Working with All One's Strength for Peace: Giving Shape to the German Constitution's Commandment of Peace

• The German Basic Law mandates a commitment to peace, yet critics argue current policies of rearmament and military expansion are incompatible with these constitutional principles.
• Nuclear disarmament remains stalled despite the 1996 ICJ advisory opinion declaring nuclear threats illegal; globally, 12,000 nuclear warheads exist, with 9,000 operational.
• Germany’s defense spending has surged following the 2025 repeal of the debt brake, with the government aiming for a 5% GDP target.
• Proposals for a new "peace-building" infrastructure include creating a Ministry of Peace and formalizing dedicated budget lines for diplomacy and conflict prevention.

Militarization and Defense Policy

• Following the March 2025 Bundestag vote, the debt brake was relaxed, enabling a €100 billion special fund for defense.
• Germany now ranks fourth globally in military spending and plans to integrate American Tomahawk cruise missiles, which the authors identify as offensive, first-strike capabilities.
• Society is being urged to prepare for a "war of defense," including infrastructure upgrades to rail, bunkers, and logistics, despite skepticism regarding the immediate threat of a Russian attack on NATO.

The Constitutional Mandate for Peace

• Article 26(1) of the Basic Law prohibits the preparation of a war of aggression.
• Experts like Andreas Engelmann and Heribert Prantl argue that the government has failed to provide a structural framework for peace equivalent to the "social state" principle.
• Critics demand a shift toward the "Common Security" model, drawing from the 1982 Palme Commission, which prioritizes interdependence and arms control over unilateral military buildup.

Recommendations for Reform

• Peace researcher Hanne-Margret Birckenbach proposes:
  • Establishing a dedicated government ministry or specific department for peace.
  • Providing institutionalized funding for NGOs working in peacebuilding.
  • Mandating transparency in federal funds allocated for diplomacy and non-military security.
• Political scientist Johannes Varwick suggests capping defense spending at 2% of GDP to avoid exacerbating the current security dilemma.