Fides hosti servanda


On rhetoric and practice of national defence

Marcus Jurij Vogt

 

Germany has abandoned the traditional dialectics of war and peace in “lop-sided battle formation” in the Afghanistan discussion. This was respectable as the persons responsible wanted to protect the general staff colonel Georg Klein concerning his action on 4th September 2009. The crude rhetoric, however, includes risky playing with fire applying a more or less anarchist war method. This paper demonstrates how the officer who is responsible for the decision is protected under public law by stressing the principle of appropriateness by virtue of expression as ban on undersize. To do this, topical rhetoric with its ambiguous inconsistence is analysed at first. The argumentation presented in this paper rests on the peace method and is based on principles of the state.
When authority has been vested in the course of a UN mandate, brandishing the sword of the state as the legitimate power of the monopolist can sometimes be adequate. After showing necessary toughness, however, a clear communication for social-educational purposes is required. This includes - with reference to the ban on undersize - open willingness to ease damages and pain. Strategies of a UN mission typology, which is still to be thrashed out - require law as a basis; after all, states prove their worth with their liabilities. Turning points such as the 4th September 2009 can be assessed fairly with the term ban on undersize from legal and political sciences. Where it comes to exporting and universalizing the concept of statedom as a peace order, the monopoly of legitimate public power ought to prevail over misguided opponents. When danger is looming, unmistakably precise action with “the sharp edge of the sword” can be appropriate. Collateral damages create call for action.
It depends on the dosage whether a medicine takes effect either as a poison or as a remedy when curing the sick. Perfectionism at establishing states fails because of inactivity. Where weighing up lives is justly denied, the options for measures to study and ward off threats widen. Key findings create the necessary development for control by assignments in security management, such as imagination. This corresponds to the anarchism of the state system, which is the reason why executives require broad prerogatives. Using the scales metaphor, following the principle of well-balanced nature, the ban on undersize counterbalances the ban on oversize. Concerning legitimate demands on stately exterior and interior self-assertiveness it sharpens moderation and objectivity for assessing actions in the framework of international authority conferment.
Military leaders are responsible for their soldiers. That is why the national three-way state-troublemaker-protégé becomes a profound argumentation pattern even on a mission abroad. One has to keep one’s word loyally, both to friend and foe, especially when applying the peace method, because only the state renders war and peace possible. As a refuge of law it protects both the commitments between individuals and the general necessities, and both of them happen not because of really exercised power, but because of the salutary dread of it.