‘To Adolf Hitler in Loyal Subservience!'

Anyone with an interest in the history of political vengeance should pay a visit to the rare-book room at the Library of Congress and request the bound volume with the call number DD244.R6. Compiled by Hitler's chief ideologue, Alfred Rosenberg, Dreissig Novemberköpfe, or Thirty November Heads, is the future chancellor's political hit list as of 1927: The book profiles government officials, legislators, judges, lawyers, journalists, academics, and one popular satirist targeted by Rosenberg for 'poisoning the life essence' of the German people with democratic processes and ideas.
The title is a mendacious nod both to November 1918, the month associated with the founding of the Weimar Republic—'November Republic,' 'November Criminals,' 'November Traitors'—and to the 1789 French Revolution, when heads rolled from guillotines into the hands of the people.
While Thirty November Heads is perhaps the most public catalog of Hitler's political enemies, the more sinister one was the list of communists, social democrats, and people within the Nazis' own ranks that was being secretly compiled by Hitler's Sicherheitsdienst, or 'SD.' Established in 1931, this 'Security Service' was run by Reinhard Heydrich, the ambitious, 20-something assistant to Heinrich Himmler, chief of the Schutzstaffel, or SS. Working out of a spare, upper-floor office in the Nazi Party's Munich headquarters, Heydrich assiduously collected the names of—and compromising information on—potential Nazi targets on thousands of index cards, a shadow operation within the dark realm of Himmler's black-uniformed SS protection squads.
Timothy W. Ryback: How Hitler dismantled a democracy in 53 days
Following the Reichstag elections, on March 5, 1933, which came on the heels of Hitler's appointment as chancellor on January 30, the Nazis seized control of state and local government with a deluge of 200,000 brown-uniformed storm troopers. Local authorities were thrown out of their offices. Swastika banners were hoisted over town halls. Citizens attempting to remove these unauthorized symbols were assailed. Some were sent to concentration camps.
In the southern state of Bavaria, two of Hitler's closest associates, Adolf Wagner and Hans Frank, were installed as state interior minister and state minister of justice, respectively. Himmler was appointed the new chief of the Bavarian state police, known as the 'Green Police' because of the color of their uniforms, while retaining his position as head of the SS. Joseph Hartinger, a Bavarian state prosecutor, immediately recognized the conflict of interest. 'Himmler had authority over the SS as well as the state police,' Hartinger observed, 'and thus had to be obeyed whenever he gave personal orders relating to police measures in concentration camps.'
Himmler suspended Green Police authority over the recently established network of detention facilities, transforming them into black sites in the justice system, a hellish world beyond the reach of accountability or judicial recourse. Himmler also placed his assistant Heydrich in charge of Department IV, the intelligence service of the Bavarian state police. Heydrich now had access to thousands of classified police files, including the reports of police informants who had infiltrated the Nazi Party's ranks. For people such as Herbert Hunglinger and Sebastian Nefzger, this was a catastrophe.
Hunglinger was a 53-year-old retired police major who had joined the Nazi Party in 1920, according him the honorific Alter Kämpfer, 'Old Warrior,' bestowed on those who had joined the movement in the earliest years, before National Socialism had become politically fashionable. Hunglinger helped establish the Führerschule, a special school for training party leaders, and was said to have possessed the personal trust of the Führer. But recognizing the threat Hitler posed, Hunglinger was all the while feeding intelligence to Bavarian authorities. When his cover was blown, Hunglinger was subjected to brutal interrogation. He confessed his role as a police informant and was dispatched to Dachau, along with five other moles ferreted out by Heydrich via his examination of the Department IV police files.
In Dachau, Hunglinger was placed in Barrack X, a series of single concrete cells, where he was lashed and beaten at regular intervals by SS guards. The pain was such that he begged for a revolver to shoot himself. 'We don't have revolvers,' Hunglinger was told, according to postwar testimony. 'Besides, you're not worth the bullet.' In a 'charitable' gesture, he was handed a leather belt and told to hang himself. When guards discovered that Hunglinger was still alive the next day, he was given a particularly severe beating. 'That should do it,' an SS guard observed. The next day Hunglinger was found dead, hanged by the neck.
Sebastian Nefzger, another police informant who had infiltrated the Nazi Party, was found dead in his cell with his wrists slit. An autopsy revealed that the 33-year-old salesman, with a wife and child, had in fact 'died from asphyxiation, resulting from strangulation and beating.' The flesh on his back had been flayed to the bone.
Loyalty was the sine qua non of service to Hitler and his movement. SS men swore blood allegiance to their Führer: ' Treue ist mein Eid,' 'Loyalty is my oath.' Treue was reciprocated with Treue, betrayal with unspeakable savagery. The pervasiveness of this blood credo throughout the National Socialist hierarchy, including among Hitler's closest associates, is evidenced by an inscription in Hitler's copy of November Heads now held at the Library of Congress. 'To Adolf Hitler in loyal subservience!' reads the handwritten dedication.
The author of that dedication was Gregor Strasser, who—in addition to being co-owner of Kampf Verlag, the publishing house that had brought out Thirty November Heads —was in the early 1930s considered equal to Hitler by many in the Nazi Party and superior to him by some. Karl Lüdecke was a Hitler disciple who knew Strasser well. 'Within Nazidom, Gregor Strasser was, next to Hitler, the most powerful man and the most effective speaker,' Lüdecke recalled. According to Lüdecke, Strasser was also the most articulate and ardent voice of 'the socialist wing' of the Nazi movement, 'strong-willed, independent, creative, with a mind of his own—ambitious, but unwilling to sell his soul for the sake of advancement.' Hitler was the fanatical nationalist. Strasser was the committed socialist. Together, the two men lent credence to the National Socialist Party name.
Strasser possessed a pragmatism that Hitler lacked. 'The visionary genius of this man is singular,' Strasser said of Hitler. 'But what good is genius that is not anchored in reality, whose brilliant ideas cannot be implemented in the real world.' Implementation became Strasser's job. The two men had met in the summer of 1921, and across the next decade Strasser assumed growing control over the party's evolution. It was Strasser who managed the surge in party membership from 27,000 in 1925 to 800,000 by 1931. He quadrupled the number of party chapters, from 71 to more than 270, and, most important, restructured party administration to align with voting precincts, helping drive the Nazis' stunning electoral successes in the early '30s. As evidence that he considered himself the chancellor's peer, Strasser never addressed Hitler as Mein Führer, only Herr Hitler.
Hitler and Strasser divided Germany into respective political realms. Hitler commanded the south. Strasser, along with his younger brother, Otto, oversaw the north. Hermann Rauschning was a prominent Nazi in the port city of Danzig. 'Hitler's nature was incomprehensible to the North German,' Rauschning observed. North Germans preferred a man like Strasser, who was 'practical, clearer headed' and 'quick to act without bombast and bathos, with a sound peasant's judgment.' When Hitler visited the Ruhr industrial region, he was annoyed by the predominance of Strasser posters.
The left-wing weekly journal Die Weltbühne took the measure of both men: 'It doesn't require much prophetic skill to be of the opinion that in the not-too-distant future Strasser will press his lord and master Hitler into a corner and take the reins of the party.' Within senior party ranks, Strasser was commonly known as 'Gregor the Great.'
Despite his near-equal position within the party, Strasser placed loyalty to Hitler above all else. Rosenberg recalled that Strasser invariably ended his speeches with the declaration 'I fought as a Hitler man, and I will go to my grave as a Hitler man.' But when Hitler clashed with Otto Strasser over the direction of the National Socialist movement, Gregor was forced to choose between Hitler and his brother. One day in the spring of 1928, while Gregor was away, Hitler appeared in the Strasser brothers' Berlin office and threatened to dispatch 10 storm troopers to pull Otto into line. Otto drew a revolver from his desk. 'I have eight shots, Herr Hitler,' he said. 'That means eight fewer storm troopers.' Hitler stormed out of the office. But Gregor would side with Hitler over his brother. 'Thank God we did not lose Strasser,' Hitler said at the time. 'Loyal subservience'— treue Gefolgschaft —indeed.
But subservience did not mean permanent blindness. In 1932, when the party radicals—Hermann Göring, Joseph Goebbels, Ernst Röhm—pressed Hitler on a 'rule or ruin' strategy, Strasser spoke his mind to Hitler, urging accommodation and restraint. When the Nazis took a beating at the polls in the November 6, 1932, Reichstag election, shedding 2 million votes and 40 Reichstag seats, the party was thrown into crisis. 'The Führer had misplayed his cards' was the line circulating among senior Nazi Party ranks. The game was up. Karl Lüdecke recalled that Hitler, 'with his own chances diving towards zero, was rushing feverishly with his aides from place to place, fighting desperately to fend off a complete Nazi collapse.'
Strasser calmly took matters in hand. He told Hitler that the time had come for accommodation. The party should enter into a coalition with Berlin's ultimate power broker, Kurt von Schleicher, who was a confidant of German President Paul von Hindenburg. Hitler waffled, then dug in. 'Strasser argued that Schleicher had to be tolerated,' Goebbels reported to his diary. 'The Führer clashed as fiercely with him as I have ever seen.'
Hitler was furious when he learned that Strasser had met with Schleicher to explore potential cooperation. He accused Strasser of betrayal. Strasser was reportedly dumbfounded. 'Herr Hitler, do you really believe me capable of such a dirty trick?' Strasser asked.
'Yes,' Hitler replied.
Strasser was 'deeply wounded' by Hitler's accusation. Hans Frank met with Strasser shortly afterward. Frank knew Strasser to be one of the most 'confident and pragmatic men' he had ever met. But he found Strasser completely undone, despairing that Hitler was now in the clutches of the party radicals. 'Frank, this is horrific,' Strasser said. 'Göring is a brutal egotist who could care less about Germany, Goebbels is a club-footed devil, Röhm is a pig. These are the Führer's guards.' Strasser resigned his party posts, as well as his Reichstag seat, but retained his party membership, ostensibly so as not to damage the already faltering political movement he had helped build.
Strasser departed Berlin for a six-week vacation in Italy. Goering and Goebbels, as Lüdecke later recalled, 'struck while the iron was hot.' By the end of January 1933, Hitler was chancellor, Göring was a cabinet minister and the chief of police of Prussia, and Goebbels would soon be minister of propaganda. Strasser withdrew from political life, devoting himself to his business interests.
Timothy W. Ryback: The oligarchs who came to regret supporting Hitler
Hitler spoke of bringing Strasser back into the party, but no one took him seriously. Hitler had always seen Strasser as a threat and seemed to be relieved to have him out of the way. Some thought Hitler's talk of reengaging with Strasser was tactical, to keep Ernst Röhm, who had succeeded Strasser as the second-most-powerful man in the party, off-guard. In the early summer of 1934, when Hitler feared a possible coup by Röhn and his army of storm troopers, Hitler decided to resolve any doubts about who held absolute authority.
On Saturday, June 30, he flew to Munich and dispatched Himmler and SS men on a blood purge of senior storm-trooper ranks—a killing spree code-named Operation Hummingbird. Röhm was taken into custody, handed a pistol, and told to shoot himself. 'If I am to be killed,' he said, 'let Adolf do it himself.' Röhm was shot dead on the spot. Dozens of senior Röhm associates were summarily executed.
That same day, the SS paid a visit to the Berlin residence of Kurt von Schleicher, who had preceded Hitler as chancellor. When he opened the door, he was asked whether he was von Schleicher. 'Yes, I am General von Schleicher,' he said, and was shot dead on the spot. Schleicher's wife, hearing the gunfire, rushed into the foyer and was gunned down as well. Another former chancellor, Heinrich Brüning, also received a knock on the door of a Berlin address where he was thought to be residing, while, in fact, he had already fled the country.
That same afternoon, Gregor Strasser was having lunch with his family at his home in Berlin. At 1:30 p.m., five Gestapo officers entered the house and informed Strasser that he was suspected of 'treasonous activities' and that his office in Munich was to be searched. This must have come as a surprise to Strasser. On February 1 of that year, Strasser had been awarded the Golden Party Pin, one of the Nazi Party's highest honors, inscribed with Strasser's founding-membership rank, Number 9. Upon arrival at his office, Strasser was handed over to a waiting SS detachment. There are conflicting accounts of what happened next, but the most credible has him being placed in a cell at the Gestapo headquarters in the Prince Albrecht Palace, where on Reinhard Heydrich's orders he was shot—in the neck rather than the head, to prolong the agony. He bled to death on the concrete floor over the course of an hour.
During those same hours, Strasser's private attorney was shot in his office after refusing to surrender documents 'concerning Strasser's conflict with Hitler,' and Strasser's former chief of staff was also shot from behind outside his Munich apartment. Strasser's right-hand man, the Nazi military officer Paul Schulz, was seized and taken for a ride by the Gestapo before being thrown out on the road with the words 'Now run, you swine!' Schulz was shot five times and left for dead, but he miraculously survived. (After dragging himself down the road, he was found by a passing car and eventually escaped to Switzerland.) In all, the Night of the Long Knives officially claimed 84 victims, but the actual number was probably much higher.
By June, all but one of Rosenberg's 30 November heads were either dead, imprisoned, or living in exile. The first November head to go down, before Rosenberg even published his book, was Walther Rathenau, the Weimar-era foreign minister who insisted that Germany respect the 'war guilt clause' in the Treaty of Versailles and adhere to the onerous war-reparation payments. In Thirty November Heads, Rosenberg observes that this 'racial Jew and liberal esthete' received his just desserts when he was assassinated, in June 1922, by right-wing extremists. Another November head, Matthias Erzberger, who helped negotiate the November 11, 1918, armistice that ended the First World War, was also assassinated by a far-right group before Rosenberg's book was published. Including Rathenau and Erzberger in the book was Rosenberg's not-so-subtle way of nodding to the fate that awaited the remaining 28.
A few others had by 1934 already died of old age or natural causes. These included Friedrich Ebert, the first president of the Weimar Republic, and Gustav Stresemann, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate, who, according to Rosenberg, had as 'chancellor of capitulation' and 'foreign minister of subservience politics' helped subjugate all of Europe to the 'reign of Jewish high finance.' Others, like the Social Democratic Party's leader, Otto Wels, and the popular satirist Kurt Tucholsky (Hitler 'has a mustache like Chaplin though hardly as funny'), had fled into exile before dying—Wels to France, where he succumbed to a heart attack, and Tucholsky to Sweden, where he committed suicide. On August 23, 1933, Robert Weismann, 'a Jew and a Jurist,' was one of the first 33 Germans to be 'denationalized,' their citizenship legally stripped, and deported as an undesirable alien. By 1934, most of the other remaining November heads were in concentration camps.
Graeme Wood: Germany's anti-extremist firewall is collapsing
The lone member of Rosenberg's list to still be alive and free in Germany as of June 1934 was November head No. 18, Hjalmar Schacht. Schacht was, according to Rosenberg, a central banker who learned the 'dark arts' of high finance from Jewish bankers—'Goldschmidts, Mendelssohns, Wassermanns'—and brought ruin to the German economy with inflationary practices while pocketing for himself an annual, inflation-proof salary of '250,000 Goldmarks.' But while Schacht was, according to Rosenberg's book, a 'criminal abuser of the German people and the 'father of the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the German people,' he would emerge six years later as one of Hitler's most important facilitators, introducing him to financiers, hosting election fundraisers, and urging President Hindenburg to appoint Hitler chancellor. For these efforts, Hitler rewarded him with a cabinet post and the presidency of the Third Reich's central bank.
Yet Schacht soon found himself dismayed by the government in which he was now complicit. 'How could you ever take upon yourself the responsibility of determining the fate of human beings without any judicial proceedings?' Schacht asked Hitler after the Night of the Long Knives. 'No matter what the circumstances, you should have allowed the trials to take place, even if they had only been summary trials.' Schacht continued to quarrel with Hitler, and in 1938 went so far as to publicly rebuke him for what happened to Jews on Kristallnacht. Eventually, like the other surviving November heads, Schacht would find himself dispatched to a series of concentration camps, ending up at Dachau. Hitler reciprocated Treue with Treue. Until he didn't.
After the bloody 1934 purge, Hitler gave a speech justifying his actions. 'If anyone reproaches me and asks why I did not resort to the regular courts of justice, then all I can say is this,' he said. 'In this hour I was responsible for the fate of the German people, and thereby I became the supreme judge of the German people.' Hitler was as explicit as he was unapologetic. 'I gave the order to shoot the ringleaders in this treason,' he said, before going on to dismiss the killing of others, such as Strasser and Schleicher, as collateral damage. 'I further gave the order to cauterize down to the raw flesh the ulcers of this poisoning of the wells in our domestic life,' Hitler continued. 'Let the nation know that its existence—which depends on its internal order and security—cannot be threatened with impunity by anyone! And let it be known for all time to come that if anyone raises his hand to strike the State, then certain death is his lot.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Politico

an hour ago

• Politico

How Germany Changed Its Mind About America, Thanks to Donald Trump

Five days after his election victory in February, Friedrich Merz's world collapses. That's how he will describe it later. That Friday evening, he steps off the stage at a large conference center in Hamburg's port, where cruise ships usually moor. He has just been hailed as 'the future federal chancellor,' and more than a thousand party supporters have cheered on their chairman at a rally of the local chapter of the Christian Democratic Union, Germany's main center-right party. At around 8:15 p.m., he shakes a few hands in farewell, then drops into the backseat of his official car for the three-hour drive home. It is February 28, 2025. Merz checks his phone and notices a message from his spokesperson. He should watch a video, preferably immediately. Merz pulls out his iPad, opens the link, and recognizes a room familiar to anyone who follows politics. Two armchairs upholstered in gold damask sit in front of a fireplace with no fire burning. In front of the fireplace is a table made of fine wood inlaid with an oversized seal. It's the Oval Office in the White House. To Donald Trump's right sits a small, bearded man in a black military sweater embroidered with a stylized trident, the national symbol of Ukraine. It is Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, a country invaded by Russia. Merz holds him in high esteem. Merz has visited Zelenskyy twice in Kyiv and, just a few days ago, accepted Zelenskyy's congratulations on his election victory. Ukraine has high hopes for Merz. The new chancellor is expected to finally provide the Taurus, a German cruise missile capable of penetrating bunkers, which Merz's more liberal predecessor as chancellor, Olaf Scholz, refused to provide throughout his time in office. In the video, Zelenskyy looks tired. Tired and helpless. Merz is dismayed as he watches the U.S. president humiliate his Ukrainian counterpart. Trump accuses him of endangering millions of lives and risking a third world war. When Zelenskyy retorts that it was Russian President Vladimir Putin who started the war, Trump interjects harshly. In front of the cameras, Zelenskyy is scolded like a naughty child for several minutes. 'Did you ever say thank you?' Vice President JD Vance asks Zelenskyy, hurling this question at him several times. 'That was good television,' Trump says at the end of the meeting. The subsequent talks, which were supposed to be about security guarantees after a ceasefire, are canceled. A fully negotiated raw materials agreement is not signed. The celebratory lunch is canceled. Zelenskyy waits another 20 minutes in an adjoining room. Then, an official appears and simply sends him away. Merz has just finished watching the nearly 40-minute scene when he posts a solidarity message to Zelenskyy in English on X: 'We must never confuse the aggressor with the victim in this war!' He is on the phone nonstop in the car until he arrives in Sauerland and then for half the night. He also speaks with Scholz, who would still be chancellor for another two months. Scholz and his designated successor agree that something historic happened that day in Washington. The Americans are threatening not only to abandon Ukraine but also all their allies. Is Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, which requires every member to come to the defense of every other member, still to be taken seriously? Would U.S. soldiers defend Germany against a Russian attack? Are American nuclear missiles still a credible deterrent? The two men agree that given these circumstances, Germany must rebuild its national defenses. As quickly as possible and at whatever cost. And it will cost a lot, between 1 and 1.5 trillion euros over the next 12 years — double the previous amount. Spending that much money on defense isn't easy. In Germany, the 'Schuldenbremse' or 'debt brake' is a fiscal rule enshrined in the Constitution. It is designed to limit the amount of new government debt to a maximum of 0.35 percent of gross domestic product. Before the elections, Merz campaigned on keeping the debt brake and insisted as chancellor he could do without extra debt. But in the coming days, Merz will flip his position and agree to this new borrowing. The humiliation of Zelenskyy has changed everything. This account of the election of Merz and his first days as Germany's incoming chancellor is based on more than 50 conversations with sources, some close to Merz, who were granted anonymity to speak freely. Merz's doubts about his prior convictions had been building for weeks. A few days before the general election, Merz met with Vance in Munich. Merz wanted to dissuade the American vice president from publicly urging Germans to vote for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. 'These are not friends of America,' Merz said, 'but partisans of Putin.' Vance nodded in apparent agreement. Just a few hours later, during his speech at the Munich Security Conference, Vance stunned the audience. He declared that restrictions on freedom of speech in the EU are a greater threat than Russia or China. He called for firewalls to be torn down across Europe and for right-wing populists to be included in politics. The vice president did not mention the AfD by name. However, a few hours later, reports circulated that Vance had met with not only Merz, but also with AfD leader Alice Weidel at his hotel before the speech. He had not told Merz about this meeting. Even then, two weeks before Zelenskyy's humiliation in the Oval Office and one week before the Bundestag elections, Merz had begun privately considering the need for Germany to take on additional billions in debt. 'What the new American president, Donald Trump, has said in Washington these last few days…' he told the audience from the campaign stage in Hamburg, 'Ladies and gentlemen, we are witnessing a fundamental shift in the global political landscape.' Following the Munich Security Conference, Merz discreetly asked former Constitutional Court judge Udo Di Fabio to explore whether it would be possible to amend Germany's Basic Law with the votes of the outgoing Bundestag. The 'Basic Law' is Germany's equivalent of a constitution. It can only be changed by a two-thirds majority in parliament. That also applies to the debt brake. Getting a two-thirds vote would be possible with the old Bundestag, but not the new Bundestag that was expected to have a higher representation of AfD and other fringe parties. Shortly afterwards, Di Fabio sent him his expert opinion. Amendments to the Basic Law with the votes of MPs who had already been voted out of office were possible up to 30 days after the election. That would be March 25, the same day the new Bundestag would be seated. Merz would have less than a month to execute an about-face. On the day of the election, Merz gave the first public signal that his thinking was changing when he appeared with other candidates on the Berliner Runde, a television program in which party leaders comment on the election as soon as the polls close. 'For me, it will therefore be an absolute priority to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the USA,' he said. Independence from the USA? Scholz, sitting right next to Merz on TV, could hardly believe it. Until now, European politicians had carefully avoided suggesting that Europe could manage its defense without the Americans. Germany, which has neither its own nuclear weapons nor a robust army, needs American troops and their nuclear umbrella more than anyone. Merz, considered a staunch transatlanticist, was giving up on the USA? 'Since U.S. President Donald Trump's statements last week, it has been clear to me that this administration is largely indifferent to the fate of Europe,' Merz continued. A summit of the transatlantic military alliance is scheduled for the end of June. 'Will we even be talking about NATO in its current form then?' he asked. 'Or will we then have to establish an independent European defense capability much more quickly?' The next day, when the election results had been tallied, Merz praised the outcome in a press conference: 29 percent was much less than the Christian Democrats had hoped for, but Merz argued it was a success if you look at the number of votes rather than percentage points. The Christian Democrats gained 2.5 million votes compared to the previous Bundestag election, and the Christian Socialists gained 500,000, he noted. What he failed to mention is that the AfD gained over 6 million votes. After an election campaign more polarizing than any in decades, more people turned out to vote than in previous years, and the AfD was the beneficiary. Merz was genuinely outraged by the scene in the Oval Office. But he also knew he could use this indignation to his advantage. After all, he would need a credible narrative to justify the political turnaround, the astronomical increase in defense spending, that will take place under his leadership. The election results meant that, for the first time since World War II, centrist parties no longer have a two-thirds majority in Parliament. Without a two-thirds majority, centrist parties cannot elect judges to the Federal Constitutional Court, declare war on an invader or amend the Basic Law. For example, to reform the debt brake. The situation is reminiscent of the late phase of the Weimar Republic. At that time, the National Socialists and Communists together held over 50 percent of the seats in the Reichstag, preventing the Social Democrats, Liberals and Christian Democrats from governing effectively — thus fueling growing frustration with democracy. This created a vicious circle that led to the collapse of the first republic at the beginning of the 1930s. Is this a bold comparison? The AfD and other fringe parties already control a blocking minority in the state parliaments of three German states: Saxony, Thuringia and Brandenburg. The same will be true in the Bundestag when the new MPs are seated March 25. Scholz also played a role in urging Merz's turnaround. In meetings unnoticed by the public, Scholz and Merz met several times in the chancellor's office after the Bundestag elections, sometimes with other center-right politicians present. At one of these meetings, Scholz presented intelligence service findings on the immense scale of the Russian arms buildup. Despite the enormous losses in Ukraine, Putin would have considerably more tanks and missiles in just a few years than before the invasion. The intelligence suggested he is preparing to wage another war, this time against Europe. Scholz, who campaigned as a peace chancellor, advised his successor to do the opposite: to massively rearm. Germany's new government coalition joined Merz's Christian Democrats with Scholz's Social Democrats. In the days after the election, the coalition partners convened private negotiations to reach a spending plan they could implement before March 25. In those talks, the sums involved increased by the hour. On March 4, when the partners reappeared in public to announce their deal, there was great astonishment. There were no longer any limits to rearmament. Merz secured special funds for a defense build-up over the next 10 years that were five times larger than an increase Scholz negotiated just three years ago. An additional special fund of 500 billion euros had been agreed upon for rebuilding the country's infrastructure. Why was Merz, the avowed debt hawk, now so willing to push Germany so deep into debt? 'In view of the threats to our freedom and peace on our continent, the same must now apply to our defense: Whatever it takes!' Merz said at a press conference. The saying was a quote from Mario Draghi, the former head of the European Central Bank, who used this slogan in 2012 to scare off speculators who wanted to bet on a breakup of the eurozone. Now Merz used the same quote to explain his rearmament plan. At a parliamentary group meeting later that day, Merz reported that he would be traveling to Brussels to take part in the meeting of the heads of state and government of the EU Council. And then he said something curious: 'If Trump announces his withdrawal from NATO tonight, then we, the Federal Republic of Germany, will be the first to have reacted correctly in advance.' There was horror among the MPs. Merz was deadly serious. The total turnaround in financial policy began after the shock appearance by Vance at the Munich Security Conference. Merz justified it by pointing to the humiliation of Zelenskyy at the White House. But now he was talking about an imminent U.S. withdrawal from NATO. How did Merz get this idea? Trump was set to give his first speech to a joint session of Congress that same night. Merz explained to close allies later that he had received information from an American source indicating that Trump would use the speech to announce a U.S. withdrawal from the Western defense alliance. He had reason to trust his source. Two weeks earlier, the source had provided him with advance information on Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference. Merz held a conference call the night before the speech and warned Christian Democratic leaders that Vance would shake the transatlantic friendship and launch a rhetorical attack on Europe. That is exactly what happened. Merz and his allies were prepared. Warned once again, Merz expected the worst from Trump's speech to Congress. During conversations and phone calls with confidants, he made it even clearer than he had in the parliamentary group meeting that if Trump announced a NATO withdrawal that night, Putin might react immediately with an attack on the Baltic states. During those hours when he agreed Germany should take on a trillion-euro debt, Merz was acting on the belief that a new war in Europe was possible and NATO was on the brink of collapse. His vote in favor of the record debt came against this dramatic backdrop. As we know, things turned out differently. Trump delivered his congressional speech but did not mention a withdrawal from NATO. To this day, Merz does not believe that his Washington source misinformed him. The NATO withdrawal announcement had been prepared, he believes. Trump changed his mind at the last minute. (POLITICO Magazine asked the White House to respond to the assertion that Trump had considered using his March 4 speech to a joint session of Congress to announce a U.S. withdrawal from NATO. In an emailed statement, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said, 'Such an announcement was never included in any draft of any speech.')

Politico

5 hours ago

• Politico

The winners and losers in Trump's NATO arms race

NATO members are rushing to show President Donald Trump they're shoveling money into defense — some with a dose of creative math — as Russia's battle with Ukraine grinds on and war threatens to consume the Middle East. The group's summit this week in The Hague, which Trump plans to attend, will attempt to set a deadline for members to spend 5 percent of GDP on defense. Trump has complained about European defense budgets since his first term, claiming the U.S. gets ripped off by countries that rely on Washington for a security blanket. The way allies approach this at the summit is critical. Leaders will need to walk a tightrope between staying on the president's good side — and continuing to benefit from America's role in NATO — and declaring more independence from Washington. As Trump increases pressure, members are touting new investments and shuffling around money — from a 'defense-adjacent' Sicilian bridge to a stopgap German fund. A POLITICO analysis reveals telling gaps between the big spenders in Eastern Europe and those further afield from Russia, who are still creeping toward a decade-old target. The 32 member states break down into three groups: the winners, the risers and the laggards. Most countries occupy a crowded middle ground, not quite racing toward the new 5 percent goal, but making solid progress in exceeding the current 2 percent mark. 'Most of NATO recognizes that it has to be better,' said a U.S. Defense Department official, who like others, was granted anonymity to discuss internal conversations. 'We're looking at these meetings as a very public chance, with the president watching, for them to step up.' Here's how NATO members are faring in the race to spend. Poland has led the pack for the last several years, spending 4.7 percent of its GDP on defense as it splurges on everything from drones to fighter planes. The country, which borders Russia and has dealt with errant missiles killing citizens, is keenly aware of the threat from its eastern flank. That kind of wake-up call has spurred Warsaw to ask the European Commission to shift $6.9 billion of its funding in green projects to defense. The bigger spending has made Poland a favorite in Washington. The Poles are getting creative in their weapons purchases by mixing systems and suppliers from multiple countries to get equipment delivered faster. Poland was the first NATO member to spend billions on South Korean long-range artillery and other systems — a move that other countries frustrated with delayed shipments of U.S. weapons, such as Finland, are emulating. Countries will do 'whatever works' to get to 5 percent, said a diplomat from a NATO member country, including folding infrastructure upgrades into defense spending to push the overall number higher. Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia — former Russian territories that tend to march in lockstep when it comes to defense spending — have outlined plans to hit 5 percent by next year or soon after. They're already among the alliance's top spenders. Baltic officials are embracing a 'porcupine' strategy, modeled off Taiwan's efforts to ward off a Chinese invasion. This involves using small, mobile and lethal weapons fired from shore at any Russian Baltic Sea fleet ships that might threaten them. Greece is a surprise spender on defense, bucking the trend of most Mediterranean countries by dishing out more than 3 percent of its GDP. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis in April announced a 12-year, $28 billion defense strategy that will focus on uncrewed vehicles, munitions, drones, satellites and its Achilles' Shield air defense system. The U.S. spends more than any other member on defense, but it still only reaches 3.4 percent of GDP. The country faces its own political challenges in reaching the NATO goal, even with a potential 2035 deadline that allies may recommend at the summit. The United Kingdom and France, Europe's two nuclear states, have made steady increases in recent years but face issues behind the scenes. Britain's defense budget rose from 2.2 percent of GDP in 2023 to 2.3 percent in 2024, with a sharp increase in research and development spending. It also paid extra for major operations such as air defense in the Red Sea and aircraft carriers deployed to the Pacific. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has promised to take that figure to 2.6 percent by 2026 — thanks in part to folding in intelligence and slashing spending on foreign aid. But he's beset by severe budget issues and has not yet set out a path to his goal of hitting even 3 percent. Paris has steadily increased defense spending since President Emmanuel Macron came to power in 2017. But it only hit 2 percent last year. France is one of the European Union's most indebted countries, and public finances are dire. It's unclear how the government would find extra money to reach the 5 percent goal, especially as Macron has ruled out raising taxes. Germany and Sweden have both rewritten their debt rules as they reach 2 percent and aim higher. German governments saw the NATO target as non-binding for years, and only the advent of war in Europe — dubbed the Zeitenwende, or turning point, by former German Chancellor Olaf Scholz — prompted the country to change course. Berlin in 2024 reported 2.1 percent of GDP on defense spending, exceeding the alliance benchmark for the first time since 1990. But the increase doesn't boost combat strength and relies on some fancy accounting. A sizable chunk of the 2024 defense budget came from a special temporary spending fund. Sweden's defense spending surged following its 2024 accession to NATO from 1.5 percent to 2.2 percent of GDP last year. Stockholm is tweaking its debt rules to allow for up to about $30 million in defense loans by 2035. Then there's Turkey. While Ankara has missed the 2 percent mark in recent years, it has a well-developed arms industry and punches above its spending weight in weapons and the size of its military — the second-largest in NATO. Several strategically vital countries hang well below the 5 percent goal, particularly Canada, Spain and Italy. All three have made pledges to catch up. But politics, accounting tricks and historical habits are slowing progress. Canada spends just 1.37 percent of GDP on defense, with key equipment gaps across its forces. Prime Minister Mark Carney this month promised to hit 2 percent 'this fiscal year,' bringing forward a target initially set up for 2029. The lag has deep roots. Ottawa has long relied on U.S. defense guarantees while prioritizing social spending and climate goals. Carney is framing rearmament as a sovereignty issue in light of Trump's threats to annex Canada, but that would require a rapid ramp-up in procurement and industrial capacity. Spain remains NATO's lowest spender, aside from Iceland, which has no army. Madrid spent 1.3 percent of GDP on defense in 2024. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has rolled out an €11 billion military upgrade plan to reach 2 percent this year. It's the country's most ambitious defense posture in decades. But Sánchez is boxed in by his governing coalition. Left-wing allies remain opposed to higher military budgets, and previous attempts to raise spending triggered a backlash. He asked Rutte this month, in a letter obtained by POLITICO, for a carveout to the new spending target. 'It is the legitimate right of every government to decide whether or not they are willing to make those sacrifices,' he wrote, saying it would jeopardize the country's welfare system. Italy was only slightly higher at 1.5 percent last year. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said the government will hit the 2 percent target this year, but officials suggest that may happen more through clever accounting. Rome wants civilian infrastructure, such as a planned bridge to Sicily, to count as a defense-adjacent goal. Defense spending remains a politically fraught topic as the country faces high debt levels and strong pressure to protect pensions and welfare. This text is a collaboration of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network. Paul McLeary reported from Washington, Chris Lunday reported from Berlin and Esther Webber reported from London. Jacopo Barigazzi in Brussels, Mike Blanchfield in Ottawa, Jack Detsch in Washington, WELT's Philipp Fritz in Warsaw, Max Griera in Brussels, WELT's Thorsten Jugholt in Berlin and Laura Kayali in Paris contributed to this report.

Chicago Tribune

7 hours ago

• Chicago Tribune

Today in History: Voting age lowered to 18

Today is Sunday, June 22, the 173rd day of 2025. There are 192 days left in the year. Today in history: On June 22, 1970, President Richard Nixon signed an extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that lowered the minimum voting age to 18. Also on this date: In 1815, Napoleon Bonaparte abdicated for a second time as Emperor of the French. In 1938, in a rematch that bore the weight of both geopolitical symbolism and African American representation, American Joe Louis knocked out German Max Schmeling in just two minutes and four seconds to retain his heavyweight boxing title in front of 70,000 spectators at New York's Yankee Stadium. 1941, Nazi Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, a massive and ultimately ill-fated invasion of the Soviet Union that would prove pivotal to the Allied victory over the Axis Powers. In 1944, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, more popularly known as the 'GI Bill of Rights,' which provided tuition coverage, unemployment support and low-interest home and business loans to returning veterans. In 1945, the World War II Battle of Okinawa ended with an Allied victory. In 1977, John N. Mitchell became the first former U.S. Attorney General to go to prison as he began serving a sentence for his role in the Watergate cover-up. In 1981, Mark David Chapman pleaded guilty to killing rock star and former Beatle John Lennon. In 1986, Argentine soccer player Diego Maradona scored the infamous 'Hand of God' goal in the quarterfinals of the FIFA World Cup against England, giving Argentina a 1-0 lead. (Maradona would follow minutes later with a remarkable individual effort that become known as the 'Goal of the Century,' and Argentina won 2-1.) In 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court, in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, unanimously ruled that 'hate crime' laws that banned cross burning and similar expressions of racial bias violated free-speech rights. In 2011, after evading arrest for 16 years, mob boss James 'Whitey' Bulger was captured in Santa Monica, California. In 2012, former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky was convicted by a jury in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, on 45 counts of sexually assaulting 10 boys over 15 years. (Sandusky would later be sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison.) Today's Birthdays: Actor Prunella Scales is 93. Actor Klaus Maria Brandauer is 82. Fox News analyst Brit Hume is 82. Musician-producer Peter Asher (Peter and Gordon) is 81. Musician-producer Todd Rundgren is 77. Actor Meryl Streep is 76. Actor Lindsay Wagner is 76. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is 76. Actor Graham Greene is 73. Singer-songwriter Cyndi Lauper is 72. Actor Bruce Campbell is 67. Environmental activist Erin Brockovich is 65. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is 65. Basketball Hall of Famer Clyde Drexler is 63. Actor Amy Brenneman is 61. Author Dan Brown is 61. Actor Mary Lynn Rajskub is 54. Football Hall of Famer Kurt Warner is 54. TV personality Carson Daly is 52. Actor Donald Faison is 51. Football Hall of Famer Champ Bailey is 47. Golfer Dustin Johnson is 41.