4 ms·
So it's a cold war law which is still in place but not being enforced. Same for conscription laws in the Netherlands, which are also still active. They just do
by jsiepkes 7mo ago
So it's a cold war law which is still in place but not being enforced.
Same for conscription laws in the Netherlands, which are also still active. They just don't ask anyone to report for conscription. It was even expanded a couple of years before the Ukraine war to also include women.
- jasonvorhe 7mo ago> The new military service law requires all men under 45 to seek approval from the Bundeswehr to leave the country for longer than three months. It also obliges the military career center to issue it. New. Not cold war. This didn't exist before.
- eigenspace 7mo agoIt's a re-instatement of a cold war era law that was suspended in 2011.
- petcat 7mo agoSeems like a distinction without a difference to me.
- dmurray 7mo agoIt's an important distinction because it prevents the defence of "oh it's just an old law, there are lots of old laws on the books that everyone knows aren't relevant, they can't be tidied up for political reasons". It was suspended for the last 15 years! Surely it was easier to leave it suspended and unsuspending it is a conscious choice.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- nine_k 7mo agoThe point is not when the law originated, but that it's being reinstated.
- eigenspace 7mo agoOkay sure, but I didnt say otherwise. I was just correcting someone who said something untrue.
- rvnx 7mo agoThe main point was that they changed it so instead of being activated during crisis now it applies anytime, including in peacetime. Making it similar to the cold war provisions doesn't make it sounds better.
- eigenspace 7mo agoNo, the one that said it was only activated during crisis was the post 2011 version.
- dundarious 7mo agoPreviously it was conditional, only in effect “in the event of tension or defense” (machine translation) which I will define below, but they are very exceptional circumstances -- AFAIK not ever invoked since unification. The change this year was to make it applicable regardless of those conditions: “Outside the tension or defense case, §§ 3 [...]” shall apply. "Tension" is defined by an imminent threat (e.g., invasion) and must be explicitly invoked by leadership. "Defense" is actual ongoing attack of territory, and must be explicitly invoked by the Bundestag. I have used https://www.fr.de/politik/drastische-wehrpflicht-aenderung-maenner-die-deutschland-laenger-wollen-brauchen-genehmigung-zr-94248132.html https://www.fr.de/politik/drastische-wehrpflicht-aenderung-m... to form my understanding. Can be read freely by prepending archive.is/newest/ to the URL.