SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Protesters at Jagel Air Base, the key Bundeswehr drone base in northern Germany. (Credit: DFG-VK)
Part One: "We Won" - By Nick Mottern
On the night of December 15, I got a call from Elsa Rassbach in Berlin. She told me I needed to be sitting down, which I did, and told her so. Then she said: "We won."
In an historic development that will undoubtedly save the lives and sanity of many people in Mali and Afghanistan--a development in which a number of U.S. citizens participated--the German military establishment was forced by a surprising surge of opposition among the MPs in the Socialist Democrat Party (SPD) in the German Bundestag (parliament) to delay plans, at least for now, to arm the Heron TP drones that Germany has been leasing from Israel since 2018. Instead, further discussions of the ethical and legal ramifications of deploying armed drones are to take place in Germany.
"The decision by the German parliament not to arm drones pending extensive further public discussion regarding drone killing is indeed historic."
"Here in Germany some people are saying they cannot think of any peace movement struggle in recent years that has won such a striking victory," Elsa said. "This brings hope to the whole peace movement."
The decision by the German parliament not to arm drones pending extensive further public discussion regarding drone killing is indeed historic. It is the only instance in which a sufficiently broad and deep popular opposition to drone killing has been mounted to effectively thwart a military, political and industry campaign to acquire and deploy killer drones.
Campaign Against Killer Drones Began in 2012
The decision is also a high point in a nearly decade-long campaign that has involved over one hundred peace groups and other civil society, scientific and religious organizations and NGOs. The campaign in Germany began to take shape in 2012, soon after Angela Merkel's party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), announced plans to acquire armed drones for the German Bundeswehr, in spite of strong international and U.N. criticism of U.S. and Israeli targeted drone killings as well as by the Left Party in the Bundestag in 2010.
In 2013, German activists, NGOs, and religious organizations, with support of the Left and Green parties, founded the network Drone Campaign (Drohnen-Kampagne) "against the establishment of drone technology for war, surveillance and oppression." Several leading SPD members signed the Drone Campaign's first appeal in 2013.
During the 2013 election campaign, the SPD, the Left and Green parties and activists raised strong questions about arming drones for the Bundeswehr. In addition, beginning in 2013, U.S. whistleblowers began revealing the role of the U.S. AFRICOM bases and Ramstein in Germany in the illegal U.S. drone killings in the Middle East and Africa, leading to further public concern in Germany and international attention.
Thus, when the SPD entered a coalition government with the CDU and Christian Socialist Union (CSU) in 2013, the binding coalition agreement negotiated between the ruling CDU, CSU and SPD parties provided that no government request to arm drones could be presented to the Bundestag for a vote until a thorough discussion of legal and ethical concerns regarding the weapons system had taken place.
Killer Drone Advocates Press Forward
Nevertheless, the killer drone advocates within the CDU/CSU found SPD allies in the Bundestag Defense Committee. In the summer of 2014, they began working on developing a European armed drone, the "Eurodrone," in a partnership led by Germany working with France, Italy and Spain and with seed financing from the European Union.
Despite international protests initiated by the German Drone Campaign in the fall of 2014 that were followed by large protests in subsequent years at the U.S. drone bases in Germany Ramstein and Africom, by 2017 the mood in the German parliament seemed to have shifted toward acquiring and deploying armed drones. Then in June 2017, the first Bundeswehr armed drone project came up for a vote for the first time in the Bundestag Budget Committee, which was asked to approve a contract with German Airbus to lease armed Israeli Heron TP drones as a stopgap "solution" until the Eurodrone, also to be produced by Airbus, would be ready for deployment in ca. 2027.
Following an intense campaign by German groups the SPD leadership decided at the end of June 2017 against approving the Heron TP deal--to everyone's surprise--on the grounds that the required discussions about arming drones mandated in the 2013 coalition government agreement had not taken place. During the 2017 campaign U.S. and Israeli anti-drone activists also wrote to the German parliamentarians, and a preview screener of the documentary film on U.S. drone whistle-blowers, "National Bird", was made available to the German parliamentarians.
After the September 2017 election, the SPD in 2018 again entered into a coalition government with the CDU and CSU. It was agreed that the Eurodrone project would go forward and that weaponizable, though non-armed, Heron TP drones would be leased, but with a provision that the drones could not be armed until after a thorough discussion regarding the legal and ethical issues.
To overcome this obstacle, the German Ministry of Defense (Germany's Pentagon) organized its own series of discussion forums, called #DrohnenDebatte2020, during the pandemic in May early June 2020. The forums allowed for some public participation per online chat and twitter, which was intended to substitute for the public discussion of the legal, ethical and moral issues surrounding drone killing required by the SPD. The Defense Ministry failed to meet the demand of peace activists that drone whistleblowers and victims be heard in the debate.
Anti-Killer Drone Forces Mobilize
But despite the clear inadequacy of the Defense Ministry's "drone debate", by mid-November 2020 it appeared likely that the SPD would go along with the Defense Ministry in declaring that the German debate about arming drones had come to a satisfactory conclusion and that the SPD agreed with the conclusion that killer drones are not less ethical than other weapons and are necessary for the protection of German soldiers.
However, several leading SPD parliamentarians and large sectors of the SPD base disagreed with this conclusion. They wrote newspaper articles and open letters, and they launched petitions. Regional SPD bodies passed resolutions against arming drones. The peace movement and civil society took hope from this and increased their own efforts to persuade the SPD not to agree to arming drones.
Activists of the Drone Campaign and many other German organizations reached out to the swing-vote SPD parliamentarians to explain to them once again the unacceptable hazards of drone killing. Elsa, a U.S. citizen in Berlin who is one of the founding members of the German Drone Campaign, also asked U.S. and Israeli opponents of drone killing to again write letters to the SPD parliamentarians, and KnowDrones.com sent the SPD members of the Bundestag this video:
On December 3, the Drone Campaign organized an online discussion for ca. ten key SPD parliamentary representatives with the U.S. drone whistle-blowers Lisa Ling ("National Bird") and Cian Westmoreland, moderated by Elsa. At the request of the SPD representatives, the whistleblowers provided their arguments against arming drones in writing for discussion in a full meeting of the SPD parliamentary group on December 7th.
Immediately thereafter, SPD leaders told the media that the SPD would not consider approving arming of drones for the German Bundeswehr until further discussion had taken place, a position that was confirmed by an internal vote of the entire SPD parliamentary group on December 15th.
The German press is right now heatedly debating the SPD decision, with the CDU, CSU, and the conservative Free Democratic Party (FDP) and ultra-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) opposition parties arguing that arming the drones is urgently necessary to protect the lives of German soldiers. But opponents of armed drones in civil society and in the Bundestag argue that other weapons are more suitable for the supposedly purely defensive purposes of Bundeswehr missions; moreover, no German soldiers have been killed by hostile forces, whether in Afghanistan or in Mali, since 2014.
Renewed Energy in the U.S.
Ideally, the recent victories against armed drones will renew our energy in the U.S. to educate our people and members of Congress to follow the promising lead that has been set in Germany.
These articles provide (here and here) further details about what happened this month in Germany and that the struggle against drone killing will continue there, and almost assuredly, in other European countries.
Part Two: The Struggle Ahead - By Elsa Rassbach
Although the request of the Ministry of Defense to arm the Israeli Heron TP drones has been denied by a parliamentary majority for now, that request will likely again be presented to the Bundestag following the September 2021 elections.
And early in 2021, the German Ministry of Defense plans to make a financing request to the Budget Committee of the Bundestag to approve Germany's share of financing for development and production of the joint German-French-Italian-Spanish "Eurodrone" to be deployed by ca. 2027 by five or more European nations as part of a "European security concept". If approved, the total share of financing to be provided by Germany in 2021 alone will be ca 232 million Euros, with more costs each year of the production phase.
"Through international solidarity we have won a victory that may point the way forward to future international successes in the struggle to prevent armed drones and robots, as well as those who own and command them, from gaining more and more destructive power."
Also in development and coming up for a decision soon in the Bundestag is the next European fighter aircraft, the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), with a Next-Generation Weapon System (NGWS), which is to have swarms of autonomous drones Airbus Germany is the lead contractor for Germany's lease of the Heron TP drones from Israel as well as for the Eurodrone. The final assembly of the Eurodrone would take place at Airbus' hub in Manching, Germany. Airbus is also a key contractor for the FCAS.
The issue of whether Germany should arm drones will surely be a key subject of debate leading up to the upcoming national parliamentary elections in Germany in September 2021. Following the elections, Merkel's CDU may seek to enter into a coalition government with the Green Party rather than the SPD, and some Green parliamentarians are already signaling that they may be ready to support increased armaments and missions for the Bundeswehr that might include armed drones.
However, in the Bundestag debate on December 17th, the Green Party supported the Left Party's parliamentary resolution to ban armed drones.
If the opponents of drone warfare prevail in the September elections in Germany--if SPD opponents of arming drones prevail, and if the Green Party representatives hold firm to their current position against arming drones--this could lead European discussions regarding whether Eurodrone should be an unarmed surveillance drone rather than a killer drone as currently planned. Such discussions would surely also need to address other European projects like FCAS and could, in turn, set the stage for the binding international negotiations that have been urgently called for by the U.N., many NGOs, and civil society around the world regarding armed drones and lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS).
Ban Armed Drones?
Although some lawmakers in Germany might merely seek international regulation of armed drones and autonomous robots, some will surely call for a ban of armed drones as well as of lethal autonomous weapons systems. The Left Party, with ca. 10% of the seats in the Bundestag, has called for the ban of armed drones since 2012, and in the November 2020 convention of the Berlin Social Democratic Party, 84% of the SPD delegates voted in favor of a resolution to ban armed drones.
We rejoice and encourage others to rejoice in decision of German parliamentarians to resist arming Germany's drones--at least for now. Through international solidarity we have won a victory that may point the way forward to future international successes in the struggle to prevent armed drones and robots, as well as those who own and command them, from gaining more and more destructive power.
We can and must turn the tide away from the nightmare world presented by the uncontrolled proliferation of lethal weapons of any kind.
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Part One: "We Won" - By Nick Mottern
On the night of December 15, I got a call from Elsa Rassbach in Berlin. She told me I needed to be sitting down, which I did, and told her so. Then she said: "We won."
In an historic development that will undoubtedly save the lives and sanity of many people in Mali and Afghanistan--a development in which a number of U.S. citizens participated--the German military establishment was forced by a surprising surge of opposition among the MPs in the Socialist Democrat Party (SPD) in the German Bundestag (parliament) to delay plans, at least for now, to arm the Heron TP drones that Germany has been leasing from Israel since 2018. Instead, further discussions of the ethical and legal ramifications of deploying armed drones are to take place in Germany.
"The decision by the German parliament not to arm drones pending extensive further public discussion regarding drone killing is indeed historic."
"Here in Germany some people are saying they cannot think of any peace movement struggle in recent years that has won such a striking victory," Elsa said. "This brings hope to the whole peace movement."
The decision by the German parliament not to arm drones pending extensive further public discussion regarding drone killing is indeed historic. It is the only instance in which a sufficiently broad and deep popular opposition to drone killing has been mounted to effectively thwart a military, political and industry campaign to acquire and deploy killer drones.
Campaign Against Killer Drones Began in 2012
The decision is also a high point in a nearly decade-long campaign that has involved over one hundred peace groups and other civil society, scientific and religious organizations and NGOs. The campaign in Germany began to take shape in 2012, soon after Angela Merkel's party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), announced plans to acquire armed drones for the German Bundeswehr, in spite of strong international and U.N. criticism of U.S. and Israeli targeted drone killings as well as by the Left Party in the Bundestag in 2010.
In 2013, German activists, NGOs, and religious organizations, with support of the Left and Green parties, founded the network Drone Campaign (Drohnen-Kampagne) "against the establishment of drone technology for war, surveillance and oppression." Several leading SPD members signed the Drone Campaign's first appeal in 2013.
During the 2013 election campaign, the SPD, the Left and Green parties and activists raised strong questions about arming drones for the Bundeswehr. In addition, beginning in 2013, U.S. whistleblowers began revealing the role of the U.S. AFRICOM bases and Ramstein in Germany in the illegal U.S. drone killings in the Middle East and Africa, leading to further public concern in Germany and international attention.
Thus, when the SPD entered a coalition government with the CDU and Christian Socialist Union (CSU) in 2013, the binding coalition agreement negotiated between the ruling CDU, CSU and SPD parties provided that no government request to arm drones could be presented to the Bundestag for a vote until a thorough discussion of legal and ethical concerns regarding the weapons system had taken place.
Killer Drone Advocates Press Forward
Nevertheless, the killer drone advocates within the CDU/CSU found SPD allies in the Bundestag Defense Committee. In the summer of 2014, they began working on developing a European armed drone, the "Eurodrone," in a partnership led by Germany working with France, Italy and Spain and with seed financing from the European Union.
Despite international protests initiated by the German Drone Campaign in the fall of 2014 that were followed by large protests in subsequent years at the U.S. drone bases in Germany Ramstein and Africom, by 2017 the mood in the German parliament seemed to have shifted toward acquiring and deploying armed drones. Then in June 2017, the first Bundeswehr armed drone project came up for a vote for the first time in the Bundestag Budget Committee, which was asked to approve a contract with German Airbus to lease armed Israeli Heron TP drones as a stopgap "solution" until the Eurodrone, also to be produced by Airbus, would be ready for deployment in ca. 2027.
Following an intense campaign by German groups the SPD leadership decided at the end of June 2017 against approving the Heron TP deal--to everyone's surprise--on the grounds that the required discussions about arming drones mandated in the 2013 coalition government agreement had not taken place. During the 2017 campaign U.S. and Israeli anti-drone activists also wrote to the German parliamentarians, and a preview screener of the documentary film on U.S. drone whistle-blowers, "National Bird", was made available to the German parliamentarians.
After the September 2017 election, the SPD in 2018 again entered into a coalition government with the CDU and CSU. It was agreed that the Eurodrone project would go forward and that weaponizable, though non-armed, Heron TP drones would be leased, but with a provision that the drones could not be armed until after a thorough discussion regarding the legal and ethical issues.
To overcome this obstacle, the German Ministry of Defense (Germany's Pentagon) organized its own series of discussion forums, called #DrohnenDebatte2020, during the pandemic in May early June 2020. The forums allowed for some public participation per online chat and twitter, which was intended to substitute for the public discussion of the legal, ethical and moral issues surrounding drone killing required by the SPD. The Defense Ministry failed to meet the demand of peace activists that drone whistleblowers and victims be heard in the debate.
Anti-Killer Drone Forces Mobilize
But despite the clear inadequacy of the Defense Ministry's "drone debate", by mid-November 2020 it appeared likely that the SPD would go along with the Defense Ministry in declaring that the German debate about arming drones had come to a satisfactory conclusion and that the SPD agreed with the conclusion that killer drones are not less ethical than other weapons and are necessary for the protection of German soldiers.
However, several leading SPD parliamentarians and large sectors of the SPD base disagreed with this conclusion. They wrote newspaper articles and open letters, and they launched petitions. Regional SPD bodies passed resolutions against arming drones. The peace movement and civil society took hope from this and increased their own efforts to persuade the SPD not to agree to arming drones.
Activists of the Drone Campaign and many other German organizations reached out to the swing-vote SPD parliamentarians to explain to them once again the unacceptable hazards of drone killing. Elsa, a U.S. citizen in Berlin who is one of the founding members of the German Drone Campaign, also asked U.S. and Israeli opponents of drone killing to again write letters to the SPD parliamentarians, and KnowDrones.com sent the SPD members of the Bundestag this video:
On December 3, the Drone Campaign organized an online discussion for ca. ten key SPD parliamentary representatives with the U.S. drone whistle-blowers Lisa Ling ("National Bird") and Cian Westmoreland, moderated by Elsa. At the request of the SPD representatives, the whistleblowers provided their arguments against arming drones in writing for discussion in a full meeting of the SPD parliamentary group on December 7th.
Immediately thereafter, SPD leaders told the media that the SPD would not consider approving arming of drones for the German Bundeswehr until further discussion had taken place, a position that was confirmed by an internal vote of the entire SPD parliamentary group on December 15th.
The German press is right now heatedly debating the SPD decision, with the CDU, CSU, and the conservative Free Democratic Party (FDP) and ultra-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) opposition parties arguing that arming the drones is urgently necessary to protect the lives of German soldiers. But opponents of armed drones in civil society and in the Bundestag argue that other weapons are more suitable for the supposedly purely defensive purposes of Bundeswehr missions; moreover, no German soldiers have been killed by hostile forces, whether in Afghanistan or in Mali, since 2014.
Renewed Energy in the U.S.
Ideally, the recent victories against armed drones will renew our energy in the U.S. to educate our people and members of Congress to follow the promising lead that has been set in Germany.
These articles provide (here and here) further details about what happened this month in Germany and that the struggle against drone killing will continue there, and almost assuredly, in other European countries.
Part Two: The Struggle Ahead - By Elsa Rassbach
Although the request of the Ministry of Defense to arm the Israeli Heron TP drones has been denied by a parliamentary majority for now, that request will likely again be presented to the Bundestag following the September 2021 elections.
And early in 2021, the German Ministry of Defense plans to make a financing request to the Budget Committee of the Bundestag to approve Germany's share of financing for development and production of the joint German-French-Italian-Spanish "Eurodrone" to be deployed by ca. 2027 by five or more European nations as part of a "European security concept". If approved, the total share of financing to be provided by Germany in 2021 alone will be ca 232 million Euros, with more costs each year of the production phase.
"Through international solidarity we have won a victory that may point the way forward to future international successes in the struggle to prevent armed drones and robots, as well as those who own and command them, from gaining more and more destructive power."
Also in development and coming up for a decision soon in the Bundestag is the next European fighter aircraft, the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), with a Next-Generation Weapon System (NGWS), which is to have swarms of autonomous drones Airbus Germany is the lead contractor for Germany's lease of the Heron TP drones from Israel as well as for the Eurodrone. The final assembly of the Eurodrone would take place at Airbus' hub in Manching, Germany. Airbus is also a key contractor for the FCAS.
The issue of whether Germany should arm drones will surely be a key subject of debate leading up to the upcoming national parliamentary elections in Germany in September 2021. Following the elections, Merkel's CDU may seek to enter into a coalition government with the Green Party rather than the SPD, and some Green parliamentarians are already signaling that they may be ready to support increased armaments and missions for the Bundeswehr that might include armed drones.
However, in the Bundestag debate on December 17th, the Green Party supported the Left Party's parliamentary resolution to ban armed drones.
If the opponents of drone warfare prevail in the September elections in Germany--if SPD opponents of arming drones prevail, and if the Green Party representatives hold firm to their current position against arming drones--this could lead European discussions regarding whether Eurodrone should be an unarmed surveillance drone rather than a killer drone as currently planned. Such discussions would surely also need to address other European projects like FCAS and could, in turn, set the stage for the binding international negotiations that have been urgently called for by the U.N., many NGOs, and civil society around the world regarding armed drones and lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS).
Ban Armed Drones?
Although some lawmakers in Germany might merely seek international regulation of armed drones and autonomous robots, some will surely call for a ban of armed drones as well as of lethal autonomous weapons systems. The Left Party, with ca. 10% of the seats in the Bundestag, has called for the ban of armed drones since 2012, and in the November 2020 convention of the Berlin Social Democratic Party, 84% of the SPD delegates voted in favor of a resolution to ban armed drones.
We rejoice and encourage others to rejoice in decision of German parliamentarians to resist arming Germany's drones--at least for now. Through international solidarity we have won a victory that may point the way forward to future international successes in the struggle to prevent armed drones and robots, as well as those who own and command them, from gaining more and more destructive power.
We can and must turn the tide away from the nightmare world presented by the uncontrolled proliferation of lethal weapons of any kind.
Part One: "We Won" - By Nick Mottern
On the night of December 15, I got a call from Elsa Rassbach in Berlin. She told me I needed to be sitting down, which I did, and told her so. Then she said: "We won."
In an historic development that will undoubtedly save the lives and sanity of many people in Mali and Afghanistan--a development in which a number of U.S. citizens participated--the German military establishment was forced by a surprising surge of opposition among the MPs in the Socialist Democrat Party (SPD) in the German Bundestag (parliament) to delay plans, at least for now, to arm the Heron TP drones that Germany has been leasing from Israel since 2018. Instead, further discussions of the ethical and legal ramifications of deploying armed drones are to take place in Germany.
"The decision by the German parliament not to arm drones pending extensive further public discussion regarding drone killing is indeed historic."
"Here in Germany some people are saying they cannot think of any peace movement struggle in recent years that has won such a striking victory," Elsa said. "This brings hope to the whole peace movement."
The decision by the German parliament not to arm drones pending extensive further public discussion regarding drone killing is indeed historic. It is the only instance in which a sufficiently broad and deep popular opposition to drone killing has been mounted to effectively thwart a military, political and industry campaign to acquire and deploy killer drones.
Campaign Against Killer Drones Began in 2012
The decision is also a high point in a nearly decade-long campaign that has involved over one hundred peace groups and other civil society, scientific and religious organizations and NGOs. The campaign in Germany began to take shape in 2012, soon after Angela Merkel's party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), announced plans to acquire armed drones for the German Bundeswehr, in spite of strong international and U.N. criticism of U.S. and Israeli targeted drone killings as well as by the Left Party in the Bundestag in 2010.
In 2013, German activists, NGOs, and religious organizations, with support of the Left and Green parties, founded the network Drone Campaign (Drohnen-Kampagne) "against the establishment of drone technology for war, surveillance and oppression." Several leading SPD members signed the Drone Campaign's first appeal in 2013.
During the 2013 election campaign, the SPD, the Left and Green parties and activists raised strong questions about arming drones for the Bundeswehr. In addition, beginning in 2013, U.S. whistleblowers began revealing the role of the U.S. AFRICOM bases and Ramstein in Germany in the illegal U.S. drone killings in the Middle East and Africa, leading to further public concern in Germany and international attention.
Thus, when the SPD entered a coalition government with the CDU and Christian Socialist Union (CSU) in 2013, the binding coalition agreement negotiated between the ruling CDU, CSU and SPD parties provided that no government request to arm drones could be presented to the Bundestag for a vote until a thorough discussion of legal and ethical concerns regarding the weapons system had taken place.
Killer Drone Advocates Press Forward
Nevertheless, the killer drone advocates within the CDU/CSU found SPD allies in the Bundestag Defense Committee. In the summer of 2014, they began working on developing a European armed drone, the "Eurodrone," in a partnership led by Germany working with France, Italy and Spain and with seed financing from the European Union.
Despite international protests initiated by the German Drone Campaign in the fall of 2014 that were followed by large protests in subsequent years at the U.S. drone bases in Germany Ramstein and Africom, by 2017 the mood in the German parliament seemed to have shifted toward acquiring and deploying armed drones. Then in June 2017, the first Bundeswehr armed drone project came up for a vote for the first time in the Bundestag Budget Committee, which was asked to approve a contract with German Airbus to lease armed Israeli Heron TP drones as a stopgap "solution" until the Eurodrone, also to be produced by Airbus, would be ready for deployment in ca. 2027.
Following an intense campaign by German groups the SPD leadership decided at the end of June 2017 against approving the Heron TP deal--to everyone's surprise--on the grounds that the required discussions about arming drones mandated in the 2013 coalition government agreement had not taken place. During the 2017 campaign U.S. and Israeli anti-drone activists also wrote to the German parliamentarians, and a preview screener of the documentary film on U.S. drone whistle-blowers, "National Bird", was made available to the German parliamentarians.
After the September 2017 election, the SPD in 2018 again entered into a coalition government with the CDU and CSU. It was agreed that the Eurodrone project would go forward and that weaponizable, though non-armed, Heron TP drones would be leased, but with a provision that the drones could not be armed until after a thorough discussion regarding the legal and ethical issues.
To overcome this obstacle, the German Ministry of Defense (Germany's Pentagon) organized its own series of discussion forums, called #DrohnenDebatte2020, during the pandemic in May early June 2020. The forums allowed for some public participation per online chat and twitter, which was intended to substitute for the public discussion of the legal, ethical and moral issues surrounding drone killing required by the SPD. The Defense Ministry failed to meet the demand of peace activists that drone whistleblowers and victims be heard in the debate.
Anti-Killer Drone Forces Mobilize
But despite the clear inadequacy of the Defense Ministry's "drone debate", by mid-November 2020 it appeared likely that the SPD would go along with the Defense Ministry in declaring that the German debate about arming drones had come to a satisfactory conclusion and that the SPD agreed with the conclusion that killer drones are not less ethical than other weapons and are necessary for the protection of German soldiers.
However, several leading SPD parliamentarians and large sectors of the SPD base disagreed with this conclusion. They wrote newspaper articles and open letters, and they launched petitions. Regional SPD bodies passed resolutions against arming drones. The peace movement and civil society took hope from this and increased their own efforts to persuade the SPD not to agree to arming drones.
Activists of the Drone Campaign and many other German organizations reached out to the swing-vote SPD parliamentarians to explain to them once again the unacceptable hazards of drone killing. Elsa, a U.S. citizen in Berlin who is one of the founding members of the German Drone Campaign, also asked U.S. and Israeli opponents of drone killing to again write letters to the SPD parliamentarians, and KnowDrones.com sent the SPD members of the Bundestag this video:
On December 3, the Drone Campaign organized an online discussion for ca. ten key SPD parliamentary representatives with the U.S. drone whistle-blowers Lisa Ling ("National Bird") and Cian Westmoreland, moderated by Elsa. At the request of the SPD representatives, the whistleblowers provided their arguments against arming drones in writing for discussion in a full meeting of the SPD parliamentary group on December 7th.
Immediately thereafter, SPD leaders told the media that the SPD would not consider approving arming of drones for the German Bundeswehr until further discussion had taken place, a position that was confirmed by an internal vote of the entire SPD parliamentary group on December 15th.
The German press is right now heatedly debating the SPD decision, with the CDU, CSU, and the conservative Free Democratic Party (FDP) and ultra-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) opposition parties arguing that arming the drones is urgently necessary to protect the lives of German soldiers. But opponents of armed drones in civil society and in the Bundestag argue that other weapons are more suitable for the supposedly purely defensive purposes of Bundeswehr missions; moreover, no German soldiers have been killed by hostile forces, whether in Afghanistan or in Mali, since 2014.
Renewed Energy in the U.S.
Ideally, the recent victories against armed drones will renew our energy in the U.S. to educate our people and members of Congress to follow the promising lead that has been set in Germany.
These articles provide (here and here) further details about what happened this month in Germany and that the struggle against drone killing will continue there, and almost assuredly, in other European countries.
Part Two: The Struggle Ahead - By Elsa Rassbach
Although the request of the Ministry of Defense to arm the Israeli Heron TP drones has been denied by a parliamentary majority for now, that request will likely again be presented to the Bundestag following the September 2021 elections.
And early in 2021, the German Ministry of Defense plans to make a financing request to the Budget Committee of the Bundestag to approve Germany's share of financing for development and production of the joint German-French-Italian-Spanish "Eurodrone" to be deployed by ca. 2027 by five or more European nations as part of a "European security concept". If approved, the total share of financing to be provided by Germany in 2021 alone will be ca 232 million Euros, with more costs each year of the production phase.
"Through international solidarity we have won a victory that may point the way forward to future international successes in the struggle to prevent armed drones and robots, as well as those who own and command them, from gaining more and more destructive power."
Also in development and coming up for a decision soon in the Bundestag is the next European fighter aircraft, the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), with a Next-Generation Weapon System (NGWS), which is to have swarms of autonomous drones Airbus Germany is the lead contractor for Germany's lease of the Heron TP drones from Israel as well as for the Eurodrone. The final assembly of the Eurodrone would take place at Airbus' hub in Manching, Germany. Airbus is also a key contractor for the FCAS.
The issue of whether Germany should arm drones will surely be a key subject of debate leading up to the upcoming national parliamentary elections in Germany in September 2021. Following the elections, Merkel's CDU may seek to enter into a coalition government with the Green Party rather than the SPD, and some Green parliamentarians are already signaling that they may be ready to support increased armaments and missions for the Bundeswehr that might include armed drones.
However, in the Bundestag debate on December 17th, the Green Party supported the Left Party's parliamentary resolution to ban armed drones.
If the opponents of drone warfare prevail in the September elections in Germany--if SPD opponents of arming drones prevail, and if the Green Party representatives hold firm to their current position against arming drones--this could lead European discussions regarding whether Eurodrone should be an unarmed surveillance drone rather than a killer drone as currently planned. Such discussions would surely also need to address other European projects like FCAS and could, in turn, set the stage for the binding international negotiations that have been urgently called for by the U.N., many NGOs, and civil society around the world regarding armed drones and lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS).
Ban Armed Drones?
Although some lawmakers in Germany might merely seek international regulation of armed drones and autonomous robots, some will surely call for a ban of armed drones as well as of lethal autonomous weapons systems. The Left Party, with ca. 10% of the seats in the Bundestag, has called for the ban of armed drones since 2012, and in the November 2020 convention of the Berlin Social Democratic Party, 84% of the SPD delegates voted in favor of a resolution to ban armed drones.
We rejoice and encourage others to rejoice in decision of German parliamentarians to resist arming Germany's drones--at least for now. Through international solidarity we have won a victory that may point the way forward to future international successes in the struggle to prevent armed drones and robots, as well as those who own and command them, from gaining more and more destructive power.
We can and must turn the tide away from the nightmare world presented by the uncontrolled proliferation of lethal weapons of any kind.
"Zeldin's assertion that the EPA shouldn't address greenhouse gas emissions is like a fire chief claiming that they shouldn't fight fires," said one critic. "It is as malicious as it is absurd."
U.S. President Donald Trump's administration faced an onslaught of criticism on Tuesday for starting the process of repealing the 2009 legal opinion that greenhouse gases endanger public health and the welfare of the American people—which has enabled federal regulations aimed at the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency over the past 15 years.
Confirming reports from last week, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin unveiled the rule to rescind the 2009 "endangerment finding" at a truck dealership in Indiana. According to The New York Times, he said that "the proposal would, if finalized, amount to the largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States."
If the administration succeeds in repealing the legal finding, the EPA would lack authority under the Clean Air Act to impose standards for greenhouse gas emissions—meaning the move would kill vehicle regulations. As with the reporting last week, the formal announcement was sharply condemned by climate and health advocates and experts.
"Greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and are the root cause of the climate crisis," said Deanna Noël with Public Citizen's Climate Program, ripping the administration's effort as "grossly misguided and exceptionally dangerous."
"This isn't just a denial of science and reality—it's a betrayal of public trust and yet another signal that this administration is working for corporate interests, and no one else."
"Stripping the EPA of its ability to regulate greenhouse gases is like throwing away the fire extinguisher while the house is already burning," she warned. "The administration is shamelessly handing Big Oil a hall pass to pollute unchecked and dodge accountability, leaving working families to bear the costs through worsening health outcomes, rising energy bills, more climate-fueled extreme weather, and an increasingly unstable future. This isn't just a denial of science and reality—it's a betrayal of public trust and yet another signal that this administration is working for corporate interests, and no one else."
Noël was far from alone in accusing the administration's leaders of serving the polluters who helped Trump return to power.
"Zeldin and Trump are concerned only with maximizing short-term profits for polluting corporations and the CEOs funneling millions of dollars to their campaign coffers," said Jim Walsh, policy director at Food & Water Watch. "Zeldin's assertion that the EPA shouldn't address greenhouse gas emissions is like a fire chief claiming that they shouldn't fight fires. It is as malicious as it is absurd."
Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Safe Climate Transport Campaign, similarly said that the proposal is "purely a political bow to the oil industry" and "Trump is putting fealty to Big Oil over sound science and people's health."
Earthworks policy director Lauren Pagel also called the rule "a perverse gift to the fossil fuel industry that rejects yearslong efforts by the agency, scientists, NGOs, frontline communities, and industry to protect public health and our environment."
"Donald Trump and Lee Zeldin are playing with fire—and with floods and droughts and public health risks, too," she stressed, as about 168 million Americans on Tuesday faced advisories for extreme heat made more likely by the climate crisis.
🚨 The Trump administration just took its most extreme step yet in rolling back climate protections.
[image or embed]
— Sierra Club (@sierraclub.org) July 29, 2025 at 4:58 PM
Justin Chen, president of American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, which represents over 8,000 EPA workers nationwide, said that the repeal plan "is reckless and will have far-reaching, disastrous consequences for the USA."
"EPA career professionals have worked for decades on the development of the science and policy of greenhouse gases to protect the American public," he continued, "and this policy decision completely disregards all of their work in service to the public."
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) highlighted that Chris Wright, head of the Department of Energy, joined Zeldin at the Tuesday press conference and "announced a DOE 'climate science study' alongside remarks that were rife with climate denial talking points and disinformation."
UCS president Gretchen Goldman said that "it's abundantly clear what's going on here. The Trump administration refuses to acknowledge robust climate science and is using the kitchen sink approach: making every specious argument it can to avoid complying with the law."
"But getting around the Clean Air Act won't be easy," she added. "The science establishing climate harms to human health was unequivocally clear back in 2009, and more than 15 years later, the evidence has only accumulated."
Today, Zeldin’s EPA plans to release a proposal to revoke the Endangerment Finding, which is the legal & scientific foundation of EPA’s responsibility to limit climate-heating greenhouse gas pollution from major sources.
[image or embed]
— Moms Clean Air Force (@momscleanairforce.org) July 29, 2025 at 12:58 PM
David Bookbinder, director of law and policy at the Environmental Integrity Project, was a lead attorney in the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court case Massachusetts vs. EPA, which affirmed the agency's authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and ultimately led to the endangerment finding two years later.
Bookbinder said Tuesday that "because this approach has already been rejected by the courts—and doubtless will be again—this baseless effort to pretend that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses that cause climate change are not harmful pollutants is nothing more than a transparent attempt to delay and derail our efforts to control greenhouse pollution at the worst possible time, when deadly floods and heat waves are killing more people every day."
In a statement from the Environmental Protection Network, which is made up of ex-EPA staff, Joseph Goffman, former assistant administrator of the agency's Office of Air and Radiation, also cited the 2007 ruling.
"This decision is both legally indefensible and morally bankrupt," Goffman said of the Tuesday proposal. "The Supreme Court made clear that EPA cannot ignore science or evade its responsibilities under the Clean Air Act. By walking away from the endangerment finding, EPA has not only broken with precedent; it has broken with reality."
Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, responded to the EPA proposal with defiance, declaring that "Donald Trump and his Big Oil donors are lighting the world on fire and fueling their private jets with young people's lives. We refuse to be sacrifices for their greed. We're coming for them, and we're not backing down."
Israel has already summarily rejected the U.K. leader's ultimatum to take "substantive" steps to end the war on Gaza by September, agree to a two-state solution, and reject West Bank annexation.
United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer was accused of "political grandstanding" after he said Tuesday that his country would recognize Palestinian statehood if Israel did not take ambiguously defined steps to end its war on Gaza—conditions that were promptly dismissed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"Today, as part of this process towards peace, I can confirm the U.K. will recognize the state of Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly in September, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a cease-fire, and commit to a long-term sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a two-state solution," Starmer said during a press conference.
"This includes allowing the U.N. to restart the supply of aid and making clear that there will be no annexations in the West Bank," the prime minister continued, adding that "the terrorists of Hamas... must immediately release all of the hostages, sign up to a cease-fire, disarm, and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza."
Member of Scottish Parliament Scott Greer (Scottish Greens-West Scotland) responded to Tuesday's announcement on social media, saying, "Starmer wouldn't threaten to withdraw U.K. recognition of Israel, but he's made recognition of Palestinian statehood conditional on the actions of their genocidal oppressor?"
"Another profoundly unjust act from a Labour government thoroughly complicit in Israel's crimes," Greer added.
British attorney and activist Shola Mos-Shogbamimu asserted that "Keir Starmer knows his time is up and pivots to save his career but it's too late."
"By placing a condition on recognizing Palestine this declaration is performative and disingenuous because before September he can claim Israel has substantively complied with the condition," she added.
Leftist politician and Accountability Archive co-founder Philip Proudfoot argued on social media that "decent" Members of Parliament "need to table a no-confidence motion in Starmer now."
"He has just used the recognition of Palestine as a bargaining chip in exchange for Israel following its BASIC LEGAL OBLIGATIONS," he added. "This is one of the lowest political acts in living memory."
Media critic Sana Saeed said on social media, "Using Palestinian life and future as a bargaining chip and threat to Israel—not a surprise from kid starver Keir Starmer."
Journalist Sangita Myska argued that "rather than threatening the gesture politics of recognizing a Palestinian state (that may never happen)," Starmer should expel Israel's ambassador to the U.K., impose "full trade sanctions" and a "full arms embargo," and end alleged Royal Air Force surveillance flights over Gaza.
Political analyst Bushra Shaikh accused Starmer of "political grandstanding" and "speaking from both sides of his mouth."
Starmer's announcement followed a Monday meeting in Turnberry, Scotland with U.S. President Donald Trump, who signaled that he would not object to U.K. recognition of Palestine.
However, U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce called Starmer's announcement "a slap in the face for the victims of October 7," a reference to the Hamas-led attack of 2023.
While the United States remains Israel's staunchest supporter and enabler—providing billions of dollars in annual armed aid and diplomatic cover—Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee have all expressed concerns over mounting starvation deaths in Gaza.
On Tuesday, the U.N.-affiliated Integrated Food Security Phase Classification warned that a "worst-case" famine scenario is developing in Gaza, where health officials say at least 147 Palestinians, including at least 88 children, have died from malnutrition since Israel launched its obliteration and siege of the enclave following the October 2023 attack.
Israel—which imposed a "complete siege" on Gaza following that attack—has severely limited the amount of humanitarian aid that can enter the strip. According to U.N. officials, Israel Defense Forces troops have killed more than 1,000 aid-seeking civilians at distribution points run by the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. IDF troops have said they were ordered to shoot live bullets and artillery shells at aid seekers.
Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza including murder and weaponized starvation—responded to the U.K. prime minister's ultimatum in a social media post stating, "Starmer rewards Hamas' monstrous terrorism and punishes its victims."
"A jihadist state on Israel's border TODAY will threaten Britain TOMORROW," Netanyahu said. "Appeasement towards jihadist terrorists always fails. It will fail you too. It will not happen."
The U.K. played a critical role in the foundation of the modern state of Israel, allowing Jewish colonization of what was then the British Mandate of Palestine under condition that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine," who made up more than 90% of the population.
Seeing that Jewish immigrants returning to their ancestral homeland were usurping the indigenous Arabs of Palestine, the British subsequently prohibited further Zionist colonization. This sparked a nearly decadelong wave of terrorism and other attacks against the British occupiers that ultimately resulted in the U.K. abandoning Palestine and the establishment of Israel under the authority of the United Nations—an outcome achieved by the ethnic cleansing of more than 750,000 Palestinian Arabs.
On the topic of annexing the West Bank, earlier this month, all 15 Israeli government ministers representing Netanyahu's Likud party recommended the move, citing support from Trump. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) found last year that Israel's occupation of Palestine, including the West Bank and Gaza, is an illegal form of apartheid.
Last week, French President Emmanuel Macron said his country would announce its formal recognition of Palestinian statehood during September's U.N. General Assembly in New York. France is set to become the first Group of Seven nation to recognize Palestine, which is currently officially acknowledged by approximately 150 of the 193 U.N. member states.
Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz subsequently threatened "severe consequences" for nations that recognize Palestine.
Starmer's announcement came on the same day that the Gaza Health Ministry said that the death toll from Israel's 662-day assault and siege on Gaza—which is the subject of a South Africa-led genocide case at the ICJ—topped 60,000. However, multiple peer-reviewed studies in the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet have concluded that Gaza officials' casualty tallies are likely significant undercounts.
"Eric Adams is a complete non-factor in this race," remarked a founding partner of pollster Zenith Research.
A new poll of the New York City mayoral race found that Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani is very well positioned to win later this year and that former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is only competitive in the race if every other Mamdani opponent drops out.
The survey, which was conducted by polling firm Zenith Research, showed Mamdani holding what Zenith founding partner Adam Carlson described on X as a "commanding" lead of 28 points among likely voters in a five-way race featuring Cuomo, incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, Republican Curtis Sliwa, and independent candidate Jim Walden. Even in other scenarios where other candidates drop out of the race, Mamdani would still garner more than 50% of likely votes in each instance.
However, Mamdani's lead becomes much smaller when the poll is expanded to all registered voters, among whom he only holds a three-point advantage over Cuomo in a head-to-head matchup. This suggests that Cuomo has room to grow as long as he can convince Adams, Sliwa, and Walden to exit the race.
Even so, commented Carlson, Cuomo faces significant headwinds that could block his path to victory even if he succeeds somehow in making it a one-on-one race.
"Another thing that’s extremely tough for Cuomo is that 60% of likely voters (as well as 52% of registered voters) would not even consider voting for him," he explained. "Only 32% say they wouldn't consider voting for Mamdani. Cuomo will need to go scorched earth to bring that number up."
New Yorkers who oppose Mamdani will have to place their hopes in the disgraced former governor, given the dismal standing held by incumbent Adams.
"Eric Adams is a complete non-factor in this race," remarked Carlson. "He polls at 7% in the five-way race, 14% if Cuomo drops out, and 32% if Cuomo and Sliwa drop out. More than half of [likely voters] strongly disapprove of his performance and have a very unfavorable view of him. 68% won't consider voting for him."
The poll also found Mamdani with an overall lead among Jewish voters despite efforts by opponents to paint him as antisemitic given his opposition to Israel's war in Gaza and his past reluctance to criticize the slogan "globalize the intifada," which he told The Bulwark he viewed as "a desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights." New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, a progressive Jewish ally of Mamdani's who has endorsed his mayoral bid, acknowledged before the election that some Jewish people view the phrase as a threat of violence.
Among likely Jewish voters, Mamdani leads Cuomo by 17 points in a five-way race. Although Cuomo holds a double-digit lead over Mamdani among likely Jewish voters over the age of 45, Mamdani dominates among young Jewish voters by pulling in more than two-thirds of likely Jewish voters between the ages of 18 and 44.