institute's accounts, so add a 'to: Oliver Bonten' - line
In article <1...@cc.helsinki.fi> LEI...@cc.helsinki.fi (Teemu Leisti) writes: >In article <8...@nixbln.UUCP>, zscho...@nixbln.UUCP (zschoche) writes: >> Berlin den 10 November 1989
>> Unbelievable! >> Incredible! >> Historic!
>> As we sit here in West Berlin this morning...
I must say I felt extremely jealous of Berliners that weekend... It w a s a momentous occassion, a cathartic release of decades of tension.
What is happening in central Europe is a rapid, domino collapse of Stalinism, due in no small part to Solidarnosc and Gorbachov... The opportunities for the future are immense. But I believe we may be in for some surprises with erstwhile purveyors of "freedom and democracy" resisting the necessary military adjustments and questions of nation status. After all, there is an awful lot of investment and self-interest involved with military funding that will drive some people into hankering after the "status-quo". My hope is that the current movement sows the seeds for a de-militarised Central Europe that can prosper and spread to the nether regions.
>Couldn't agree more! Well, do many West Germans want reunification? Any East >Germans on the net? (0.5*:-)) Are these events anything to do with >reunification? Is reunification interesting anyway? What do you think?
Well, Stewart, I can't speak for "the Germans", though I'm one (more or less). But personally, I'm strictly against reunification for several reasons. First, I fear that the equilibre in the mid of Europe may be destroyed by the existence of an economic superpower which a "re"united Germany would be, without doubt. This would be a major concern for our neighbours, I guess. Second, the people of the GDR is the first who completed successfully a revolution in the German-speaking part of Europe since 600 years. That valuable example might be extinguished by a simple absorption of East Germany by West Germany, which would be the inevitable result of a reunification. Third, I believe that socialism is more than the poststalinist dictatorship of Ulbricht resp Honecker. Most even of the GDR opposition groups don't want to abandon socialism. Giving them the chance to go their way might be in favor of all of us. If they decide to finally abandon socialism and go th capitalist way, ok. If they succeed to build up a socialist and democratic society, as well not bad at all for us all. I regard it foolish to declare the final victory of capitalism, now. There are such lots of internal and global problems in the world and in all countries that competing ways to build up and maintain a society serve us all. That would be impos- sible in case of reunification. Fourth, the problem of the two military treaty systems remains unsolved. Absorbing the GDR into a NATO member FRG would mean a kick into the face of Gorbachew, who encouraged the changes in GDR, an might be intolerable for the USSR. On the other hand, a neutralization of whole Germany might be intolerable for the USA and the NATO.
>Personally, I miss the objectivism debates - Come back Magnus, all is forgiven! >This silence is exactly what I feared when people called for banning >objectivists. You *need* people with strong faiths for a good ding-dong... :-)
I agree that eunet.politics turned dull after Magnus' leave. It's a shame that flamig is the best way to keep a discussion alive.
>========================================================================== = >Stewart Tansley STC Technology Ltd >+44 279 29531 x2763 London Rd, Harlow, CM17 9NA, UK >========================================================================== =
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >Hey, where's all those other Germans?! Am I all alone around here?
Hi, Martin, I'm here. :-)
>Well, I am from West Berlin, maybe I should comment on that German Reunifica- >tion debate.
>Our constitution says we all must strive for final reunification of Germany. I >have always thought of that as the formation of a Republic of Germany consist- >ing of and limited to the FRG, the GDR, and all of Berlin.
Not completely true. There is a statement like that in the preliminary comment of the constitution. It's more than questionable that it forms a duty to all citizens. Personally, I don't feel compelled by it. But let's leave that to the lawyers.
>We should leave the "German" territory east of the Oder-Neisse border (Poland's >present western border) well alone. The Poles should keep that forever. agreed
>I personally am in favour of reunification. It will solve a lot of problems >we are now having with visitors and refugees (oops, they don't have to flee >any more, they just come over) from the East. The come over, get those 100 DM, >and start shopping. Then they go back. They bring public transportation to >the brink of collapse around here. I am really happy they can come and go to >their heart's content, but if they all come at once, they spell trouble.
I don't see at all how a reunification should hinder East Germany's population to rush in . On the long range, the sitution will normalize - with or without reunification. Maybe that the West Berlin subway has to be extended, well - why not.
>Then they have those *nasty* stinking cars ... well, many problems.
Do you think that GDR people will burn their trabbies on a reunifica- tion party? Even the Honecker government planned to modernize the Trabant and Wartburg engines - no reunification necessary for that. Technical aid from West German car producers would be helpful, anyway.
>But reunification does not depend on us alone. The East Germans must be in >favour of it too. And I don't think they are, at least not right now.
Right. They know very well that reunification would mean absorption - and not everything in West Germany is bright example for our poor, under- developed brothers and sisters in the East :-) .
>My opinion is this: If we (all Germans) want it, let's do it. I get angry >looking at all those false friends (US, UK, France, ...) who have been paying >lip-service to the idea for four decades and have always silently (or sometimes >even openly) opposed it.
I strictly disagree. Those countries (including Poland, USSR and others) sacrificed 50 million lives in order to roll back German expansionism. Concerns about their safety and independence are basically legitimate and have to be respected by any German government. And concerning lip-services (is that the right expression?): West German overnment is one of the worst (concerning hypocrisy). They offered free immigration to all German nationals in Eastern countries in order to put hazard on communist governments. Now, they are about to reduce immigration, because those countries were that nasty to follow what they were urged to. Same with freedom of movement: nice to be used for anticommunist campaigns, but now, West Germany imposes compulsory exchange on Polish citicens and closes the borders for refugees as much as they can. What is freedom of movement worth while if you can go outside your country, but nobody lets you come in?
>If they are Western Democracies, they must favour self-determination of the >German people. If they fear for their security, all right: Defend us, at as >far as I am concerned, there does not have to a German army. I like that idea >very much.
Well, I wouldn't bother (a) demilitarized Germany(s), too. But note that an economic superpower is a legitimate subject of concern, as well.
>-- > \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany // > || |\ /| E-mail mart...@netmbx.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!tmpmbx!netmbx!martini ||
Dr. Erhard Sanio Tempelhofer Damm 194 , 1000 Berlin 42, Phone xx49-30-7521197 e...@netmbx.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!tmpmbx!netmbx!es e...@athen.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!sinix!athen!es
In article <1...@rwthinf.UUCP> mat...@rwthinf.UUCP (Lehrstuhl fuer Mathematik D) writes:
>However, I didn't want to start a discussion about reunification >here, as I felt this should be done by non-Germans. Maybe other people in >Germany thought the same way.
I think, many people (e.g. me) feared to be considered neo-nazistic when talking about these matters. And I mean: by Germans, not foreigners. This danger is quite real here in Germany! But why non-Germans. Don't they have their own problems? Who on earth does REALLY STILL fear Germany?
>And, some days ago, a former east german >computer scientist told on TV that he had found a well paid job in West Germany >soon after he arrived. He now works for one of our major military-equipment >companies...
Really? (Surprise, surprise! :-))
>On the other hand, both Germanies have much more in common than just >the language. It is hard to say what, but I often get the feeling that they >have much more in common with the west germans than, e.g., the french or the >dutch. But this refers to Austrians and german-speaking Swiss' too, and no one >wants really to be 'reunified' with Austria or Switzerland.
At least both Germanies have one thing in common: Berlin. And that's a strong reminder of what's the differrence between Austria/Switzerland and East Germany. (Or just consider the names... :-))
>In my opinion, >if the borders within Germany are as open as those to Austria and Switzer- >land, in both directions (currently the East Germans can easier come and go >as we West Germans), and the currencies free exchangeable at a fair rate, >there is no more need for reunification. Other people may think different. >But I think, with a reunification there would arise some very hard problems:
Very true. One of these problems IS the exchangeability (any short word for this?) of the currency. I still do believe there is a need for reunification (consider the situation in Berlin in the above scenario) and I am NOT neo-nazistic, nor 'Republican' (German meaning).
P.S. Maybe the header (From: etc.) of this is in a mess. It's not my fault. At least that's what I hope. :-)
Snail mail: | E mail: h...@trillian.informatik.uni-dortmund.de Hasko Heinecke +------------------------------------------------- Ostenbergstr. 97 | Computers are different from telephones! D-4600 Dortmund 50 | Computers do not ring! -Tanenbaum
Sorry to post again, but I MUST answer that article.
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >But personally, I'm strictly against reunification for several reasons. >First, I fear that the equilibre in the mid of Europe may be destroyed by >the existence of an economic superpower which a "re"united Germany would be, >without doubt.
Well, maybe they would have some PROFIT of this as well. This was the idea behind the uniting of Europe, wasn't it?
>Second, the people of the GDR is the first who completed successfully a >revolution in the German-speaking part of Europe since 600 years.
REALLY! I always knew East Germany is a museum. Only the tickets are quite expensive - 25 DM. (When you enter East Germany you must exchange 25 DM per day into some, uh, currency called Mark der DDR, I think.) 1/2 :-)
>That valuable example might be extinguished by a simple absorption of >East Germany by West Germany, which would be the inevitable result of >a reunification.
Would it? Don't be more catholic than the pope. (German proverb)
>Third, I believe that socialism is more than the poststalinist dictatorship >of Ulbricht resp Honecker.
Ok, just go on believing. It's not forbidden. Fortunatly.
>Most even of the GDR opposition groups don't >want to abandon socialism. Giving them the chance to go their way might be >in favor of all of us. If they decide to finally abandon socialism and go >th capitalist way, ok. If they succeed to build up a socialist and democratic >society, as well not bad at all for us all.
All right.
>Fourth, the problem of the two military treaty systems remains unsolved. >Absorbing the GDR into a NATO member FRG would mean a kick into the face of >Gorbachew, who encouraged the changes in GDR, an might be intolerable for >the USSR. On the other hand, a neutralization of whole Germany might be >intolerable for the USA and the NATO.
There was something, in Prague, you know, some years ago, I can't quite remember... The Soviets (not Gorbachew) couldn't tolerate that as well. See? 1/2 :-) or less.
Snail mail: | E mail: h...@trillian.informatik.uni-dortmund.de Hasko Heinecke +------------------------------------------------- Ostenbergstr. 97 | Computers are different from telephones! D-4600 Dortmund 50 | Computers do not ring! -Tanenbaum
: :[...] However, I didn't want to start a discussion about reunification :here, as I felt this should be done by non-Germans.
Huh? You *ARE* a non-German, right? So you should have started one! (Or was that a typo?)
:I doubt that any East German Computer is on any network, at least legally. :Forgot the Cocom-agreement?
Well, I think some computers may be exported to the East (C64s are no longer forbidden, or are they?), and they do have their own MS-DOS-based (or equi- valent) machines. But I have heard that possession of communation equipment (modems, couplers) is against East German law.
:[...] It is hard to say what, but I often get the feeling that they :have much more in common with the west germans than, e.g., the french or the :dutch. But this refers to Austrians and german-speaking Swiss' too, and no one :wants really to be 'reunified' with Austria or Switzerland. In my opinion, :if the borders within Germany are as open as those to Austria and Switzer- :land, in both directions (currently the East Germans can easier come and go :as we West Germans), and the currencies free exchangeable at a fair rate, :there is no more need for reunification. Other people may think different.
At least I don't. You captured my feelings very well, better than I could have done. -- \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany // || |\ /| E-mail mart...@netmbx.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!tmpmbx!netmbx!martini || || | | | ---------------------------------------------------------------- || // Voelker der Welt, schaut auf diese Stadt! \\
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >Well, Stewart, I can't speak for "the Germans", though I'm one (more or less). >But personally, I'm strictly against reunification for several reasons. >First, I fear that the equilibre in the mid of Europe may be destroyed by >the existence of an economic superpower which a "re"united Germany would be, >without doubt. This would be a major concern for our neighbours, I guess. > [ ... ] >Fourth, the problem of the two military treaty systems remains unsolved. >Absorbing the GDR into a NATO member FRG would mean a kick into the face of >Gorbachew, who encouraged the changes in GDR, an might be intolerable for >the USSR. On the other hand, a neutralization of whole Germany might be >intolerable for the USA and the NATO.
I think you are lacking some imagination here. There can be no doubt that after the events of the last couple of months (starting with the Hungarians opening their borders) there is no way back the the previous post-war state. With East and West loosing more and more reasons to be scared of each other, the military blocks will loose importance - they may be gone soon.
Sure, all the politicians in east and west keep telling the opposite, but that's just because they would rather keep things the way they were. For those in power, the status quo was much more comfortable as it is now, where no one really knows what's going to happen. How do they want to motivate further spending on arms when all those bad guys aren't bad any more? Sooner or later (and I believe sooner) the peoples of Europe will be fed up with this (if they aren't already), and what good are those military blocks then?????
The East bloc obviously start disintegrating, politically and militarily. The West bloc won't survive that; if there is no East bloc, NATO will fall apart quickly. So, what's the problem? I certainly will feel more at ease with _less_ weapons. So will most people, I think. And besides, I think it's time Europe is being run by Europeans, not by Americans and Russians.
With respect to German re-unification: there is no way that we can build a free and peaceful Europe if the right to self-determination is _not_ granted to the Germans. There is no freedom with two classes of nations, self-determining ones and others.
Let's make a "gedankenexperiment". Short of a military coup in either Moscow or E-Berlin (with immense bloodshed), there seems to be no doubt that the GDR will see free elections soon. Let's suppose they take place some time next year. Let's further suppose, the newly elected GDR parliament passes a law to conduct a plebiscite on re-unification. Let's assume, a clear majority of the GDR population says yes. What's going to happen? Will they sent tanks? Russian ones? American ones? Neither Russians nor Americans (nor the French nor the British) would like that to happen, but are they going to say no? Can they do so openly with the whole world watching?
If the people want it, it's got to happen, no matter how others like the economical power of a united Germany. With respect to the (legitimate) safety interests of our neighbours, that is certainly a problem that can be solved. A peace treaty, to finally and officially end WW2, certainly would help (really the only way to guarantee the borders of, say Poland).
To imply that the Germans, once united, are bound to resort militarism is nothing but racism. Nor is there a serious reason to believe that. There is much less nationalism in Germany than in most other European countries. And the Germans have finally learned the lessons. Depriving them further of their rights will only work the wrong way. -- Gernot Heiser Phone: +41 1/256 23 48 Integrated Systems Laboratory CSNET/ARPA: heiser%iis.ethz...@relay.cs.net ETH Zuerich UUCP (new): hei...@iis.uucp CH-8092 Zuerich, Switzerland UUCP (old): {uunet,mcvax,...}!iis!heiser
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >>Hey, where's all those other Germans?! Am I all alone around here?
>Hi, Martin, I'm here. :-)
Yes, me too. UP here!
>>Well, I am from West Berlin, maybe I should comment on that German Reunifica- >>tion debate.
me too.(well, not any more. But, in the immortal words of A.S.: I'll be back. Hey! I think I'll put that in my .signature!)
>>Our constitution says we all must strive for final reunification of Germany. I >>have always thought of that as the formation of a Republic of Germany consist- >>ing of and limited to the FRG, the GDR, and all of Berlin.
I don't know whether I've posted this before or not, if I have, well, here it is again. The Federal Republic of Germany does NOT HAVE a constitution. There is only the "GRUNDGESETZ", which is NOT a constitution. West Berlin does have a constitution. (And I clearly remember having been given a copy of: "Das Grundgesetz & Verfassung von Berlin" many years back.) We will not have a constitution until we get a peace treaty, and we can't get a peace treaty until we're unified. (N.B. this is how I understand it, and how my father explained it to me. He has a politics degree so he *should* know. Anybody claim otherwise?)
>>We should leave the "German" territory east of the Oder-Neisse border (Poland's >>present western border) well alone. The Poles should keep that forever. >agreed
strongly agreed. Just leave everybody else's territory _well_ alone. And decrease the size of the army; what do we need it for? (I mean, come on!)
>tion party? Even the Honecker government planned to modernize the >Trabant and Wartburg engines - no reunification necessary for that.
Hey, didn't you hear? Trabbis now get VW Polo engines! (This is no :-)
>Technical aid from West German car producers would be helpful, anyway.
see line above
>>My opinion is this: If we (all Germans) want it, let's do it. I get angry [....] >Well, I wouldn't bother (a) demilitarized Germany(s), too. But note that an >economic superpower is a legitimate subject of concern, as well.
How? Do you really think economic reasons are legitimate for not wanting a unified Germany? To who? the Americans? or the EEC? I am wondering about something: How many Germans out there _want_ the Bundeswehr? Since this is apparently an 'academic' network, I don't think many will. (So far the score is 3-0 against the Bund) [Maybe that's we've had 3/3 Berliners]
>>-- >> \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany //
>In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >>We should leave the "German" territory east of the Oder-Neisse border (Poland's >>present western border) well alone. The Poles should keep that forever. >agreed
But Russia still keeps the bits of Poland it stole after collaborating with Hitler?
In article <1...@castle.ed.ac.uk> ai...@castle.ed.ac.uk (Nicolai A. Czempin) writes:
The Federal Republic of Germany does NOT HAVE a constitution. There is only the "GRUNDGESETZ", which is NOT a constitution.
As the Grundgesetz forms the base of the decisions of the ``Verfassungsgericht'' (``consitution court'', which is the german Supreme Court), it is functionally equivalent to a consitution. The inventors of this consitution (``die V\"ater des Grundgesetzes'') chose not to name it ``Verfassung'' because it was intended as temporary, as you correctly stated.
... We will not have a constitution until we get a peace treaty, and we can't get a peace treaty until we're unified.
I always thought it were just the other way round: We're not gonna be unified until there is a peace treaty.
(N.B. this is how I understand it, and how my father explained it to me. He has a politics degree so he *should* know. Anybody claim otherwise?)
No, if he has a politics degree, then he *should* know.
>In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >>... >>My opinion is this: If we (all Germans) want it, let's do it. I >>get angry ...
No, sorry, not ``all Germans'' want it. At least, I certainly don't. So let's not do it.
``Ich mag Deutschland so gerne, da\ss{} ich am liebsten zwei davon habe.''
``I like Germany so much I rather have two of them.''
(Probably incorrect quotation attributed to multiple persons, possibly Alfred Grosser) -- Simon Leinen.
In article <1...@castle.ed.ac.uk> ai...@castle.ed.ac.uk (Nicolai A. Czempin) writes:
>In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >>In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >>>We should leave the "German" territory east of the Oder-Neisse >>>border (Poland's present western border) well alone. The Poles >>>should keep that forever. >>agreed >strongly agreed. Just leave everybody else's territory _well_ alone. And >decrease the size of the army; what do we need it for? (I mean, come on!)
That's great :-). But how about those 19-35% (time&event dependent) surveyed in opinion polls in FRG who d o n' t agree with the present border and think that it should be changed?
In article <m...@cs.qmc.ac.uk> (Matthew Huntbach) writes: >But Russia still keeps the bits of Poland it stole after >collaborating with Hitler?
Hmm, these territories were integrated into the republics of Lithuania, Byelorussia and Ukraina (not Russia!) which consider them as their own. So the opinion in Poland is now identical to the opinions expressed above: They should keep these territories forever.
In article <1...@laura.UUCP> h...@trillian.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Hasko Heinecke) writes: >In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >>First, I fear that the equilibre in the mid of Europe may be destroyed by >>the existence of an economic superpower which a "re"united Germany would be, >>without doubt.
>Well, maybe they would have some PROFIT of this as well. This was the idea >behind the uniting of Europe, wasn't it?
Hey, what is all that crap about? There are about 80 million Germans. They are ONE (1) people and if they choose so, have the internationally acknowledged right to live in ONE (1) state.
If the French are not so numerous, is that our fault? Hardly. If Germany really becomes an economic superpower, that will be (um, uh...) deserved, and not unjust on anybody. The French (and all the others) have no right to deny us our freedom and unity because they are so few! (And their econmy is less healthy than ours [West Germany's].
As an aside, it will take years and years for Germany to emerge as an economic superpower. Ten or more year's work will go into the now-GDR to get that shit (oh, sorry: sh*t) up to Western standards. Only then will we have energy left to get an economic giant on the world's markets.
>>Third, I believe that socialism is more than the poststalinist dictatorship >>of Ulbricht resp Honecker.
>Ok, just go on believing. It's not forbidden. Fortunatly.
No, it's not. I believe that too.
>>Fourth, the problem of the two military treaty systems remains unsolved. >>Absorbing the GDR into a NATO member FRG would mean a kick into the face of >>Gorbachew, who encouraged the changes in GDR, an might be intolerable for >>the USSR. On the other hand, a neutralization of whole Germany might be >>intolerable for the USA and the NATO.
STOP IT OR I'LL CRY! The Nato is a defensive pact. If we no longer want to be defended by them, we can leave NATO, and NO nation with any self-respect should even think of stopping us.
Yes, I know that does not include the US. But shall we go on being intimidated by that hamburger-munching bunch of arrogant s*ckers?
Let make me one thing clear: I favour reunification only if the East Germans want it too, and I don't see that now. I see a chance to try some democratic socialism in the GDR, and I'd hate to see it wasted. If that doesn't work, we can still annex them :-) But they should try their way first, and we should help them, with no strings attached. Maybe it works. -- \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany // || |\ /| E-mail mart...@netmbx.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!tmpmbx!netmbx!martini || || | | | ---------------------------------------------------------------- || // Voelker der Welt, schaut auf diese Stadt! \\
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: >In article <1...@laura.UUCP> h...@trillian.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Hasko Heinecke) writes: >>In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >>>First, I fear that the equilibre in the mid of Europe may be destroyed by >Hey, what is all that crap about? There are about 80 million Germans. They are >ONE (1) people and if they choose so, have the internationally acknowledged >right to live in ONE (1) state.
That's what I deny. I think Mr. Momper had the point when he spoke about "the people of the GDR". Maybe, the populations of West and East Germany could become one people again in case of reunification, actually they are not. Actually, the young Turk national born here is more my compatriot than somebody born and grown up in Dresden or Leipzig. You see that the definition of "the German people" is not that easy.
>If the French are not so numerous, is that our fault? Hardly. If Germany really >becomes an economic superpower, that will be (um, uh...) deserved, and not >unjust on anybody. The French (and all the others) have no right to deny us >our freedom and unity because they are so few! (And their econmy is less >healthy than ours [West Germany's].
It would be a quite different discussion whether or not economic superio- rity of industrialized countries is "deserved" at all. I leave that topic for practical reasons (pls refer to underdevelopment discussion some weeks ago). Anyway, I believe that those nations who sacrificed 50 million lives in defense of their sovereignty and freedom in WWII have a legal right to interefere into changes of the continental equilibre. Look at what our government is doing now in the field of economic blackmail against the GDR people - maybe you can understand concerns of our neighbours. Btw., as a whole, they are lots more numerous than the Germans and have a legal right to take part in the determination of the future European landscape.
>As an aside, it will take years and years for Germany to emerge as an economic >superpower. Ten or more year's work will go into the now-GDR to get that shit >(oh, sorry: sh*t) up to Western standards. Only then will we have energy left >to get an economic giant on the world's markets.
In case of substantial disarmament, there would be enough money to do that very fast. The GDR is no underdevoloped state at all. They have qualified workers and scientists, well organized child care and education and a lot more preconditions for economic growth. IMHO, mainly the patronizing, illusionary and poorly organized command economy hindered faster progress, there. Even simply looting out that system leaving the lower third of population in misery (Reaganist model) would be a good business.
>>>Third, I believe that socialism is more than the poststalinist dictatorship >>>of Ulbricht resp Honecker. >>Ok, just go on believing. It's not forbidden. Fortunatly. >No, it's not. I believe that too.
Well, maybe we have less differences than it seems :-)
>>>Fourth, the problem of the two military treaty systems remains unsolved. >>>Absorbing the GDR into a NATO member FRG would mean a kick into the face of >>>Gorbachew, who encouraged the changes in GDR, an might be intolerable for >>>the USSR. On the other hand, a neutralization of whole Germany might be >>>intolerable for the USA and the NATO. >STOP IT OR I'LL CRY! The Nato is a defensive pact. If we no longer want to >be defended by them, we can leave NATO, and NO nation with any self-respect >should even think of stopping us.
Sorry for you :-) . Anyway, the NATO is a pact for defense of capitalism, without doubt. I'm not that sure that we may easily leave it (it would be worth while an attempt - reunification or not).
>Yes, I know that does not include the US. But shall we go on being intimidated >by that hamburger-munching bunch of arrogant s*ckers?
Don't like that statement. I know & like a lot uf US people. But as I under- stand, you mean we should ignore US govt. pressure when intending e.g. to leave NATO. Maybe I agree so far, but the US as well have a legal right to be interested in stability in Europe. Don't forgot that Hitler concerned them, too.
>Let make me one thing clear: I favour reunification only if the East Germans >want it too, and I don't see that now. I see a chance to try some democratic >socialism in the GDR, and I'd hate to see it wasted. If that doesn't work, we >can still annex them :-) But they should try their way first, and we should >help them, with no strings attached. Maybe it works.
As stated before, we obviously haven't that much differences. Anyway, I regard it important to respect the security considerations of a l l our neighbours - in the East as well as in the West. Don't forget that - at least theoretically - a reunited Germany might not only be governed by well-behaving people but by, say a chancellor Waigel, vice-chancellor Schoenhuber and foreign Minister Czaja. Actually, at least we in West Berlin are protected against such a nightmare - or even a worse one. So are our neigbours (more or less). At least the Poles have a neigbou- ring country which expressively accepted their Western border etc.
>-- > \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany //
Dr. Erhard Sanio, Tempelhofer Damm 194, 1000 Berlin 42, West Berlin
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: >Don't forget that >- at least theoretically - a reunited Germany might not only be governed >by well-behaving people but by, say a chancellor Waigel, vice-chancellor >Schoenhuber and foreign Minister Czaja.
This is a perspective which makes a lot of people in Poland feel uneasy about the future and why they are not terribly happy about German reunification. Herr Czaja is a nightmare guy there and his statements were often used by communist propaganda to justify a need for total subordination to the Soviet Union.
> Actually,>At lWest >Berlin are protected against such a nightmare - or even a worse one.
I don't understand this - I thought that there will not be any West Berlin in reunited Germany but only Berlin, its capital.
>So are our neigbours (more or less). At least the Poles have a neigbou- >ring country which expressively accepted their Western border etc.
Both FRG and GDR expressively accepted the border, so there is not any legal problem now. But after reunification tht the problem will start over again as the right-wing legalists say in FRG. This, and a perspective of an economic giant with capital only 80 km from the western border of economically weak Poland makes people there uncertain.
>Dr. Erhard Sanio, Tempelhofer Damm 194, 1000 Berlin 42, West Berlin
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP>, sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: > In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: > >In article <1...@laura.UUCP> h...@trillian.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Hasko Heinecke) writes: > >>In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes: > >>>First, I fear that the equilibre in the mid of Europe may be destroyed by > >Hey, what is all that crap about? There are about 80 million Germans. They are > >ONE (1) people and if they choose so, have the internationally acknowledged > >right to live in ONE (1) state. > That's what I deny. I think Mr. Momper had the point when he spoke about > "the people of the GDR". Maybe, the populations of West and East Germany > could become one people again in case of reunification, actually they are not. > ..... > Anyway, I believe that those nations who sacrificed 50 million lives > in defense of their sovereignty and freedom in WWII have a legal right > to interefere into changes of the continental equilibre.
I have seen this figure of 50 millions lives quoted several times in the debate, and am somewhat surprised by it. Actually, I have the impression that it includes German deaths as well, my memory recalling me of something like 25M deaths in the USSR, almost the same in Germany, and much less in the other countries. The number of French deaths in WW-I, for one thing, was about three times larger than that of WW-II.
Beside, the assertion that the French are globally opposed to German reunification is contradicted by both opinion polls, which show about the same kind of split opinions as the German polls although not for the same reasons, and by the official statements of the French government, e.g. the very formal statement of M. Mitterand during a joint press conference with M. Kohl: that Germans are one people, that they deserve the right to let state and nation boundaries coincidate, but that one should indeed ask their opinion to the East-Germans too. The add-on is that the natural harbour for reunification is the European community, and that one should avoid to start a war with Russia on that subject...
In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> sa...@netmbx.UUCP (Erhard Sanio) writes:
:In article <3...@netmbx.UUCP> mart...@netmbx.UUCP (Martin Ibert) writes: :>Hey, what is all that crap about? There are about 80 million Germans. They are :>ONE (1) people and if they choose so, have the internationally acknowledged :>right to live in ONE (1) state. :That's what I deny. I think Mr. Momper had the point when he spoke about :"the people of the GDR". [...] :Actually, the young Turk national born here is more my compatriot than :somebody born and grown up in Dresden or Leipzig. Hmmm. I see the young Turk as my compatriot (well, not all of them, actually). But I insist that the residents of the GDR are not a seperate "people". Although I grant Walter Momper the right to think so. I regard him highly and despise of anyone wielding the "Grundgesetz" against him on false pretexts. Info for non-German readers: Momper mentioned the "people of the GDR" in a speech, and was spanked by the Chancellor Kohl for that. Momper has settled for the "people in the GDR".) I have talked to quite a few East Germans, and I really feel they are Germans, just as I am.
:[...] Look at what :our government is doing now in the field of economic blackmail against :the GDR people [...]
That is disgusting. First they say "We'll give you money if you make some reform". The GDR makes a *lot* of reforms, with more underway. Then the FRG govt says "No you have to have free elections before you get any money." Hey, whom are they going to vote for right now? Even the opposition says election should be held be Sep 30, 1990 at the earliest. The opposition needs time to organize.
:[...] The GDR is no underdevoloped state at all. [...] Oh yes, it is. Look at their houses, their cars, their factories, their infra- structure. Close to everything has to be scrapped and re-built. Decades of mis-management cannot be undone in a year. The people are capable, knowledgeable, ambitious, just as we are. But everything else is in a shambles.
:Well, maybe we have less differences than it seems :-) Yes, I think so too. It is just that I don't like false friends.
:Sorry for you :-) . Anyway, the NATO is a pact for defense of capitalism, :without doubt. I'm not that sure that we may easily leave it (it would be :worth while an attempt - reunification or not).
Same argument again. Of course I know NATO is there to defend the US security interest. But the treaty says something entirely different. I wish we could rub that under the American's (and a couple of other people's) noses and take them at their word.
:>[...] hamburger-munching bunch of arrogant s*ckers? :Don't like that statement. I know & like a lot uf US people. But as I under- :stand, you mean we should ignore US govt. pressure when intending e.g. :to leave NATO. Maybe I agree so far, but the US as well have a legal :right to be interested in stability in Europe. [...]
Oh well, I did not mean to insult all Americans. I mean their government and the other people who think that way. That's by no means all of them.
But I do not think the US have any right to intervene in Europe, or anywhere else, for that matter. We don't need a big daddy watching over us.
:I regard it important to respect the security considerations of a l l :our neighbours - in the East as well as in the West.
Yes. We should respect their concerns. But we should resist any pressure they might use on us.
:Dr. Erhard Sanio, Tempelhofer Damm 194, 1000 Berlin 42, West Berlin
I think we stand to learn quite few things from the people of/in (delete according to taste and confession) the GDR. We have got the money, but they have the courage to try something new, something that might work. We all should combine what each of us has to give. -- \\ . Martin P Ibert, Westendallee 100 d, 1000 Berlin 19, West Germany // || |\ /| E-mail mart...@netmbx.UUCP ...!uunet!unido!tmpmbx!netmbx!martini || || | | | ---------------------------------------------------------------- || // Voelker der Welt, schaut auf diese Stadt! \\