BERLIN - Germany may need to build its own nuclear weapons to counter the threat of nuclear bombs falling into the hands of a terrorist state, a former German defence minister said Thursday.
"We need a serious discussion over how we can react to a nuclear threat by a terrorist state in an appropriate manner - and in extreme cases with our own nuclear weapons," said Rupert Scholz who served as defence minister from 1988 to 1989.
Germany does not have nuclear weapons and Scholz admitted in a Bild newspaper interview that his remarks were breaking what is widely seen as a national taboo.
Scholz - who is a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU) - said Berlin should first try to get binding guarantees from the NATO alliance that it would protect Germany in case nuclear threats were directed at the country.
But he insisted if such guarantees were not spelled out in a formal NATO doctrine, then Germany needed to ponder building its own nuclear deterrence system.
Such a move would clearly violate the 2+4 Treaty which paved the way for Germany's 1990 reunification by formally ending post-World War II occupation rights in the country for the US, the former USSR, Britain and France.
Under article three of the Treaty, Germany renounces "the manufacture and possession of and control over nuclear, biological and chemical weapons."
Rainer Stinner, a member of the opposition Free Democrats (FDP) in parliament, sharply criticized calls for German nuclear weapons.
"If we start questioning international treaties, what right do we have to demand that others adhere to them?" said Stinner, adding, "Germany's security would be reduced - not increased - through the possession of nuclear weapons."
Last week French President Jacques Chirac warned that France could use nuclear arms against state sponsors of terrorism against his country.
Chirac did not name any country but was widely seen to have been referring to Iran which is suspected of seeking to build nuclear weapons - an allegation strongly denied by Tehran.
DPA
26 January 2006
Posted by proutist-universal on January 30, 2006 5:43 AM
|
"Human beings have still not been able to form a human society, and have still not learned to move with the spirit of a pilgrim. Although many small groups, motivated by self-interest, work together in particular situations, not even a small fraction of their work is done with a broader social motive. By strict definition, shall we have to declare that each small family unit is a society in itself? If going ahead in mutual adjustment only out of narrow self-interest or momentary self-seeking is called society, then in such a society, no provision can be made for the disabled, the diseased or the helpless, because in most cases nobody can benefit from them in any way... in that case there always remains the possibility of some people getting isolated from the collective. All human beings must attach themselves to others by the common bond of love and march forward hand in hand; then only will I proclaim it a society." |