search results

Spring to late autumn 2020 (DE) When the infection figures slowly fell in mid-April 2020, relaxations were granted. That shops beyond daily needs were allowed to reopen was good, that the outdoor area of restaurants and later also the indoor area could be used again was really very pleasing. But that hairdressers were allowed to open put an end to the wild growth on heads almost led to euphoric outbursts of emotion. Order on the heads Typical appearance in spring 2020: fuzzy hair and a self-sewn mask. I took the first of two selfies with my Corona hairstyle in May 2020. Almost shoulder-length, stringy lacklustre hair stuck to my head, even when freshly washed. Even the round blow-dried fringes hung straight, shapeless and too long over the eyes after a very short time. Horrible! I looked horribly old and, even worse, unkempt. In recent years, I have constantly urged my increasingly demented mother to have her shoulder-length shaggy hair cut. She looked terrible, I told her ruthlessly. But it didn't help. My reflection in the mirror now bore a certain resemblance to the confused look of my old mother. That's not me; that's not what I want to be! But, on the other hand, the hair would be long now, and one could work towards a long chic hairstyle. I didn't know what I wanted for a long time and therefore had no problem with the fact that I couldn't get an appointment at the hairdresser's anyway. Finally, I sat in front of the mirror at the hairdresser's and heard myself saying, "Short, please!" I had to do something radical after this period of holding still and enduring. A reflex? A substitute action? A protest action against current events? A visible sign of a new beginning? I don't know! But to this day, I also ask myself how it can be that the horror of the suffering of those seriously ill with covid, the death of so many thousands of people and the compassion for all those who have to fear for their livelihood, for their existence, moved me as much as the hairstyle on my head. Chaos in the minds Confusion also spread through the minds of myself and others, which could not be brought back under control by a visit to the hairdresser. I intend I do not want to be blind, as one is often as a contemporary. On the contrary, I want to be alert and informed in this crisis situation. My generation and all the younger generations had never experienced such massive restrictions on fundamental rights. Freedom of the person, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of movement within the federal territory were temporarily suspended. Even data protection, sacred at other times, was up for debate. The fact that the federal government and the Bavarian state government restricted fundamental rights in the context of infection control cannot be taken lightly. Indeed, care must be taken to ensure that restrictions, including those on data protection, do not remain in place beyond the pandemic, or so I thought. On the other hand, it was also clear to me that these measures protected people's health. After all, I consciously adhered to all the rules, convinced they made sense. Nevertheless, I always felt the sting of mistrust and the need for mindfulness at that time. I had always looked for a more profound background to political events because my grandmother had taught me early on that there were always two levels in politics: the generally visible and the actual reasons and causes. "Always ask who benefits!" was her mantra. So I researched the origins of the pandemic in China on the internet and found that this country was also getting ready to buy up companies and corporations that might have gotten into trouble due to the corona. China had done the damage and positioned itself globally to profit from it. The Chinese propaganda machine even turned the tables and claimed that the origin of the pandemic might be in Europe, more precisely in Italy. Moreover, the Chinese government passed all the information to the WHO and other countries in good time. The latter, however, had failed, unlike the Chinese government, and now wanted to put the blame on China. It is unbelievable. Was it possible that the Chinese rulers had accepted the pandemic because it increased the chances of China's political and economic expansion?! An outrageous train of thought, but is it also far-fetched?! But I also took a close look at which German politician was making a name for himself with what and which companies or branches of the economy were earning money from the measures. Were perhaps measures taken that were useful for some but not necessary? Scientists supported the measures and even demanded them. Moreover, arguments were presented and exchanged in the media, which was quite convincing. However, the experts did not always agree either. One could read statistics proving that this pandemic was extremely threatening to the entire population and the opposite. Only a tiny percentage would fall ill! Only older adults with pre-existing conditions would be at risk, similar to the annual flu. And voices were raised that brought up the collateral damage: psychological and physical effects in children and young people, such as depression, anxiety and obesity. Even the completely isolated elderly felt sad and abandoned; economic damage in the particularly affected sectors, build-up of national debt and a decline in economic growth, etc., were predicted. I made the experience that it would not be possible for me to find out the hundred per cent truth. So I had to make a conscious decision to believe and trust some more than others. An experience too! Nevertheless, I stayed on the ball as a critical observer. It is evident to everyone that the Bavarian Prime Minister was presenting himself as a doer to possibly be put forward by the CDU/CSU as a candidate for chancellor for the Bundestag elections in autumn 2021. No conspiracy theory or outstanding research was needed for that. The pandemic actually suited him. The fact that online shops and delivery services were booming and would probably save this order level beyond the pandemic was also not surprising. There were true "war profiteers" in this pandemic. And I also wondered how much this pandemic would help shape the future, even if it had long since subsided. Would home office working become more prevalent wherever possible? Could this lead to less concentration of people in the expensive cities and instead lead to healthy growth in the rural, partly isolated regions? Would people's shopping and leisure behaviour change fundamentally? What would be the significance and atmosphere of city centres? One could see empty and dead city centres for the first time at the time of the lockdown. Spooky! How many gastronomy, travel, retail, art and culture livelihoods would disappear forever? Like many others, I was witnessing the beginning of great social upheavals. Things would never be the same after the pandemic as they were before the pandemic. I was convinced of that. But was this an organically growing development or a controlled one? I couldn't quite let go of this question. Almost caught on the hop! "Querdenker" - a movement in Germany? And then a trustworthy friend, whom I know to be an intelligent, sensible woman, sends me a video in which a presenter strongly relativises the danger of the coronavirus Covid-19. This video talks about Bill and Melinda Gates raking in millions for vaccinations with their foundation and wanting to influence population growth via secret side medication. Bill Gates didn't exactly emerge as a philanthropic human whisperer during his time as a businessman. I don't have a lot of faith in him. But I don't like this blogger's exaggerated theories. So I do some more research and end up with articles that are so absurd that they make you dizzy. Paedophile circles around Hillary Clinton would hold children captive in underground rooms etc... The virus doesn't even exist... Flu is more dangerous... Politicians like German Chancellor Angela Merkel and doctors like Christian Drosten from the Charité would want to establish a dictatorship... In fact, more and more people are taking to the streets and want to shed light on the so-called corona and pandemic lie. They call themselves lateral thinkers. And now I am pissed off. For me, lateral thinking has always been a positive term because it means that you don't have scissors in your head that you question critically. You can imagine many options and scenarios and discard the ones that are not viable, and you research for information about backgrounds and motives and look for evidence and proof. In this sense, I have always seen myself as a lateral thinker rather than a conspiracy theorist. But all this is not to be found among the anti-Corona cross-thinkers. So now the term is burnt for any serious lateral thinker. What a pity. Quite uncomprehendingly, I see cross-thinker demos on television in which signs are carried comparing Germany with the Nazi dictatorship, in which calls are made for resistance, and demonstrators pin yellow stars to their clothing to compare themselves to cross-thinkers in the Germany of 2020 with the persecuted Jews of the Third Reich. And there are violent actions against journalists and dissidents. Right-wing groups are jumping on this bandwagon and are frighteningly successful in spreading their ideology. The whole thing seems absurd to me, and I can't figure out what drives these people. This is no longer a critical attitude. Hysteria? Yes! Objective debate? Not at all. I only calmed down again when a historian explained that this phenomenon also occurred at the beginning of the 20th century when the Spanish flu raged. Apparently, many people deal with a crisis that renders them helpless in such a hauntingly brainless manner. I read these days of the pandemic, "Branded. The True Story of Racism in America" by Ibram X. Kendi, published in German by C.H. Beck 2017, and found an interesting passage. Smallpox was raging in Boston around 1721. Kendi describes that at the beginning of the 18th century, influential citizens of the American colony learned from an enslaved person about a kind of preliminary form of modern "vaccination" that had been used in Africa for centuries to immunise against smallpox. The healers of West Africa took a tiny dose of pus from a smallpox boil and scratched the skin of a healthy person. This method was called inoculation. European physicians investigated this method with the resources of the time and recommended it to their compatriots in the colony. However, the highly respected physician Dr William Douglass in Boston saw his reputation in danger. He started the conspiracy theory that enslaved Africans were planning to kill their masters with this method. The newspapers spread this theory, and smallpox claimed many lives regularly. (see above "Branded", Ibram X. Kendi, p. 83/84). Do some situations in history repeat themselves in such a fatal way? But I have to say I underestimated the impact of this movement. In autumn 2021, the fourth wave of infections will build up, starting in southern Germany, and it is preparing to dwarf the first three waves. And all this despite the fact that there is now a vaccine against Covid-19. In Upper Bavaria and also in Saxony and Thuringia, esoterics, conspiracy theorists, lateral thinkers and, in some cases, right-wing followers are strong. They also have a conviction that is devastating in this case: they are opponents of vaccination. In the districts, especially in southern Upper Bavaria, the vaccination rate is about 53 per cent, but the 7-day incidence per 100,000 inhabitants in November 2021 is about 1,200. The intensive care units in the area are full. Government failure Instead of denying the pandemic and accusing politics of dictatorial desires, the responsible state organs could have been accused of a lack of crisis management in 2020. Compulsory masks and lack of masks After lengthy discussions between doctors, virologists and experts on medical protective clothing, as well as politicians about the benefit or harm of nasal mouthguards, compulsory masks were finally introduced in public transport, shops, doctors' surgeries, restaurants, etc... Yet, there were simply not enough masks to buy. Indeed, I suspect this shortage was the real reason for the strangely controversial debate about the usefulness of masks. Buying time!!! The opponents of compulsory masks argued, for example, that people would no longer observe hygiene and distance rules because of the apparent safety provided by wearing a mask. The improper use of a mask would even increase the risk of infection. Moreover, the protection is only indirect and minimal. The mask wearer releases fewer aerosols into the air and thus reduces the risk of infection for others. He himself, on the other hand, breathes in aerosols almost unfiltered. So the mask filters when you exhale but not when you inhale? I didn't quite understand the discussion. But it seemed to me that it was helpful to wear mouth-nose protection, however round it was. Unfortunately, you couldn't buy one at the moment, making the discussion about the usefulness seem strange—the evil of it all. But people are always inventive in such situations. So I researched on the internet what material I could use and how to make my mouth-nose protector. And I bought coffee filters because a doctor had recommended this mask substitute in a video and showed how one could easily make such a thing. However, I didn't have the necessary rubbers for the ear holders, and I couldn't find these parts anywhere either. So I grabbed a tea towel and made a gigantic nose and mouth protector. Unfortunately, my sewing talent is very modest, so in the end, I resorted to the fabric masks of more talented contemporaries, which could soon be bought in health food shops and everywhere else. Strictly according to the instructions of virologists, I only touched the fabric mask on the side after use, put it in a bag and boiled it out regularly. But if I wasn't supposed to touch the outside of the used mask and had to boil it because viruses might have collected on it, then I should actually have cooked myself and not just washed my hands for three minutes. I didn't quite understand that in my nitpicking, but I went along with it and didn't boil myself but the mask. You never know, and it doesn't do any harm. Probably! Parallel to our attempts to produce all kinds of masks, government representatives and members of parliament from the federal states and the federal government were promoting purchasing and producing more professional surgical and FFP2 masks. There were a lot of offers from China, but they wanted to be independent in the medium term and ensure quality. In the summer of 2020, the people had no idea who was sniffing out which business. It was not until 2021 that the public learned that CSU politicians such as Georg Nüsslein, a member of the Bundestag, and Alfred Sauter, a member of the Bavarian state parliament and former Bavarian Minister of Justice, among others, had become involved as paid intermediaries in the mask business that was starting up and had earned millions in intermediary fees from it. Others, such as the Free Voter leader and Bavarian Minister of Economic Affairs and Deputy Minister-President Hubert Aiwanger, awarded contracts to entrepreneurs who were friends of theirs and left out more competent producers with expertise in the production of medical products. A Lower Bavarian car supplier company based near the Aiwanger homestead received the order for the mass production of masks. However, a company from the Augsburg area, which already had expertise in mask production and had also applied for an order, was hardly considered. People and the media showed little understanding of such deals, which had to be dealt with by the courts. However, it turned out that this business acumen did not violate any legal principles. It was neither corruption nor bribery. Morally, everyone agreed this had been reprehensible for a representative of the people but criminally irrelevant. As a result, Alfred Sauter left the CSU more or less voluntarily but did not lose his mandate. As a normal part of the population, it is impossible to understand why elected representatives can see an opportunity to enrich themselves privately in the face of all the misery, helplessness and urgent need. At the same time, there is a significant shortage. Some lose their livelihoods or even their lives, and others, whose job it would be to protect the population, rape millions. Test chaos The collection and evaluation of the tests of returning travellers after the summer holidays was also problematic. The Bavarian Prime Minister Markus Söder tried to make a name for himself by offering tests for returnees at the Bavarian border with Austria. Those who came from a risk area had to get tested anyway; all others could do so voluntarily. Bavaria, and with it Markus Söder, was supposed to act as a bulwark against the return of the virus with the travellers. But this prestige project went badly wrong and cost Bavarian Health Minister Melanie Huml her job. Several test stations were set up at border crossings and on the motorway within a few days. The Bavarian Red Cross provided the staff, some of whom were volunteers. However, there was no appropriate software with which a functioning database could have been set up without an intermediate step. As a result, many test volunteers had to fill out forms by hand, which were passed on to the staff to enter the data into the system—a very time-consuming and error-prone method. The BRK was soon overwhelmed by the volume of data, as were the laboratories. The Bavarian State Office of Public Health could not even notify those who tested positive quickly. Over a week, 44,000 people who tested positive were not informed. Nine hundred of them had tested positive. They went their separate ways unsuspecting, met friends, relatives and colleagues and passed on the virus. A fiasco! The procedure is supposed to have been made more efficient and reliable at the airports in Germany. But who knows! Nevertheless, at the end of the travel season, the infection figures rose again. A second wave was building up, and no politician dared to contemplate another lockdown. One almost had the feeling that politicians thinking and acting in campaign mode were waiting for someone to lose their nerve and be the first to impose a lockdown on the electorate. Contact restrictions in nursing homes - a tragedy for my elderly mother with dementia As before, however, nursing home residents were rigorously protected by contact restrictions. This greatly affected me because my demented 86-year-old mother could no longer be visited in the nursing home since the spring of 2020. The situation was fatal because she had not been able to use a telephone independently for some time. Since I did not live in the same city as my mother, I would have had to spend six hours there and back in full trains to perhaps be able to see her through a pane of glass or at the window. Staying in a hotel was not possible because of the infection control law and probably not recommended. So I wrote funny cards to her and took advantage of the home's facility to at least have a telephone conversation with her from time to time via an intermediary so that I also heard from her and not only she from me. But talking on the phone was exhausting for her. And, of course, she didn't understand what was going on. She, who had been walking the streets of her neighbourhood every day, chatting people up mercilessly, was now not allowed to leave the house. She didn't understand. She didn't believe that everyone meant well to her. She became grumpy and finally very angry. When she threatened a flatmate at the end of the summer of 2020, she was taken to the psychiatric ward of the district hospital, where they hoped to be able to adjust her medication. I learned by phone that she had been suffering from Alzheimer's for a long time, a diagnosis that had not been communicated to me by her family doctor. But now the partly disturbing behavioural abnormalities added up to a clinical picture. Surprisingly, I was allowed to visit her in the psychiatric ward of the district hospital. In the late summer of 2020, the shops and restaurants reopened with restrictions such as mandatory masks, limiting the number of visitors, and hygiene concepts and the number of infected people was still low, but the pandemic was definitely not over. There was still no vaccine and no medication for therapy. So it was a big deal to enter a place where sick people and people needing special protection lived. I was careful in my everyday life, but I was terrified of possibly spreading the virus to the old and sick. My son drove me there, but he was not allowed inside because only one person was allowed in. I was frantic because the procedure was new to me then and very intimidating. I had to ring the doorbell, disinfect my hands, and put on a mask. Then, after a while, a counsellor came and took my temperature and handed me the obligatory form on which I had to fill in my contact details and ensure that I had no symptoms of illness and had no contact with a sick person. So far, so good! Then I was led to a glass cabinet, and at the same time, my mother was also led there. She recognised me and was pleased. But this joy was soon over because we were only allowed to greet each other by waving at a distance and sat opposite each other at a large table with masks on our faces. I felt as if I were visiting my mother in prison. The allowed 20 minutes were over quickly, and my mother was very sad that we were not even allowed to shake hands, let alone hug each other goodbye. That would have been important to her because she could no longer keep memories in her head. She could only feel the moment of closeness for a moment. After a week, she was sent back to the nursing home. It had become September in the meantime, a mild autumn announced itself, but also a new wave of infections. My son, my daughter-in-law and I were not allowed to go to the nursing home, but because of the mild weather, we could take my now immobile and dozing mother for a walk in the park in her wheelchair. Unfortunately, she only gave us a few light minutes on our second visit. We were not supposed to touch and hug her, but we allowed ourselves a little stroking anyway. She was handed over to us at the nursing home door, and we left her there slumbering. The whole situation was absurd and sad. We felt very helpless. Then, at the beginning of October, the number of infections rose rapidly again regionally, and the autumn weather no longer allowed outdoor meetings. I was still allowed to enter the nursing home alone, but for how much longer?! My residence was becoming a high-risk area, so further restrictions on contact and movement were to be expected. So I planned my next visit as soon as possible and very meticulously. I took the first-class train to keep my distance, but I didn't want to bring coronaviruses into the nursing home. So I walked from the station to avoid picking up anything on the bus. It was probably hysterical, but my fear of being responsible for the death of the elderly was enormous. My mother was barely responsive at this point. She refused to eat and had only a brief lucid moment during my visit. When I left, however, she looked sadly after me. We both felt that we would not see each other again. And so it came to pass. The place where I lived became a high-risk area in October, so it was not feasible for me to visit or even accompany her and stay overnight in a hotel. Clearly, my mother was dying, and the home would have even allowed me a farewell visit, but I had no chance to organise it safely for myself and the home. So when my mother died on 23 October, we were not with her. Only my son and I were on her deathbed, but my daughter-in-law, whom my mother loved, was not allowed in. Only two people! But my mother was no longer present anyway. I felt that very clearly. There is a lot to say that I acted wrongly in this situation and let her down. But there is also a lot to say that my mother would have approved of my actions if she could still have been asked. I will never know in the end, but I will spend the rest of my life wondering precisely that. The funeral was held in the smallest of circles due to contact restrictions, but it was still very coherent. My son, my daughter-in-law, my friend from childhood and adolescence, who had experienced my mother as a young woman, and I were allowed to say goodbye together in a mourning room because we came from only two households. As the three of us, my son, daughter-in-law, and I drove home together in the car; we suspected that we were heading for autumn and winter with high infection rates and profound restrictions. (TA)

November 2020 to November 2021 (DE) These twelve months, from late autumn 2020 to November 2021, blur my memory into a mush of infection numbers that pile up higher and higher as the second, third and fourth waves. Life, however, seems to be without high points and instead full of low points and crushed hopes for even the shortest holiday trip, for visiting friends, for the lightness of summer and the end of the pandemic. If I had to assign a colour to this year, I would choose grey. If I had to name one feeling as predominant, it would be listlessness or even bleakness. My train of thought during this time often led to the question of whether this restricted state would now be with me for the remaining few years of my life. My analytical mind worked itself to breaking point at the ignorance and often also at the indecisiveness and inaction of the politicians and threatened to despair at the stupidity of a minority among my fellow citizens gone wild. Again and again, I felt caught in a time loop because certain experiences and situations seemed to repeat themselves constantly, as did the slogans of the scientists and the political leaders. At the beginning of the pandemic, in the spring of 2020, I was still curious about the developments. I learned a lot about the virus and pandemic management, and had lively exchanges with friends with the help of modern technology, often spiced with humour. I was ready to put all this down as a new, enlightening experience. However, in 2021, the hope of an end faded away. I, like many others, was worn out by the ups and downs of infection figures, openings and renewed lockdowns, measures taken by the federal and state governments and their withdrawal by those responsible or by constitutional courts, the warnings of virologists and the wait-and-see attitude of government officials. I would like to tell you about these experiences during this part 4 of my pandemic experiences and start with a few key dates: From 20 October 2020 to 08 June 2021, the peak of the first wave (in April 2020, over 72,000 active cases/infections) was never undercut. At the peak of the so-called second wave, on 24 December 2020, there were over 400,000. At the bottom of the wave, on 02 March 2021, over 126,000 infections were counted. This brief low was followed quickly by a new peak on 25 April 2021, with about 322,000 active cases. (Source: John Hopkins University) On 15 November 2021, Germany counted 476,000 active corona case numbers. Again, a new high and winter had only just begun. The chart from statista.com (see below) illustrates the development described and provides an overview. Source: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1181971/umfrage/aktive-faelle-des-coronavirus-in-deutschland/#professional These figures show that there was never any real easing of the situation during this period. On the contrary, the infection figures increased from wave to wave, partly due to the new mutation, the Delta variant. There was no real hope of an end to the pandemic at no point. Looking back at events from late autumn 2020 onwards In November 2020, many wondered why no planning for autumn and winter occurred during the summer. Was it not apparent to the political leaders that the virus had by no means been eradicated? With the autumn, the infection figures would rise again, and that medicine still had nothing to counteract this? The scientists stood empty-handed and urged preventive measures, contact restrictions, testing concepts, etc. The exponential growth overshadowed everything that had been frightening in the first phase of the pandemic. The people and, astonishingly, the federal and state governments' representatives were amazed by this development that had been predicted by experts, not by esoterics looking into a crystal ball. This scenario of ignoring the results of scientific simulations on infection figures and the incredulous amazement at the development that, in fact, occurred was to be repeated many times. In the New Year's classic "Dinner for One", the old lady says: "The same procedure as every year, James". In Germany at that time, one could say: "The same procedure as every year Jens, Angie, Markus...". (Jens Spahn – Health minister, Angela Merkel, Chancellor, Markus Soeder- Bavarian Head of State) Incidence - a pivotal point That autumn, I stared daily at the infection figures published in the news and all media in the form of incidence figures. At the beginning of the pandemic, the R-factor (reproduction factor, i.e., How many others does one infected person infect on average? If this factor falls below 0.7, the event subsides) was an assessment criterion and a benchmark for behavioural regulations. When the R-factor was replaced by incidence rates (cases of infection within seven days per 100,000 inhabitants) as a basis for political measures and why I don't remember. In the media, all of Germany's districts and independent cities were now shown with their incidence as measured by the Robert Koch Institute. So every day, you could read whether you lived in a high-risk area and whether the incidence of infection in the immediate vicinity was increasing or decreasing. In Bavaria, attempts were made to convert these differences into travel restrictions. If, for example, the incidence in a district was over 100, then one was only allowed to leave one's residence up to a radius of 15 km beyond its outer borders. There were exemptions for visits to the doctor, work and shopping. Why the virus might lurk beyond 15 km was not discussed. How this could be controlled had not occurred to anyone. The freedom of movement of, for example, the people of Munich up to their town limits already included many times more kilometres of freedom of movement than the town limits of a small town plus 15km. This measure could no longer be called unfair but only a joke. The road signs at the edge of the town, which indicated the distance to the next town, took on a whole new meaning. However, the Bavarian state government, more precisely the Prime Minister Markus Söder, was met with puzzled headshaking. The Bavarians jokingly wondered how far they could drive and then went their way as usual. This measure seemed so nonsensical to most of us that we didn't even get upset about it or protest against it. Instead, we ignored the nonsense, which was not maintained for long. The dependence of openings and contact restrictions on local incidence lasted longer. While in Munich, for example, it was already possible to shop in department stores and boutiques by giving contact details, in Hof, everything was still closed. Strangely enough, the incidence in the large cities of southern Germany fell faster than in northern Bavaria on the border to the high-incidence areas of Thuringia, Saxony and the Czech Republic. The border withon the Czech Republic was also closed for a time. Although my residence is close to the Czech border, the border closure did not affect me. But when I was able to enter a department store in Munich, my first place of residence, for the first time again after a long time, to try on clothes in the textile department and buy a few accessories, I realised how much I had missed this freedom. However, one had to leave one's address at the entrance and the time of entry etc. But with the incidence, the aggravations also fell, and one day, except for the mask, a little normality returned. What remained was the restriction on the number of visitors in many shops. For example, the "Penny-Markt" supermarket around the corner installed a traffic light system at the entrance that turned red when there were too many shoppers in the shop. And until today (February 2022), you can disinfect your hands at the entrance of the shops. Long-running issues: Mask obligation and mask deals On 18 January 2021, it was decided that FFP2 masks must be worn throughout Germany. The problem was, of course, again, as at the beginning of the pandemic, the sourcing of masks. It was compulsory to wear them, but it was impossible to obtain sufficient supplies. Such an FFP2 mask could now no longer be handmade by oneself, and it was more expensive than surgical masks. They also could not be boiled like the handmade fabric masks but were disposable. So there was a prioritisation of who was eligible. First, high-risk patients such as the elderly and chronically ill were supplied through the pharmacies free of charge with three of these masks. Then they were available for purchase at a low price. Finally, everyone could buy as much as they wanted. Apart from a few enterprising members of parliament and representatives of the Bavarian government, China of all countries successfully entered the market niche. No matter where you buy the masks, whether on the internet or in a pharmacy, most of them are "Made in China". Occasionally, one finds the label "Made in Germany" and then pays more for it accordingly. After all, the price includes the commissions for the people's representatives. We are talking about a multi-million-dollar business here. A few politicians mediated between mask producers and suppliers and the federal government and Bavarian state suppliers. They included political celebrities such as Georg Nüßlein (then MP for the CSU), Alfred Sauter (CSU MP of the state parliament), Andrea Tandler (daughter of former CSU minister and secretary-general Gerold Tandler) and Monika Hohlmeier (CSU member, former Bavarian minister for education and cultural affairs, currently a member of the European Parliament and daughter of the former Bavarian prime minister Franz-Josef Strauß). While MPs Nüßlein and Sauter bagged commissions in the tens of millions, MEP Monika Hohlmeier denies receiving any financial benefits. However, she acted as a door opener for her friend Andrea Tandler for the Swiss company Emix. Then, the two company owners sold masks worth almost 700 million euros in Germany. German ministries paid between €5.50 and €9.90 per mask. The most expensive deal ever. Of course, the commission for Andrea Tandler's PR agency was correspondingly worth millions. Source: https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/ndr-wdr/maskenaffaire-sms-spahn-101.html Bavaria is known for its amigo affairs, which take place right on the border of legality and, in any case, cross the line into unethical reprehensibility. The courts called upon to rule on the matter found no corruption. However, MPs Sauter and Nüßlein were ostracised by their party or forced to resign. Representatives of the people who exploit the plight of the people to rake money into their private coffers are not fulfilling their responsibilities. They have forfeited the title of representatives of the people. But even the fact that the governments were so unprepared in the first place that they believed they had to accept overpriced offers cast doubt on their ability to represent the people. In this pandemic, many mistakes were made and are still being made by various government coalitions. Some were of a communicative nature, and others of an organisational nature. Others showed a lack of decisiveness. However, the mask affairs could also indicate how the federal and state governments do business, not only when there is a pandemic, and some become overbold with greed. Fear of Lockdown - Fear of the Voters Considering that on 9 December 2020, when Bavaria once again declared a state of emergency, 319,000 infections were counted daily, while the first time on 16 March 2020, there were only about 7,000, one wonders why a lockdown light was still hesitantly discussed in minister-president meetings with Chancellor Merkel. In my memory, wishy-washy decisions, modified again by each minister-president for his federal state anyway, waft through autumn and winter. I observe the potential chancellor candidates of the sister parties CDU/CSU, Armin Laschet (MP North Rhine-Westphalia) and Markus Söder (MP Bavaria), sharpening their profiles. The one from the north is deflecting, and doesn't want a lockdown. He develops plans that are rejected by the rest of the republic because they are pointless and impracticable. The other one from the south plays the doer, pushes ahead with stricter regulations, puts everyone under pressure and still has the highest infection figures in his federal state. In November 2020, politicians whispered that the Germans should hold back on socialising to be able to celebrate Christmas in the usual family circle. And New Year's Eve should not suffer too much from Corona either. For me, there is only one explanation for this tactic: In September 2021, elections are taking place, and politicians are just setting their opinions, actions and presence to election campaign mode. The need for a lockdown was evident to any reasonably rational person. Moreover, at that time, we were experiencing for the first time exponential growth, during which there seemed to be no upper limit. One could see and feel the dilemma of the election campaigning politicians and parties, almost hearing their inner monologues: If I annoy people with overly unpleasant measures, they won't vote for me. But if I come across as indecisive, they won't vote for me either because then I don't show any leadership qualities. But, on the other hand, if I do nothing at all and talk a lot and resolutely, then the infection figures go sky-high. Still, the survivors might then vote for me! ... That's how I imagined it in my rage at the fact that the people's representatives didn't want to do justice first and foremost to their task but wanted to raise their profile. Angela Merkel, of all people, who did not want to stand for re-election and therefore was not concerned about the votes, pushed for far-reaching measures in the minister-presidents' conferences. She, who no longer wanted to govern the people, tried to represent the people's interests in this crisis. But she did not stand a chance. How absurd is that? On 16 December 2020, however, it was the end of the line for everyone. Finally came the hard lockdown until 10 January 2021. Only the shops for daily needs were allowed to stay open. This put the brakes on the Christmas shopping frenzy. Good thing too! There is something to be said for a little more tranquillity in the last days of Advent. It was never so quiet before Christmas. People seemed relieved that a decision had finally been made. On such occasions, one becomes aware of how much we all need a certain level of guidance. I am not entirely comfortable with this realisation. Guidance? How much guidance? To be led by whom and to where? However, leadership seems to be beneficial and indispensable in this case. According to the decision, the strict rules for personal contacts - a maximum of five people from a maximum of two households - were to be relaxed for Christmas. Accordingly, from 24 to 26 December, meetings with four people from the immediate family beyond one's own household were permitted, plus children up to the age of 14. This could also allow more than two households. In addition, under certain conditions, church services were permitted. There was a nationwide ban on gatherings on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day. In addition, the sale of fireworks for New Year's Eve was prohibited as a matter of principle. My family only consists of five people, one dog and one cat. So for us, everything we had planned was allowed. My son, daughter-in-law, and I celebrated in Hamburg with my ex-husband and his wife. On Christmas Eve, at about 11 p.m., we met on the street between the houses with the neighbours - at the biggest possible distance, of course - and sang Christmas carols while holding candles in our hands. It was beautiful and harmonious, and for a few hours, the pandemic no longer played a role in our lives. On 24 December 2020, the peak of the infection wave passed with 400,000 infections. After that, the infection numbers slowly decreased. However, they never fell below the highest level of the first wave before rising again from the beginning of March 2021. Extended winter blues or maybe even depression? All hope for improvement lay in the spring awakening. But the opposite was the case. Exponential growth gave rise to bad omens. A federal emergency brake had emerged from one of the minister presidents' conferences with the Chancellor. The political representatives had agreed that the regional states would decide on their own more far-reaching restrictions once the 7-day incidence exceeded the hundred mark. But this did not stop the exponential growth. So it came to a farce that exposed the helplessness and confusion of those politically responsible these days: On 23 March, the Minister Presidents' Conference with Chancellor Merkel decided, after 12 hours of deliberation, on a so-called extended Easter holiday. In addition to Good Friday and the usual Easter holidays, Maundy Thursday and Easter Saturday were also declared holidays. Furthermore, only grocery shops would be allowed to open on Saturday. The intention was that the wave would be broken during these five days of rest when contact was restricted. The implementation of this decision had to be aborted on the very next day. The decision-makers had not thought through what consequences this closure would have for workers, companies, and shops. The Chancellor withdrew this measure and apologised for the confusion. She even took sole responsibility, which was, of course, nonsense because all the regional prime ministers had helped to organise this debacle. So we more or less lived in a permanent lockdown or were threatened with an even harsher lockdown with curfew and even stronger contact restrictions. I felt completely at the mercy of the whims of a virus, the helplessness of our political leaders and Saint Peter, who, as we all know, is supposed to be responsible for the weather on earth. In Germany, in Bavaria, to be precise, it never really turned into summer. On the contrary, it was cold and wet, and on some days in August, I even had to turn on the heating, while heatwaves in southern Europe and the USA caused massive forest fires. When unbelievable amounts of rain led to devastating, unprecedented floods in the states of North Rhine-Westphalia and Rhineland-Palatinate in mid-July, it felt a bit like the apocalypse. Everyone murmured that these were the consequences of climate change. So, finally, something had to be done about it, and typically German, elementary insurance should become compulsory for homeowners. For a while, Corona was but background music. Those who did not have well-functioning denial mechanisms did not go on a holiday lightly but observed with concern the changing infection patterns in Germany and the holiday countries and the moderately successful vaccination campaign. Everyone was dreading a new lockdown, and everyone was annoyed to the point of anger. At the beginning of the summer, Germany's infection protection measures were slowly reduced. At first, shops and restaurants opened according to local incidence. Still, people were only allowed in with an appointment and a test. Later they were permitted with proof of vaccination, recovery, or test, finally without restriction except for the obligation to wear a mask. The students mostly sat at home, whether in quarantine or to prevent infection; it didn't matter. They were studying in their homes. The first-year and second-year students wondered what their university looked like from the inside. They had not yet entered a lecture hall or seminar room. But there were relaxations. People managed to travel. After all, many things became possible with tests, good business deals even including fraud. Travel-willing people were not bothered that only the PCR tests gave reliable results and were happy to buy them. Tour operators, airlines, hotel and restaurant industries fought for existential survival, and the guests fought against depressive moods. So a win-win situation?! But not for those who became infected on the plane, for example, and then infected others at home. I personally didn't feel truly free. It was only a matter of time before new waves would come. These could lead to lockdowns or at least some kind of restrictions. To me, it was clear it simply wasn't over yet. Published figures, scientific projections and scenarios or simulations left no doubt about that. And as so often in life, it drove me crazy that the whole world was acting as if the pandemic problem had been solved. Yet a new mutation appeared on the horizon, the highly infectious and quite aggressive Delta variant. I would have loved to have had more talent for denial during this time. The infection figures rose again at the end of July 2021, maybe because mass events were now possible. From 11 June to 11 July 2021, the European Football Championship was held in front of crowds in 10 European cities and Baku, Azerbaijan. The Allianz Arena in Munich was also the venue, and the fans behaved as true fans do. Boozing and bawling and gathering together. I watched underground trains packed with fans rolling past me to the stadium. Their shouting and chanting pushed every respirator mask to its limits. The final match at Wembley Stadium in London was two-thirds full, with 60,000 spectators. There was no mask requirement, probably because no one would have stuck to it anyway. This event was great for the starving football fans who had had enough of ghost matches without an audience. But it was absurd for all those who wondered why infection control measures were once in place when suddenly mass events were allowed to occur at a time of rising incidence. In 2020, this international football event was postponed because of the Corona pandemic. However, the games took place in 2021 despite the rising number of infections that were in Germany in June 2021, 4 to 5 times higher than in the same period in 2020. Thanks to UEFA and its business sense. Do we need to understand this? You don't have to, but you can justify it. There was one big difference in 2020: the world had vaccines. Well, not the world, but some countries did. Vaccine shortage and vaccination opponents In November 2020, Ugur Sahin (Professor of Experimental Oncology at the Medical Clinic of the University of Mainz) and Özlem Türeci (Professor at the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz), the founding couple and CEO (Sahin) and Medical Director (Türeci) of the BioNTech company appeared before the press. They declared that their publicly listed company BioNTech-Pfizer had developed an mRNA-based vaccine against covid-19 that would provide 95% protection against infection. A glimmer of hope! Other pharmaceutical companies soon brought vaccines onto the market. AstraZeneca had developed a vector vaccine, and Moderna offered an mRNA-based vaccine, as did BioNTech, to name but the best known. However, the countries' approvals were still taking a long time, and the German vaccination commission is working thoroughly. For that, though, I am honestly grateful. The EU then went shopping for all 27 member countries and worked out quotas. But of course, there was a dispute with, for example, the Swedish-British company AstraZeneca. The company allegedly found itself unable to meet delivery commitments due to production difficulties but was perfectly capable of increasing its supplies to the UK. At least, that is how it was communicated in the press. But BioNTech's production was also a bit bumpy at the beginning. After all, the production had to be set up first. So what was the result? Lack of vaccine! Start-up difficulties! Vaccine prioritisation! There were four groups of prioritisation in the winter and spring of 2021, the time of the vaccine shortage. The deciding factors were age and pre-existing conditions. With my 68 years, I ended up in prioritisation group II. The fact that I have a damaged heart due to a heart attack did not matter. So I waited patiently and for a long time quite calmly for the things that were to come. What came first and foremost were discussions. The anti-vaccination activists mobilised on social media and the streets. Vaccination centres were set up at great expense. At some point, the family doctors intervened, saying they could take over the vaccinations because they knew their patients' medical records better than the doctors at the vaccination centre. This was especially an argument because the AstraZeneca vector vaccine had been discredited. First, the vaccine was recommended only for people under 60 years of age due to a lack of data, and then only for people over 64. The Stiko ( Permanent Vaccination Commission) had to deal with cerebral vein and sinus vein thrombosis cases in young women after vaccination. The use was suspended and re-released, but now for older people and no longer for young people. A few studies later, a U-turn again! BioNTech for the elderly and AstraZeneca, after thorough consultation, for the young. Why, why, why? It was difficult to understand because the side effects were actually very rare. In the UK, for example, 4 cases of thrombosis and one death occurred in one million vaccinated people. But the press also pounced on every speculation as if it were a matter of avoiding mass vaccine damage. No wonder this vaccine became a slow seller, and people became increasingly suspicious altogether. All these arguments took place even though there were not enough vaccines available for everyone. The media told tales of vaccine tourism, cheating to move up in the prioritisation group, and vaccine critics such as Hubert Aiwanger (Free Voters), Bavarian Deputy Minister-President and Bavarian Minister of Economic Affairs. In April, I was still waiting for a vaccination appointment at the vaccination centre. Around me, there were already many vaccinated people younger than me, but with better reasons. What these reasons were precisely was a mystery to me. Slowly, I began to get the feeling that the vaccine system might have forgotten me. Then suddenly, I received an offer by telephone of an appointment for the very evening. I didn't care about the type of vaccine, but it was BioNTech, the generally preferred vaccine. I had almost no side effects with the first vaccination, but with the second vaccination, I felt aching limbs and joints for two days lurking in the background for another week. But then it was over. It was a good feeling, a kind of hope that times might get better after all. Excited and agitated discussions marked this phase. Finally, when enough vaccines were available at the beginning of July 2021,them and the vaccination prioritisation was lifted, the interest in vaccination waned among the population, and there was no peace at all. Polarisation, resentment and anger Heated discussions took place in the reader forums of the Süddeutsche Zeitung and interviews and reports on radio and television. While most people still had to wait for their vaccination, others called for the immediate withdrawal of restrictions on vaccinated and recovered people because any restriction on the fundamental rights of vaccinated people now had no legal basis. The younger ones sneered that they no longer had a good life because of the older people, even though young people did not get seriously ill. Now, these selfish older people wanted all their rights of freedom back just because they had been given priority in vaccination. After all, they, the young, could not help it if no one had wanted or been able to vaccinate them. But when everyone could have been vaccinated in the summer of 2021, the vaccination campaign was slow in coming. After all the bad press and the tossing and turning about individual vaccines and their side effects, many people had reservations. People also distrusted the vaccines because they received medical clearance in such an unusually short time. "This can't have been properly researched!" many argued. Then, of course, there were the ideologically motivated vaccination refuseniks who saw a political or pharmaceutical industry-driven conspiracy behind the vaccination campaign. In any case, "vaccination refusers" (anti-vaxxers) became a synonym for stupid, irresponsible, lazy, antisocial people. Countries and municipalities considered motivating those who refused vaccination because they were lazy. So mobile vaccination teams were set up in busy places, such as shopping centres, next to the bratwurst stall etc. I was amazed that after this long period of lockdown and contact restrictions, there were people who had still not had their vaccinations because they had not yet been able to arrange them. If you were going shopping anyway, you could do it quickly. A doctor's appointment or an appointment at the vaccination centre? No, no, no! The vaccination centres complained in the summer that many people did not show up for the second vaccination. Probably they couldn't make it because they were on holiday. And the debates in the print, online, audio and visual media kept finding new material. Now there was discussion about whether vaccine refusers should perhaps be the last in the line to be cared for or even have to pay for their treatment costs if they had to go to the hospital for a severe corona disease. Serious thought was being given to whether or not employers should be allowed to ask about the vaccination status of their employees. It was also considered whether unvaccinated people should receive continued pay in the event of a quarantine. Corona tests, required according to the 3-G rule for the unvaccinated to visit restaurants and events, had to be paid for. But, of course, this is also a topic of discussion! Whether children should be vaccinated, whether the scientists recommended it, and if so, at what age also led to emotional and rational upheavals. Tidal wave of the unvaccinated and Corona deniers On 05 November 2021, the 7-day incidence per 100,000 inhabitants was around 150 across Germany, and 250 in Bavaria, with an upward trend. People were talking about an infection wave of the unvaccinated. For example, 90 % of the patients in intensive care units who had to be ventilated were unvaccinated. In a radio interview, I heard a stunned doctor saying that he had people lying there who were seriously ill with Corona. However, they still claimed that Corona did not exist, that they would never be vaccinated and that the whole family had not been vaccinated and never would be. You don't know what to say to that. About two-thirds of Germans, including me and my family and friends, are vaccinated. Those over 70 in the first vaccination phase need a booster vaccination. The recommendations go toward booster vaccination, i.e. booster with a third vaccination, for everyone. Children under 12 have not yet been vaccinated in Germany. The opponents of vaccination organised a day of remembrance for the victims of the Corona vaccination. Around 5 million people worldwide had died of or with Corona at that time, about 100,000 of them in Germany. The Paul Ehrlich Institute in Germany investigated about 100 suspected cases of deaths close to the time of the vaccination. Most of them were very old and had suffered from other severe illnesses from which they eventually died. Corona outbreaks often occurred in nursing homes when the newly vaccinated had not yet developed sufficient vaccine protection. Others were not allowed to have a post-mortem examination at the request of their relatives. To cut a long story short, there was no scientific proof of deaths caused by the vaccination. November 2021 - Germany in a desolate state I felt like I was in an endless loop in which events were constantly repeating. The slogans of politicians, the warnings of experts, the ignorance of most people, the exponential growth in the number of infections, the fear of hospitals and their medical staff being overburdened... Intensive care units were running out of beds and staff. Nurses and doctors were exhausted after more than a year of constant stress. Some quit and looked for a new line of work. When interviewed, they said it was particularly enervating to see that many younger people were in intensive care. They did not get vaccinated, even though there was enough vaccine for everyone. Fear? Ignorance? Opponents of vaccination? Phlegmatic? They wouldn't know. The vaccination rate in Germany in November 2021 was just under 68 %. In regions with an incidence of over 1000, a vaccination rate of just over 50 % had been achieved. That was not enough to contain the pandemic. In a speech on 15 November 2021, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier called out to the unvaccinated: "What else needs to happen?" Particularly in southern Germany, Saxony and Thuringia, the incidence quickly rose to several hundred and exceeded the thousand mark. Why? I had and have a theory about that. In the south of Germany, the esoteric scene is widespread and distrusts conventional medicine and the pharmaceutical industry. In Saxony and Thuringia, the political right is strong, fuelling distrust of the German state and ranting about a vaccination dictatorship and fascist tendencies of the governing parties. This right-wing lateral movement is building up a network as part of the protests against Corona measures, which it will undoubtedly feed new content after the pandemic. The aim is to weaken democratic structures. All alarm bells are ringing when I think about this. But the German government's pandemic management was also quite lacklustre during this period. Half-hearted pandemic response Virologists urged that booster vaccinations be given to those who have been vaccinated. Vaccine protection wears off after five to six months, medical experts said. A booster vaccination would increase the protection again. But the vaccination centres were closed in the summer due to a lack of people willing to be vaccinated. So, where to put the masses of booster vaccinators? Booting the vaccination centres would take a while, and the delta wave was building up ominously. German politicians could have planned ahead by looking at Israel's development and handling of the pandemic. Israel boosted the population in good time and consistently. But during the summer, there had been an election campaign in Germany. The extensive withdrawal of restrictions and opening of retail, gastronomy and sports and cultural facilities could bring votes. By October/November 2021, political Germany was without leadership and direction in this current crisis. Whereas before the Bundestag elections in September 2021, the representatives of all parties were eager to explicitly demonstrate their competence in the pandemic through actionism or prudence, now they all had "better things" to do. The losers of the elections, the CDU/CSU, still provided the caretaker chancellor and the cabinet, including Health Minister Jens Spahn. But their representatives no longer felt responsible. Still-Health Minister Jens Spahn intended, during unchecked exponential growth, to let the legal instrument of declaring an "epidemic situation of national significance", which according to the Bundestag resolution, was to apply until 25 November, expire. The potential coalition partners and election winners, SPD, Greens and FDP, did not want to extend this legal basis for far-reaching Corona restrictions in Germany. Therefore, the state of emergency, which allowed the federal and state governments to react to the respective pandemic developments and issue binding regulations, was to be replaced by an amendment to the Infection Protection Act to be passed by parliament. The intention was to grant parliament the competence to legislate even in a crisis such as this pandemic. This was the current thinking in November. Given the rising infections, this discussion was of secondary importance. Germany needed concrete decisions at that time. But no one wanted to expose themselves. Regulations, regulations, regulations The SPD, Greens and FDP were still tinkering with their coalition agreement and did not know precisely what they were allowed to want. The scientists had been calling for measures for weeks. Unfortunately, their warnings in the summer about the fourth wave had gone unheard. The SPD favoured compulsory vaccination for certain professions. Even absolute mandatory vaccination was discussed publicly. Variations of entry restrictions for restaurants, retail and public transport were also presented: 2-G+ means that only vaccinated and recovered people who have also taken a test would be allowed to enter. 2-G means that unvaccinated people who have only been tested would not be allowed to enter. 3-G means that vaccinateded, recovered, and tested persons would be allowed to enter. What is the most effective option? And who should control all this and how? I was fascinated by the idea of 2-G in trains and buses. However, how that would work was beyond me! But people very quickly got used to these access restrictions, pulled out their vaccination and test cards, and the shops and restaurants demanded them too. Wearing FFP2 masks had long become commonplace. The majority of Germans did their best to avoid infections. Schools and universities were open. However, the schools had not been equipped with ventilation systems during the summer holidays. So the pupils sometimes had to wear masks, then they didn't, then they did. So constantly, some were in quarantine, sometimes even whole classes again. The Christmas market stalls were set up, and no one knew whether a Christmas market would take place or not. On 18 November 2021, there was again a conference of minister-presidents to discuss how to proceed, together with Angela Merkel, who is still Chancellor of Germany. Didn't we already have that from October 2020 to early summer 2021? I, an observer and reflective pensioner, wondered, as did many scientists and journalists, why politicians were now astonished that it had come about as the experts had predicted. Why no precautions had been taken? Why no foresight had been shown! In the following part of my pandemic experiences, I will describe and comment on what happened in Germany from 18 November 2021 onwards. (TA)

(DE) "Come over here; he's talking now!" With these words, the coordinator of the refugees' shared accommodation calls me from the training room into her office. Strangely enough, not a single one of my German language students has turned up for the course that morning, not even the reliable Dschamila from Afghanistan, who, as a 60-year-old illiterate woman, is making every effort to learn to speak and write in a completely foreign language. 16 March 2020 in Bavaria Three of us sit tensely around the radio, waiting for the voice of the Bavarian Prime Minister Markus Söder, who wants to inform us about the situation in Bavaria or Germany and announce measures. The radio we are staring at is not a " Volksempfänger" (a German equivalent of the wireless home service in Britain), and we are not living in the 1940s. But as we sit there, listening spellbound to the determined words of a politician, the contours of time become blurred. I feel transported back to a time I never experienced, a time I only know from films and stories. At the time of Hitler's speeches, people gathered around their "Volksempfänger" to hear about the start and progress of the war and to listen to the slogans and propaganda. On that memorable 16 March 2020 at 11 a.m. in Germany, more precisely in Bavaria, it is not about war and propaganda, but about the approach of a pandemic of unimagined proportions. The coronavirus Covid-19 is, in the eyes of politicians, out of control as of spring 2020. In contrast to the United Kingdom, binding legal measures are being taken. The Bavarian Minister-President declares a state of emergency for Bavaria. Contact or curfew restrictions, ban on events, closure of restaurants and shops, except for those serving the essentials of life, closure of schools and end of attendance classes and such measures more. We are silent and shocked and totally inexperienced in dealing with such news. None of us has an opinion on what we have heard. No one suspects what might come next and what actually came. Infection situation in Germany: 27 January 2020 - first cases of infection at "Webasto" in Stockdorf near Munich. 16 March 2020 - 1,477 new cases / 7-day average 871 Bavarian Prime Minister Markus Söder declares a state of emergency: Exit restrictions, closures, contact bans... Shutdown. 18 March 2020 - 3,070 new cases / 7-day average 1488 German Chancellor Angela Merkel's televised speech: " This is serious. Not since German unity, no, not since the Second World War, has there been a challenge to our country in which our joint action in solidarity is so crucial. This is a historic task - and we can only achieve it together." 02 April 2020 - 6,922 new cases / 7-day average 5,837 (peak). 13 June 2020 - 41 new cases / 7-day average 260 (low point). Source: JHU CSSE COVID-19 Data Secret Corona - China's approach to the virus During my research at the beginning of the Corona pandemic, I came across a fascinating documentary on ZDFinfo entitled "Geheimsache Corona - Wie China die Pandemie vertuschte" (translated: Secret Corona – How China hushed up the pandemic). According to this documentary, on 01.12.2019, a 70-year-old man in Wuhan was hospitalised with severe pneumonia of unexplained cause. On 11.12.2019, there had already been 70 to 200 cases with mild conditions. The virus that caused the lung disease had been examined in a laboratory. On 26.12.2019, the treating doctors, the hospital, the State Academy of Medicine and the Centre for Disease Control in Beijing were informed that it was a new coronavirus. Latest at this point, as any internet search will show, the cover-up by the Chinese authorities began. Case numbers were falsified, doctors warned, journalists censored, hospitals instructed to report cases but not to make anything public, and staff banned from wearing masks. Chinese virologists explained that the virus is not contagious and not transmitted from person to person. According to the documentation mentioned above, a researcher in Shanghai decoded the gene sequence on 6 January 2020 and confirmed the similarity with SARS. But this knowledge was not shared with the world. It was only on 11.01.2020 that the Chinese scientist decided, against his orders, to share the genome sequence with his colleagues outside China. So work could start on testing, vaccine development and containment measures. Like all governments, China would have been obliged to report the virus' emergence, the extent of the epidemic and the scientific findings to the World Health Organisation (WHO) in Geneva. The documentation mentioned above reveals that the WHO has had bad experiences with China before in terms of giving information or cover-up. Nevertheless, WHO did not publish its concerns, did not sound the alarm, but merely repeated the information it received from China. China informed the WHO of cases of pneumonia with unknown causes on 31 December 2019. However, only almost two weeks later, after the Chinese scientist unofficially shared the genome sequence with his colleagues worldwide, the Chinese government felt compelled to officially publish the genome sequence, providing clarity on the potential threat. By mid-January 2020, the scientists have so much information on their desks that the potential for a pandemic is clear. In China, however, people travel to their families to celebrate the Spring and New Year holidays while Wuhan goes into lockdown. No one believes in a greater danger In Germany, the first cases of infection with the Covid-19 coronavirus emerged at the "Webasto" company in Stockdorf, south of Munich, on 27 January 2020. A Chinese employee, who had entered and left the country without any problems, had infected colleagues during a training course. At the time, this worried those affected but not really those in power or even the population in Germany. Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn (CDU) explained: "It was to be expected that the virus would also reach Germany. But the case from Bavaria shows that we are well prepared for it. The risk to the health of people in Germany from the new respiratory disease from China remains low according to the RKI's assessment." As a precaution, at least 100 returnees from Wuhan will be isolated for 15 days on 01 February 2020. Jens Spahn sees the risk of being called "overly cautious" for himself and consciously accepts it. Source: www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/coronavirus/chronik-coronavirus For most Germans, China is far away, so the news of a new virus rampant in Wuhan was not earth-shattering in the true sense of the word. The health ministers from the EU and the G7 countries agreed on closer cooperation to prevent the spread of the virus. However, neither the national governments nor the EU seemed to have ready-made plans to prevent a pandemic in their drawers. On 12 February 2020, the Robert Koch Institute still estimated the danger for the German population as low. Source: www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/coronavirus/chronik-coronavirus Four weeks later - a historic challenge On 11 March 2020, the WHO declared the outbreak of infection to be a pandemic. A few days later, on the 16 and 18 March 2020, both the state and federal governments agreed that the pandemic could only be brought under control with strict measures. Particularly feared was the overload of hospitals and significant excess mortality, especially among the elderly. Pictures from northern Italy, which was literally overrun by the pandemic, frightened both politicians and the population in Germany. The hospitals could hardly cope with the intensive care patients, and the dead had to be transported away in army trucks. Germany/Bavaria, therefore, tried to contain the pandemic with decrees on infection control measures: -Events and gatherings, including those of all religious communities, are banned. -A minimum distance of 1.5 m is to be maintained in parks and green spaces. -Facilities that serve recreational purposes must close. -Catering establishments may now only provide or deliver food and drink for takeaway. Company canteens can only apply for exceptions under certain conditions. -Hotels and other accommodation establishments may now only accommodate business travellers. -Retail shops must close, except for those that provide essential supplies to the population. This includes grocery shops, pharmacies, petrol stations, post offices, pet supplies and dry cleaners. -People must maintain a minimum distance, and the number of people allowed to meet is also limited. - There is a ban on entering and visiting hospitals and similar care and nursing facilities. - Schools will be closed. Care for students in schools is only available in urgent cases. - One is only allowed to leave the house for urgent reasons. - One is only allowed to meet with one person outside one's own household and only at a distance. Links to Ministry of Health / Bavarian Ministry : https://www.stmgp.bayern.de/coronavirus/ The world knows the usefulness of masks, but their use is not yet planned. In addition to national measures, each federal state had its own Covid strategy. (TA)

Resurrection of Cold War propaganda (De - April/May 2022) Already some time before Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022, I had a bad feeling when I heard or read news about Russia and Ukraine. Warnings were heard almost daily, especially from the US president. Russia’s attack was imminent! The secret services reported that Russia was about to create an occasion for its war of aggression artificially! The German media speculated that Putin was either evil, crazy, deathly ill, insulted, could no longer stand democracy in Ukraine, or even feared it. The one-sided view of Putin’s propaganda To me, this sounded like warmongering, pre-war Western propaganda to get into the mood for war. The warning signals in my head started flashing frantically. The press in the West, including the German, had a different view. Propaganda of the West?! Impossible! Russia was the aggressor! It was Russia who was spreading propaganda to justify its aggression! Once the war had begun, the German media head shakingly reported on the absurd Russian propaganda lies. After all, no rational person could take Putin’s statements seriously. (a) It was clearly propaganda if “intimidated” Russian politicians and citizens and the synchronised media were forced under penalty of law to call the war not a war but a “special military operation”. Here in the free West, Putin’s “criminal, brutal war of aggression” could be described by politicians and society as it was, namely “criminal”, “brutal”, and “illegal under international law”. – Yet, no politician, journalist, presenter or panellist on a talk show would dare to call the war something else. (b) Putin’s and the Russian media’s claim that Russia must prevent the threatening genocide by Ukraine in the breakaway People’s Republics in the Donbas region could also only be propaganda. Why? That was not explained! (c) Putin’s repeated claim that a Nazi regime under President Selensky was in power in Kyiv was absurd because Selensky was of Jewish descent. Until then, no one cared, but now this fact was used as a counter-argument to Russian propaganda. So in what way were Selensky’s party, politics and government not fascist but democratic through and through? Nobody wanted to argue. Why not? (d) According to the German media and politicians, the pinnacle of Russian propaganda is the claim that Nato is threatening Russia. Instead, it was the other way round. One should be ashamed not to have listened to the Eastern Europeans. For a long time, they had demanded a more substantial NATO presence in the East on Russia’s border to protect against Russian aggression. Yet, a threatening gesture on the part of Nato had never taken place! Putin’s point of view is ridiculous and owed to his affinity for lies and the distortion of the truth. True, the Russian government undoubtedly circulates propagandistic claims, lies and incomprehensible arguments. But does the West really renounce manipulation, the creation of sentiment and opinion through propaganda, as they say? What is still opinion-forming, and what is already propaganda? As a German contemporary, I naturally look first and foremost at the formation of public opinion in Germany. In doing so, I noticed that some of what is considered part of free opinion-forming in our country seems to be propaganda. These days, the labels “propagandist” and “Putin-understander” are quickly applied to contemporaries who do not want to justify the war but only examine Russian propaganda for its accurate content. I am reminded of the one-sidedness in my childhood and youth, the rigorous view that Western governments were good and the Eastern regimes were evil – also known as the propaganda of the Cold War, if not that of the Weimar Republic and the Nazi era. For example, why is it necessary to add the adjectives “criminal and brutal” to a war of aggression? Are there also legitimate and humane wars of aggression? Do these routinely used specifications reach back to the attitudes of the collective German subconscious of the 19th century? Russia and Ukraine are at war, but Russia and the USA/EU are in a propaganda battle. Germany is in the middle of it! The governing coalition and most of the Bundestag have the declared will to commit to Ukraine, to turn away from Russia with a shudder, no ifs or buts. It would be unthinkable if Germany, which in the eyes of most Europeans carries historical guilt, were to refuse help and moral support for a country formerly subjugated by Germany. The international pressure to argue vehemently for Ukraine is enormous, as is the internalised pressure. A neutral Germany like Switzerland or Israel?! Also unthinkable in terms of foreign policy! So Germany stands firmly by Ukraine’s side, and politics and the media do their utmost to ensure that the people support it despite all the difficulties and disadvantages. A war alone is not reason enough, as the half-hearted or complete lack of commitment in other armed conflicts has shown and continues to show. Only prolonged propaganda ensures approval among the population when the initial horror images and reports fade and adverse effects on everyday life become noticeable. In August 2022, the first appeals by Ukrainian politicians to Germans and other Europeans appeared, urging them not to become “war-weary”. So, German media are still keeping up the interest through war reports, features, interviews with Ukrainians in Ukraine or as refugees in Germany, etc. According to politicians and the media, the energy shortage and cost increases have their cause solely in “Putin’s war”. “Putin is turning off the gas tap” can be heard and read everywhere. This simple explanation is catchy! It’s helpful, but it is also propaganda! The effort to keep the interest in the Ukraine war alive is quite apparent. However, occasionally critical voices are now slowly finding their way into the public arena, explaining how the German energy market works and how this is connected to the blatant price increases. Of course, it’s not that simple! But it is not propaganda! Atrocities and propaganda The atrocities committed by Russian soldiers in Ukraine were instrumentalised to argue for weapons demands and deliveries. From the Ukrainian leadership’s point of view, this is understandable, no question! But for German politicians and media to also identify the Russian army, and even President Putin, as the perpetrators of these atrocities even before the official international investigations into who was responsible were completed was simply unprofessional, except for propaganda purposes. The desire to supply heavy weapons to Ukraine was too strong. The horror of the war could serve as a moral justification for arms deliveries and sanctions, which the population must, after all, support through blatant cost increases. Even the Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ), the renowned medium of neutral Switzerland, was carried away by the torrent of propaganda. In the NZZ of 28 April 2022, the Ukrainian writer Oksana Sabuschko (b. 1961) writes an incredibly polemical article in which she even goes so far as to equate Russia with evil and to identify signs of Russian mental maldevelopment already in the literature of Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy. The essay reads like an excess of hatred, leading from Russian literature to the Red Army’s orgies of rape and robbery after World War II and directly to the horrors of Bucha in Ukraine in 2022. More information: https://www.nzz.ch/feuilleton/lektionen-aus-einem-bluff-russische-literatur-nach-butscha-ld.1681267?mktcval=fbpost_2022-04-28&fbclid=IwAR2rmX-QYbsgTk4shOHIKc3JRkGLaCGwnNk3ehtL5F0G_tA0zCCd7uYIMzE&mktcid=smch The fact that the NZZ, to my knowledge, printed this hate tirade without comment is appalling. Does this mean that the editors share this opinion, indeed this emotion? It reminds me of Cold War propaganda, when, through documentaries, non-fiction and accounts by contemporary witnesses on radio and television, post-1945 rape by the Red Army was reported, but never by representatives of other Allies. Cold War propaganda was built on the image of the brutal, ugly Russian Bolshevik that had already shaped the view of “the Russians” on the election posters of the Weimar Republic. The aim was to keep the memory of the enemy in the East alive among the population. There were also numerous rapes committed by military personnel of the other Allies in the occupation zones. However, their publication was unsuitable in the West integration and America euphoria phase and was swept under the table. Hardly anything is known about that. The victims and their illegitimate children remain silent or are not heard. In 2015, historian Miriam Gebhardt attempted to give a voice to victims of Allied rape in an extensive study on sexual violence at the end of World War 2. With this research, she intends to correct the collective memory. But to this day, no one wants to know about crimes committed by the western Allies. Why? Because there could and must be only one unified image of the enemy. For more information on Miriam Gebhardt’s study, see the link and bibliography: https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/zweiter-weltkrieg-massenhafte-vergewaltigungen-durch-100.html, 4 May 2015. Miriam Gebhardt: “When the soldiers came. The Rape of German Women at the End of the Second World War”, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Munich 2015, 352 pages, 21.99 euros, ISBN 978-3-421-04633-8. The pressure of opinion up to the level of a criminal offence In today’s war in Ukraine, there is once again only one enemy image. This time it has a specific face: Vladimir Putin! And woe betides anyone who deviates from the official, simple image of the enemy and searches for more detailed background information! -Woe betides anyone who also looks for faults in the “good” West! -Woe betides anyone who does not want to beat the enemy but wishes to negotiate with him! -Woe betides anyone who questions opinions disguised as information. -Woe betides anyone who thinks even a bit different! – Shitstorm! It is alarming how pressure is currently being exerted in Germany for everyone to go along with the general opinion on the war in Ukraine and on Putin (beyond the indisputable fact that Russia is the aggressor and Putin the aggressor warlord!). Such pressure restricts freedom of expression in a democracy. Some examples: -Putin’s rune – criminal offence! The use of the sign “Z” was recently made a criminal offence in Germany because the Russians use it as a propaganda rune for victory in the Ukraine war. Therefore, whoever paints the sign anywhere presumably condones the war of aggression and is thus liable to prosecution. Furthermore, the perpetrator who uses it to express his pro-Russian sentiments can be punished with up to three years in prison. Freedom of expression is generally a precious commodity in Germany. Sometimes that freedom is almost unbearable. Yet this law came into force within a very short time frame. Unbelievable for me and others of my generation. SZ columnist Heribert Prantl takes up this issue in a commentary in the SZ and warns that German criminal law should not fall into the Russian mistake and punish sentiments, even those we would find abominable. See link to the commentary: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/meinung/heribert-prantl-kolumne-140-strafgesetzbuch-krieg-in-der-ukraine-angriffskrieg-1.5559003 -Russian musicians under pressure in Germany The Russian star conductor of the Munich Philharmonic Orchestra, Valery Gergiev, was dismissed by Munich’s mayor Reiter on 01 March 2022 for not distancing himself from Putin. However, the fact that he had long before been known for his homophobic views and expressed them vociferously was not considered an “outrage”. It had not led to any official consequences. When pressed, the world-famous Russian star soprano Anna Netrebko hesitantly spoke against the war in Ukraine but demanded that musicians be allowed to be apolitical. Major opera houses subsequently stopped working with her, and the singer cancelled all her concerts. But she is now also considered an enemy of the state in Russia. You can read more about this under this link: https://www.br-klassik.de/aktuell/news-kritik/anna-netrebko-ukraine-krieg-stellungnahme-putin-100.html -Ex-Chancellor pilloried Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (SPD) was also caught in the crossfire. He is not only a personal friend of the Russian president but also holds leading positions in the Nordstream 1 and 2 pipeline projects. In addition, he is a member of the board of Rosneft and has been nominated for the supervisory board role at the Russian energy giant Gazprom. Media representatives, parliamentarians and his party, the Social Democratic Party (SPD), launched a witch hunt. First, his staff in the ex-chancellor’s office resigned without exception; then, he was asked to distance himself from war and the warlord, and the European Parliament was about to put him on the sanctions list. Finally, they wanted to cut off his ex-chancellor’s salary if he accepted the post at Gazprom. He resisted for a long time, talked to Putin, condemned the war and finally gave in. He did not accept the supervisory board post at Gazprom. Nevertheless, he continues to be ostracised. The following link provides an overview of the Schröder case: https://taz.de/Schroeders-Russland-Verbindungen/!5856093/ These examples raise concerns that freedom of expression today, in 2022, is being restricted bit by bit both by the law and by slavering contemporaries. Rigid linguistic conventions In turn, propaganda is rampant, particularly evident in language conventions. No public figure – politicians or presenters, for example – can afford to call the war in Ukraine just war. It is unthinkable that the foreign minister does not explicitly emphasise during a speech that this war of aggression is brutal, contrary to international law, or even criminal. There is also increasing pressure on those with political responsibility not only to say that Russia must not win the brutal war of aggression. No, the correct version is: Ukraine must win this war! For some time, Chancellor Olaf Scholz was repeatedly reprimanded for refusing to use precisely this formulation. Anyone who has studied propaganda in history has repeatedly come across such language formulas and determinations as an ideological basis. What is behind this formula? This war must be waged until Russia is wholly driven out of Ukraine, including the Donbas and Crimea. That would be the end of Russia, even more drastic than the withdrawal from Afghanistan. And it would mean that there can be no peace negotiations for lack of a bargaining chip. So there are particular political goals behind this formula, which have not yet been expressed. But it gives a glimpse into the future. Because of the hardened fronts, the war will probably last for years. But it is not only the German population that will suffer from economic difficulties such as energy price increases, inflation and supply bottlenecks. The ghost of recession looms over and over again. Moreover, measures against climate change, a concern for many, will be put on the back burner. Presumably, many people could be motivated to sustain the cold and restrict themselves to the climate, but is that also true for supporting Ukraine in this war? Propaganda can provide such motivation. Pigeonholing – a consequence of propaganda It also strikes me that it is becoming increasingly difficult to have serious, factual and controversial discussions about political events and developments. There is an increasing tendency to filter out specific keywords from what a conversation partner says and to see them as an indication that this person must belong to a particular group. Then, based on individual features taken out of context, the other person is quickly labelled as a conspiracy theorist, a lateral thinker, a person who understands Putin, a Putin propagandist, a leftist, a rightist etc. If you don’t belong to this presumed group, you don’t listen anymore. Put the people in the pigeonholes! Communicate only with like-minded people! This dangerous development threatens interpersonal relationships, is often complained about in public discussions and encourages propagandists. Why this resurgence of pathos and hero worship? Pathos and heroism are wafting through the world, and Germany, which should know better. For example, there are pathetic declarations of solidarity from politicians to school classes sitting in classrooms dressed in Ukrainian yellow and blue or marching through the streets, as well as the yellow and blue flags hanging from windows everywhere. Even EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was not above dressing in yellow and blue on the day of the vote to grant Ukraine candidate status for EU membership in June 2022. That the biggest band of 1,000 musicians came together in Piazza San Carlo to play a particular version of John Lennon’s “Give Peace a Chance” as an international show of solidarity at the opening of the 2022 Eurovision Song Contest in Turin was moving. But the fact that the Ukrainian colours were omnipresent and that Ukraine naturally won the competition strikes me as inappropriate and overbearing. With shining eyes, many look at President Selensky, who is playing the role of his life. He is the hero who wants to save Ukraine and the whole world from totalitarian, brutal Russia. Entire parliaments listen to him devoutly. When he lectures the German Parliament, the members of Parliament applaud him compliantly. When the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany, Andrij Melnyk, rages against Germany, the Chancellor and the President in a highly undiplomatic manner, no one stops him. Even when he made his political views known by honouring the Ukrainian national hero, the former nationalist leader and Nazi collaborator Stephan Bandera, who belongs to the ultra-right and the fascists, at his grave in Munich, nothing happened. Noone protested. Simply silence! More information on the following link: https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/bandera-kult-ukraine-100.html In June 2022, this outrageous undiplomatic diplomat gave Germany a verbal slap in the face by saying that many Ukrainian women would not feel comfortable in Germany and would return to their homeland. He claimed they held Germany responsible for the many deaths because deliveries of heavy weapons had not been made so far. Therefore, he said, his compatriots no longer wanted to stay in the country. By September 2022, Andrij Melnyk will be recalled as Ukraine’s ambassador to Germany and will probably continue to work in the Ukrainian Ministry of the Interior. The world’s most powerful visited President Selensky in Kyiv despite the war. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres even demonstratively adapted his outfit to the host Selensky, wearing a shirt and jumper in almost Nato-olive like the host’s T-shirts instead of his suit and tie. Everyone, even the UN Secretary-General, wants a bit of the glamour of this “hero” to enhance or support his position. I find this sudden fondness for pathos and heroism creepy and downright repulsive. When I talk to people of my generation, many are also suspicious of the current propaganda activity in the public sphere. They are concerned about the affinity of today’s generation in politics and the media to pathos and uncritical, compulsive unanimity. Images of friends and enemies in the 1950s I was born in West Germany in 1953 and consequently grew up with the propaganda of the Cold War in the West. This propaganda held that the imperialist Soviet Union was hostile to the free West. Its people were poor because of the communist economy of scarcity. The communists oppressed them; they ended up in the Siberian gulag if they expressed their opinions freely; they had to subordinate their individuality to the community and did not know freedom and democracy according to the Western model. There was talk of communists, a dirty word at the time, who did not tolerate the practice of religion. They wanted to achieve world domination and were only waiting to annex Europe. This could only be prevented by the military presence of our US friends. In my home town of Regensburg, the saying went, “You’ll see when the Russian boots start marching down Maxstraße!” When we went on excursions to the Iron Curtain, i.e. to the border with what was then Czechoslovakia, we were afraid of the Russians who might suddenly come across the border. The border regions in the Upper Palatinate and other federal states were withering economically. They reflected in our feelings the grey, joyless, depressing life under communism on the other side of the border. “The Russians are coming!” was the ultimate horror scenario presented to us children. This horror scenario was haunting the minds of the Western powers, led by the USA, on an even larger scale. One only has to think of the hunt for communists in McCarthy-era America. In the course of the USA’s containment policy towards the USSR, the Western states thus founded their defence alliance North Atlantic Treaty Organization, better known as NATO, in 1949. Germany had been planning its rearmament since 1950 and finally became a NATO member on 09 May 1955, when it had retained its sovereignty with certain restrictions. The West needed Germany, which shared a long border with the Eastern bloc states of East Germany and Czechoslovakia, as an active partner in the mutual assistance pact against the enemy in the East, the Soviet Union. On 14 May 1955, one week after the admission of the Federal Republic of Germany and six years after the founding of Nato, the Eastern Bloc states signed the so-called “Warsaw Pact”, a “treaty of friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance”, on the initiative and under the leadership of the Soviet Union. The East, for its part, felt threatened by the West. Perhaps someone will recognise the parallel to the year 2022! At that time, West Germany was a state that bordered directly on the Eastern Bloc and thus had Nato weapons and soldiers threateningly close at hand. Of course, we were told at the time that the threat came from the imperialist Soviet Union and that it was imperative to be able to defend ourselves under the leadership of the USA. In the Eastern bloc countries, by contrast, the USA and its appendage, the British, were the imperialists who wanted to achieve world domination and wipe out the socialism that existed. Soviet-style socialism perished, and Western-style capitalism was not entirely uninvolved. That, however, is another story. But until then, for 35 years, the East-West conflict was described in Western societies as a tension between the humane democratic West and the inhumane communist East. According to Western reporting, the Eastern bloc consisted of the power centre, the Soviet Union and the so-called satellite states GDR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Baltic states, m. E. Yugoslavia, Albania…., which were forced into dependence and lack of freedom by the Kremlin. The West, on the other hand – never actually called the Western Bloc – cherished and cultivated a partnership with the USA. Germany gladly accommodated Allied soldiers and war equipment, partly because the Allies had secured reservation rights for themselves after the end of the occupation in 1955. It was not until 1990, at reunification, that Germany became a sovereign state. In short, my generation in West Germany grew up amid the propaganda that the evil empire existed in the East and that good heroic figures were to be found in the West. Just think of all the political thrillers, including James Bond films, in which heroic Englishmen or Americans fight against a dishonest, unscrupulous, misanthropic Soviet agent who wants to destroy the world and win. Those born in the 50s had to expose and shake off the propaganda they grew up with. This sharpened their perceptions and fuelled distrust of authorities, opinion makers and political leaders. Western Cold War propaganda was exposed as hypocrisy! It fell to my generation to question this worldview. And we didn’t like the answers we found at all. Re-armed West Germany joined NATO. This disappointed all those who believed in “Never again war!”. The Korean and Vietnam wars dwarfed the military suppression of the uprisings in the Eastern Bloc (East Germany in 1953, Hungary, Poland and Czechoslovakia in the 1950s and 1960s). We learned of war crimes committed by American Gis, American intelligence operations and old Nazis in the German government and judicial system. In addition, we explored the unscrupulous dealings of big corporations worldwide. We experienced first-hand the suppression of freedom of expression in our own country, Germany. We experienced smear campaigns against dissidents. We saw the one-sidedness, the profit orientation, and the opportunism of the West when it came to business. Values like human rights and democracy played no role in dealing with friendly dictators. What hypocrisy! Many dubious domestic and foreign policy agreements, economic cooperation, and laws were justified to the population by the fight against communism. Communism had to be fought wherever it appeared, whether in Europe, Cuba, Asia or South America! On the other hand, military dictatorships like Chile and Argentina were acceptable because they pretended to be anti-communist and were prepared to cooperate with capitalist-oriented states. Critical students, intellectuals and critical media such as the “spiegel” and the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” or the magazine “konkret” began to question this communist agitation. As a result, many of the young generations started to consider whether evil was only in the communist East or whether it was not also wreaking havoc in the capitalist West. However, if you thought this way, in the eyes of society, you were a communist or at least a sympathiser. You were strongly advised to “go over there”. In Germany, this meant East Germany, to which dissenters should disappear. Those who challenged the common belief that the West was democratic and good and the East was undemocratic and bad had to suffer consequences. They were discredited, insulted and threatened existentially; some were even banned from working in their profession. My generation, already dismantling convictions set in stone, also questioned other values such as the nuclear family, the distribution of roles between men and women, education to obedience and order, and so on. The youth liberated themselves from sexual taboos, culminating in the slogan: “Make Love, not War!” Considering the manipulative behaviour of the media and politics in those days, it was not surprising that left-wing terror groups with an affinity for violence developed, such as the RAF (Red Army Faction). We fought against propaganda, simplistic black and white views, old and new fascists etc. We fought for human rights for everyone, equality, freedom, peace, and self-determination of the individual and nations. The enemy image of our childhood and youth, the communist Eastern Bloc with the great power Soviet Union at its head, lost its horror. The propaganda of the Cold War simply no longer worked. We learned to distrust! For many of this generation, questioning political statements, mainstream attitudes, and unsound information became second nature. Being able to form one’s own opinion, without taboos and without pressure to conform, was a high value. Politicians and business representatives were distrusted in the first place because recent history had shown that declarations of intent and deeds often did not match. The powerful of this world often showed only verbal interest in the common good. Yet, at the same time, they acted in the interest of the economy of their nations, parties or international corporations. This is how quite a few representatives of my generation have become what they are today, in 2022: older people who do not trust politicians, with a strong instinct for recognising propaganda, and with an irrepressible need for understanding before forming their well-founded opinions. But many of us are no longer involved in the productive process. Most are pensioners and no longer have any influence. The now active generation that increasingly holds certain political and media positions was born in the 1980s (give or take) and socialised differently. I think this is reflected in the reactions to the war in Ukraine. Suppose we, the Cold War generation, see the Ukrainian war as a power play of the great powers, urgently call for de-escalation and peace negotiations, and react allergically to Ukrainian heroism and pathos. In that case, we are met with incomprehension by the next generation. As they were raised and socialised, they want to help, support the weak, and save freedom and democracy; they want to push back the aggressor, disarm him and bring him to justice. But they do not consider the possibility that they could be manipulated. (TA) Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 2/1 War in Ukraine - part 2/2 War in Ukraine - part 2/3 War in Ukraine - part 2/4 War in Ukraine - part 2/5 War in Ukraine - part 3

Moments in the war year 2022 (DE - April/May 2022) On 07 April 2022, on the 43rd day of the war in Ukraine, I started to record all the information, impressions, thoughts, reflections, analyses, feelings, and doubts that moved me as a fellow contemporary during these days and weeks, even months. The war is taking its course, and no one knows when it will end. I won’t write about it until the end of this war because that could take years. I am not interested in documenting the course of the war or analysing all the facts about weapons, front lines, strategies and plans of the warring parties and their allies. That is the task of researchers in various fields and areas of specialisation. Historians will gather facts and analyse the prehistory, the course, the background, the motives, the interests etc. Then, in retrospect, it may become more apparent what it was all about. Or the scientific community will disagree, and the respective theories will be disputed. That is exciting! That is enlightening! You can learn from it – if you want to. But that is of no use to critical contemporaries these days. As a contemporary, I have to live with blinkers. The concern that drives me is that we contemporaries might be influenced by one-sided information or information gaps in the interests of the powers that be. Therefore, I try to research all possible directions, think without “scissors in my head”, and grasp correlations and causalities. Maybe I am wrong! Perhaps I am right! I invite readers to contribute additional information and well-founded counter-arguments by e-mail (Link to CONTACT). A lively controversial factual discussion is most welcome. The following links lead to particular topics and issues that I have dealt with in this part of the article series: –Atrocities (part 2/1) -Russia’s war objectives mysterious – Russia’s strategy baffling! (part 2/2) -Is a refugee not the same as a refugee? (part 2/3) -Germany’s image in the Ukraine conflict (part 2/4) -What if….? (part 2/5) (TA) Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 3

Disbelief and confusion before the war (DE - April/ May 2022) When the army of the Russian Federation invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022 and surrounded and bombed cities a little later, I was shocked. I had not expected that at all. I had dismissed the warnings by US intelligence agencies and the US government that an invasion was imminent and an event was being staged as warmongering. Memories of the “pre-war period.” Weeks before the attack, Russia deployed its troops on the border with Ukraine. Russian President Putin insisted it was a manoeuvre, and he did not intend to invade anywhere. Concerned European and US politicians made their way to the Kremlin, and the chair across President Putin’s overlong table never got cold. However, the public did not find out what they talked about or what the Russian president demanded. Did he openly threaten to invade Ukraine if his demands were not met? Why could these demands not be met? All visiting politicians were tight-lipped! No records of these meetings were published! Why were we, the public, not allowed to know anything about the content of these negotiations? In contrast, US President Biden diligently, almost every week, published the content of intelligence reports predicting an attack by Russia on Ukraine and publishing scenarios of how the Russian side could stage an event. Allegedly, an emergency was to be created so that Russian soldiers could rush to the aid of those under pressure. Such disclosure of intelligence is quite unusual. Like me, many remembered Hitler’s staged invasion of Poland in 1939 and, more recently, in 2003, the justification of the American-led Iraq war by non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Throughout history, it was pretty common to construct reasons. So why shouldn’t Russia do the same? Yet I believed in warmongering and the usual anti-Russia propaganda of the US rather than an attack by Russia. Why did I not believe in an invasion but dismissed the signs as a threatening gesture towards Europe and the USA and, more importantly, a display of power towards China to impress them as a partner in the Eastern power bloc? A war of aggression by Russia seemed pointless. To put it simply, the war did not make any sense. Questions upon questions ran through my mind. What spoke for it, what against it? What could Russia gain by invading and destroying Ukraine? Putin spoke of a fascist regime in Kyiv that had to be removed from power. He also talked of having to prevent the genocide by Ukraine in the Donbas. Ukraine is known as a corrupt country. But I also experienced in Ukraine, and in my encounters with Ukrainians, a lot of pathos and national pride, which had nationalistic features. For example, in Ukraine, the Russian language has been banned at school. Teachers who let a Russian word slip are held accountable. And yes, there are radical right-wing groups in Ukraine, but how influential and powerful they are was never, and still is not, an issue in our media. In fact, I know too little about Ukraine to condemn Putin’s claims outright, as the media, politicians, and many citizens in Germany, Europe and the USA are doing. But what is evident to me is that Russia is not different or better than Ukraine. So why would Russia claim to want to save the neighbouring country? Moreover, who should govern Ukraine afterwards as a so-called puppet government loyal to Moscow? Usually, a political “substitute” is ready and waiting in such situations, but there is no counter-candidate to President Volodymyr Selensky being built up. I found that no comprehensible motive for war emerged from these assertions. In addition, the timing was, in my eyes, another argument against a war of aggression. Why should Russia torpedo the commissioning of its second gas pipeline at the very time when Nordstream II was completed and about to start? Surely, it had to be clear to President Putin that Germany, now in the face of war, would have little chance of resisting the massive pressure from the USA demanding that Nordstream II be stopped, a pressure which had gone on for years. The Russian president had prepared his country well for sanctions and prioritised the energy business with China to compensate. However, Russia’s economy and its population would still suffer from sanctions. To what end? What could be gained from a war in Ukraine worth that price? A denazified and demilitarised Ukraine? I found that hard to believe. The Russian government’s anger about NATO’s eastward expansion for years seemed more plausible. The Russian president kept saying: You haven’t listened to us! And that is true. He always highlighted clearly and unambiguously NATO’s eastward enlargement as a threat to Russia. However, the NATO members’ reaction was merely uncomprehendingly shaking their heads. Source: https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/sicherheitskonferenz-in-muenchen-putin-schockt-die-europaeer-a-465634.html When Russia 2014 annexed the site of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, Crimea, every politically thinking person knew what it was all about. Ukraine wanted to become a NATO member; if that had happened, Russia would have lost this location and access to the Mediterranean. While NATO member states repeatedly affirmed that Ukraine’s membership was not imminent in the foreseeable future, NATO nevertheless held a joint manoeuvre with Ukraine in the Lviv region in September 2021. Does this counter the assurances of the Western allies, or is Putin suffering from paranoia? In line with the wisdom of the Dakota: “Great Spirit, keep me from judging a man until I had walked a mile in his moccasins“, perhaps I could feel the spot where Putin’s shoe or moccasin pinched when I considered his perspective. Was NATO, from a Russian point of view, really a threat? Once again, I cannot answer this question unequivocally, but Vladimir Putin’s speech at the 43rd Munich Security Conference at the beginning of 2007 is clear. German translation: http://www.ag-friedensforschung.de/themen/Sicherheitskonferenz/2007-putin-dt.html – Putin’s full speech at the 43 Munich Secuirty Conference on the 21 Feb 2007 in English: https://newslog.cyberjournal.org/putins-full-speech-at-munich-security-conference/ However, Russia and the NATO states interpret NATO’s statements on eastward enlargement differently. https://www.tagesschau.de/faktenfinder/nato-erweiterung-mittel-ost-europa-101.html Some agreements speak against a threat from NATO. The following article/link provides an overview and source of information https://www.br.de/kultur/warum-die-nato-erweiterung-fuer-putin-ein-vorwand-ist-100.html. On the other hand, one cannot simply play down this NATO-Ukraine manoeuvre. Just imagine if Finland and Sweden, which are not NATO members but feel connected to NATO and hold joint manoeuvres, would jointly conduct manoeuvre battles with Russian troops on their territories. In the front yard of the EU and NATO?! Or, what almost led to war in 1962, if Russia stationed missiles in Cuba, and Cuban and Russian soldiers would hold joint manoeuvres in Cuba. Or in Venezuela! Right on the doorstep of the USA. EU and US politicians always stressed that Ukraine and all other states must have freedom of choice regarding their military and defence alliances. This is, of course, a matter of sovereignty. But would this argument also apply if neighbouring states were to ally themselves with Russia? Again, I doubt it, and history allows for these doubts. That does, of course, not justify war! Yet, I would like to ask the NATO member states if they wouldn’t blame themselves for being inconsiderate and unsympathetic to Russia’s needs. NATO’s eastward expansion brought NATO troops and NATO weapons directly to Russia’s northwestern border, namely Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. In addition to the Baltic states, the EU and NATO member country, Poland, stood out as a proponent of massive armament, including nuclear missiles on its territory. Although it does not have a direct border with Russia, Poland has consistently pushed for weapons. For years, Poland had created a scenario of threat from Russia. It accused Russia of not respecting the INF Treaty (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty), which entitled NATO to station missile systems in Poland, close to Russia. More details on this treaty are at https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/INF-Vertrag Poland has repeatedly offered itself to the United States as a missile site. From a historical perspective, it is plausible to explain Poland’s fear of Russia (Hitler-Stalin Pact and Soviet occupation, oppression and incorporation into the Eastern Bloc). Yet, could this be the predominant and only motive? Be that as it may, Russia may have perceived Poland’s aspirations with a shudder. I hate to say it, but politicians, as we all know, are human beings after all and, as such, can be offended or hurt. Rumours in the media of humiliations could have driven Vladimir Putin to an unpredictable fury. For example, when US President Barack Obama mocked Russia during the Crimea crisis in 2014 as a “regional power” that “was standing alone”, he is said to have struck President Putin. Putin may have long felt disrespected and insulted by the EU, NATO and the US. However, all these politically and psychologically understandable reasons in no way seemed so severe at the beginning of the year 2022 that Russia’s president would wage a war of aggression on Ukraine. When everyone is staring at one point, then look around you! The obvious didn’t get me anywhere in my search for explanations. Then I noticed that the media was not staring at other significant powers like America and China. China’s role and interest In my view, an attack would only amount to long-term trench warfare. In the news broadcasts, military experts attested that the Ukrainians had no chance of sustained military success. So it’s a war of destruction of life, industry and infrastructure! I couldn’t see what such a war would do for China, Russia’s friend. At the start of the 2022 Winter Olympics in China, President Putin and President Xi Jinping demonstrated unity and partnership. The fact that the planned “New Silk Road” would run through Ukraine and have a hub in Kyiv was no secret, but the media gave little attention. I argued that no sensible person, and certainly no economist, would set up and expand a trade route through a country in war. So, I imagined China would not urge Russia towards war or positively encourage it. China’s leader Xi Jinping supported Putin’s argument that Europe, the US and especially NATO were not meeting Russia’s security needs. China later abstained from voting in the UN Security Council to condemn Russian aggression. But would a destructive war be in China’s interest? It seemed that Russia could not expect much support from China, especially not militarily. China has other methods of expanding and using its power. What did make sense to me, however, was that China could watch the reactions of the Western bloc very closely. If, for example, it were to annex Taiwan one day in the not-too-distant future, it could prepare itself or prevent potential sanctions. Such a “simulation” indeed represents an opportunity that would give China an advantage. But would this be enough of a reason to support or even tolerate a war? The USA and its interests In my perception, US President Joe Biden appeared like a warmonger. For example, he warned of an attack by the Russian army on Ukraine almost every week, referring to intelligence. But, this is by no means a reason to trust the American government. However, the media did not even begin assessing America’s role and interests in this conflict and establishing connections. The question of the Biden family’s personal and economic connections with Ukraine was taboo because US President Donald Trump had tried to instrumentalise these contacts in the election campaign and would have liked to have found something to discredit Biden. No one wants to fool themselves by associating with Donald Trump. Background knowledge on this from the following source from 20.10.2020: https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/us-wahlen-biden-trump-burisma-100.html However, there must be deeper contact between the current US President Biden and Ukraine because he was in Ukraine as Vice President under Barack Obama in 2014 to help fight corruption. At that time, his son Hunter had been appointed to the supervisory board of Burisma, a company suspected of corruption. President Selensky did not side with President Donald Trump, for whom an implication of his democratic rival’s son with corruption and bribery would have been welcome. Still, I didn’t want to get caught up in rumour and intrigue; I wanted to gain insight into the powers that be in world politics. So I drew up a chart to get a visual overview of the world situation, based on my knowledge and common sense. This simple chart demonstrates that China is only in a significant power-political and economic conflict with the USA. Otherwise, it has only an ideological disagreement with economically dependent Europe. Europe maintains economic relations with all of them. Otherwise, it raises the moral finger, knowing fully that it can’t take any consequences. NATO enlargement to the East and EU membership seem like wild cards in this game with Russia, to show that one could also make trouble. The United States, on the other hand, has to deal with two enemies: China and Russia. At the same time, relations between Germany and Russia are a painful thorn in the side of the USA. For years, the various American administrations have urged Germany to stop Nordstream II and not to increase its dependence on energy imports from Russia. Instead, they strongly recommended American gas and oil. After all, dependence on America is not bad, as the USA is one of the good guys. But Germany has been stubborn. Until now! So the USA would benefit the most from a Russian invasion of Ukraine. The positive ties between Europe, especially Germany and Russia, would be destroyed at a stroke. The USA would emerge from this conflict stronger as the supreme power in the Western bloc. With a bit of luck, the Europeans might also recognise that a dependence on China is not good either, and do something about it. This way, this opponent could also somehow be weakened. For this very reason, because there was nothing to gain for Russia but a lot to lose, and the political opponent, the USA of all people, would be strengthened, I did not believe in an attack by Russia on Ukraine. I was wrong. (TA) Background knowledge on Ukraine – some sources: https://www.lpb-bw.de/ukraine-wirtschaft https://www.bpb.de/themen/europa/ukraine/272720/analyse-ueberraschende-entwicklung-mit-offenem-ausgang-die-ukraine-usa-beziehungen/ https://ukraineverstehen.de/dubowyk-use-und-ukraine-blinken-besuch-2021/ Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 2/1 War in Ukraine - part 2/2 War in Ukraine - part 2/3 War in Ukraine - part 2/4 War in Ukraine - part 2/5 War in Ukraine - part 3

-Intention of the three-part article series-. (DE: April/Mai 2022) My intention of writing this series of articles on the war in Ukraine is, as a contemporary witness, to record for future reference unfiltered what I observe, what goes through my mind, what information I obtain, what research reveals and what I felt in these first months of the war in Ukraine. I have dealt with three phases or focal points within this period in three articles. Part 1: In the first article, “Disbelief and confusion before the war”, I set out my view of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine in the weeks and days leading up to the attack and record the questions that troubled me at the time. Part 2: In the second article, “Snapshots in the Year of War 2022”, I deal with various phenomena and pressing questions that emerge from the events, reporting, public discussion and my own research in the first few months of the war. Part 3: In the third article, “The Resurgence of the Cold War Propaganda”, I try to identify propaganda and manipulation from the Western side. As a German citizen living in Germany, I am mainly influenced by German media, politicians and other opinion makers, not by the Russian side. We know from history if there is a war, all parties involved usually use propaganda. The old saying, “The truth dies in war first!” is no coincidence. To avoid any misunderstandings, I would like to emphasise that I neither endorse, justify nor relativise the Russian Federation’s war of aggression on Ukraine. I am as suspicious of Russian propaganda and claims as I am of, for example, American and German propaganda and claims. I simply want to understand how this war came about and where it might lead. I want to understand what interests are at play. (TA) Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 2/1 War in Ukraine - part 2/2 War in Ukraine - part 2/3 War in Ukraine - part 2/4 War in Ukraine - part 2/5 War in Ukraine - part 3

Atrocities (DE) Since April 2022, when the word "Bucha" has been mentioned, every politician, every journalist and every reasonably informed person knows what it is all about. Russian atrocities and Ukrainian demands for weapons It is about the discovery of atrocities by the Russian army in the occupied and now liberated town of Bucha, 25 kilometres northwest of Kyiv! The press and top politicians cry outraged: War crimes! Putin is a war criminal! In the aftermath, forensic experts, specialists and journalists meticulously searched for evidence that it was Russian soldiers who looted, tortured, raped and murdered - because the Kremlin denies it. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Selensky promptly topped this by claiming that thousands of Ukrainians were missing. What happened to them? Were they taken to Russia? Murdered and buried in mass graves or burned to death? Since then, reports of atrocities from all areas from which the Russian army has withdrawn have reached the public. By default, the media added to these accounts that these reports were unconfirmed and still had to be verified. However, nobody seemed bothered by this because the information was out; thus, it has become fact. There is no doubt about the truthfulness of the Ukrainian account for US President Joe Biden, the NATO foreign ministers and the EU Council of Ministers, and the German government. The Ukrainian government and diplomats are increasing the pressure on Europe, especially Germany. Along the lines of 'What more has to happen before you support us with more and better weapons and decide on a complete energy import stop for Russian oil and gas so that you do not fill Putin's war chest with your payments!' The EU Parliament recently called for a radical step towards a complete oil or gas embargo. However, the EU states are already arguing about the transitional period for the import ban on coal. The EU Commission presented as part of the sixth sanctions package against Russia a phased plan for an oil embargo at the end of April 2022. Hungary refused to participate. Hungary gets all its oil from Russia. What would happen if much more severe measures, such as a gas embargo, were taken? Both Germany and Italy are heavily dependent on the Russian gas supply. Almost in a panic, Economics Minister Habeck (Greens) travels the world to find new energy sources. But Ukraine not only demanded tighter sanctions in the early summer of 2022. (Note: "demanded" not "requested"!) Moreover, against the backdrop of Bucha, President Selensky massively demands offensive weapons to recapture Ukrainian territories, especially in the Donbas and around Mariupol and Crimea, to prevent further atrocities. I do believe that Russian troops committed atrocities. In a private conversation with a friend, I heard about atrocities before "Bucha". A mother in Ukraine told her daughter, who had fled to Germany, but she did not want to tell her the whole picture so she would not be upset. I believe her because I am confident this mother does not have any propaganda intentions. The corpses in the streets of Bucha, seen in photos and videos, some tied up, were killed. No question about it! But by whom? The Russian troops were occupiers at the time of the killing, and witnesses reported in videos of atrocities and random shootings. Who made these recordings and when is unclear to some extent. But what else was going on in the city during this occupation? Were there no resistance fighters? No colluders and revenge on those colluders? At the beginning of the war, the Ukrainian government handed out weapons to anyone in Ukraine who wanted them. Where were these armed men during the occupation? In the Ukrainian army? They have their army weapons. In most wars, there is resistance in occupied territories. Guerrilla fighters can make life difficult for an occupying power and successfully defend their country. It would not be the first time that compatriots get harmed in the process. No one would condemn them in the current situation. Regret, yes, but condemn? No! However, such armed conflicts could not be used to demand weapons. That sounds cynical, but it may be realistic. Perhaps my mistrust is unjustified. Maybe my doubts will be dispelled. In any case, I don't believe in the denial by the Kremlin either. War crimes I think war crimes by both sides are likely. However, it is undoubtedly not opportune at the moment to confront both sides with accusations because there is only one war criminal in public opinion. In this context, one observation is revealing. A friend of mine, who is above any suspicion of being biased, saw a short clip on a news programme on German television about war crimes committed by the Ukrainian army. Ukrainian soldiers shot captured and tied Russian soldiers in the legs. I have not read, heard or seen anything about this anywhere. It was also reported that both the Russian and Ukrainian armies had used banned cluster bombs. This, too, remained but a marginal note on the sidelines of the war. I believe there should be no taboos in war reporting. Whose interests are being protected by one-sided reporting? Reaction to the everyday horror An obvious war crime, also according to the Geneva Convention, is, in my eyes, the destruction of residential buildings and civilian facilities. This sight fills me with as much horror as the murdered people in the streets of Bucha. Perhaps this is due to my memories of good times some years before the Maidan protests in one of those insanely high skyscrapers in a district of Kyiv. I can still see the endless expanse of this gigantic high-rise housing estate in Kyiv's metro area. There are no street signs; instead, there are flooded construction pits and hordes of stray wild dogs. I am always afraid of getting lost, as my sense of direction is not the best. I spent a week in the flat of a Ukrainian acquaintance with her family, consisting of three grown-up children and a son-in-law. I was allowed to cook borscht under supervision, drank plenty of vodkas while cooking, during and after the meal, and laughed and discussed Europe and politics with the young people. I know and am glad that all of them, except the men, fled because no one would get out of these houses alive if a missile hit. And I was assured that there had been missile fire there. Yes, and at this point, I am ashamed to admit that the destroyed homes in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza did not affect me as emotionally as the Ukrainian ones. Why is that? I would never have thought that of myself. The suffering of the Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans and Palestinians is just as intense as the suffering of the Ukrainians. How can I feel differently?! What is wrong with us Europeans and with me? I criticise Poland for using barbed wire and violence to prevent refugees from these countries from coming into the country and Europe because, since 2015, it has never been willing to accept refugees like other European countries. Now, however, it is opening its doors wide to millions of refugees from Ukraine and welcomes them. Why? Because they are neighbours? Because they are Europeans? Because they belong to the same culture? Because they have the same enemy? Because they are Christians in the broader sense?... I probably should look at this phenomenon with less repulsion and more "psychology". I am ashamed of this double standard and angry that in all the weeks of the Ukraine war, few commentators have denounced this inequality and difference in the measurement of human rights and human dignity. To my knowledge, not a single politician stood up for the equal treatment of refugees. (TA) Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 2/1 War in Ukraine - part 2/2 War in Ukraine - part 2/3 War in Ukraine - part 2/4 War in Ukraine - part 2/5 War in Ukraine - part 3

IS A REFUGEE NOT THE SAME AS A REFUGEE? (DE) In April 2022, more than 4 million people fled from Ukraine, 2.5 of whom were in Poland. In Germany, at that time, there were more than 310,000, and in August 2022, there were about 910,000 documented arrivals. More facts, figures and background reports on the situation of Ukrainian refugees can be found on the Media Service Integration Service Platform for Journalists. Source: https://mediendienst-integration.de/migration/flucht-asyl/ukrainische-fluechtlinge.html I worked in a college that had a partner school in Kyiv. Therefore, in this crisis, colleagues activated personal contacts, and I experienced firsthand how the official side deals with refugee colleagues in Germany. Immediate integration of Ukrainian refugees The legal situation for refugees from Ukraine is rather generous, even though Ukraine is not a member of the EU. Refugees from Ukraine can freely choose their place of residence and move around the Schengen area without any visa requirement. Ukrainians automatically have permission to work. Those with no assets and who cannot get a job are entitled to social benefits that ensure their livelihood. Facts and background information can be found on the Deutsche Welle website of 4.3.2022. https://www.dw.com/de/asyl-welche-regeln-und-leistungen-gelten-f%C3%BCr-ukraine-fl%C3%BCchtlinge/a-60961795 Female Ukrainian friends reported that at the border, they immediately received a free SIM card for their mobile phone so that they could make phone calls to Ukraine. In addition, public transport, including trains, was also free of charge for Ukrainians who had fled. A quarter of Ukrainian refugees in Germany are staying with friends and relatives. In schools, “welcome classes” are set up for schoolchildren and integration schemes for kindergartens. Asylum seekers or refugees from other countries can only dream of such support, as I know from my voluntary work. No work permit, living in shelters, no freedom of movement between the federal states of Germany or even Europe…! There is no Dublin Agreement for Ukrainians sending refugees back to where they first set foot on European soil, which in this case would be Poland and Hungary. Why are Ukrainian refugees given such preferential treatment? What distinguishes them from other refugees from war-torn areas? What is expected of them? These questions remain unanswered, but I have a feeling of déjà vu! This great willingness to help reminds me of 2015, when trains full of refugees from Syria arrived at Munich’s Central Station and were greeted by applauding Germans; when then the Chancellor Angela Merkel said encouragingly: “We can do it!” I have seen how do-gooders cared for refugee families with remarkable commitment, only to turn away from them in disappointment and frustration after some time. The gratitude of those cared for was limited, the level of mutual demands rose steadily, and the cultural differences were too significant in the long run. The right-wing parties, such as the AfD (Alternative for Germany), with their agitation against foreigners, gained popularity and became a political force. Does anyone believe that this will not happen with the Ukrainian refugees? The Süddeutsche Zeitung also recalls the situation in 2015, when many volunteers took care of Syrian refugees but were soon overwhelmed. It, therefore, points out the limits of generosity. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/meinung/ukraine-deutschland-fluechtlinge-bund-laender-treffen-grundsicherung-1.5563478, 8 April 2022. There are hardly any cultural differences between my former Ukrainian colleagues and us, the German teachers. But other Ukrainians are more nationalistic than is bearable for us Germans. This ranges from an exclusionary pathetically expressed national pride to aggressive bullying of black people and Muslims. It is also no coincidence that the Ukrainian Consul General, Iryna Tybinka, rejects teaching Ukrainian children in German integration classes. She told the Conference of Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs that integration classes would put Ukrainian children under psychological strain, that teaching in Ukraine is stricter and that the content in German schools is too Russia-friendly. In fact, Ukrainian schools are better equipped with digitalisation than German schools; presumably, Ukrainian lessons via the internet would not be a problem for most pupils. But the other arguments hint at ideological differences that are not so obvious to the Germans. In public opinion, politics and the media, it is said that European values and democracy must be defended in Ukraine. I am curious to see what happens when differences and disagreements become visible and tangible. An Inadequate Promise by the President of the EU Commission At the beginning of April 2022, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen visited the Ukrainian President in Kyiv and, with an expression signalling consternation, promised a quick decision on Ukraine’s admission to the EU. A refusal is unthinkable at this point. So I fear the decision has already been made. Ukraine’s entry into the EU would massively increase the influence of Eastern Europeans. Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, questionable in terms of their true sense of democracy, would have a strong ally. And no one really knows whether Ukraine’s rule of law and democracy is as stable and deeply rooted as it is said now. Before the war, no one cared about Ukrainian issues. That could be a rude awakening. Perhaps this is what German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Greens) had in mind when, four weeks after Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s pledge of concern, she put Ukraine’s process of EU membership into perspective. At a press conference in Kyiv, she announced there would be no shortcut for Ukraine on the way to full EU membership. However, Ukraine is an integral part of Europe. Whatever that may mean, it seems that German politicians’ assurances of solidarity and affection are due more to pressure from the media and some fellow politicians than to inner conviction. (TA) Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 2/1 War in Ukraine - part 2/2 War in Ukraine - part 2/3 War in Ukraine - part 2/4 War in Ukraine - part 2/5 War in Ukraine - part 3

GERMANY’S IMAGE IN THE UKRAINE CONFLICT (DE April/May 2022) From the beginning, Germany was under massive pressure from within the country and foreign allies. The pressure boiled down to that Germany being told to withdraw immediately from the NordStream 2 contract because otherwise, it was financing Putin’s war and responsible for Ukraine’s deaths. Germany’s economic and political relations with Russia were actually to blame for Putin being able to invade Ukraine. Germany was accused of only looking after its economic interests and tended to put values aside. These and similar arguments were heard. Although I was critical of Germany conducting business with dictatorships for a long time, this “concerted action” of apportioning blame astonished and annoyed me. As if it were only Germany that acted in this way! And as if, for example, Saudi Arabia, with which the USA and Germany maintain intensive business relations, were a democracy that didn’t betray values! Many states do not take sides against Russia or only half-heartedly. Several states, especially in Africa, South America, and Asia, did not join sanctions against Russia. China does not renounce Russia but does not actively support it either. Xi Jinping can wait. India is dependent on Russia’s oil and gas. It, therefore, stands by Russia but does not feel entirely comfortable in its role, as it is currently under massive pressure from Western politicians. Israel and Switzerland avoided taking sides in the first few months. Neutrality is the usual behaviour for Switzerland, and it has always fared well. However, it could no longer afford to remain neutral after a while. Israel has domestic and foreign policy reasons for not getting on the wrong side of either Ukraine or Russia. Jews from Russia and Ukraine have emigrated to Israel and still have family ties to their countries of origin. Jews will remember that the Ukrainian fascists, together with the German occupiers, took part in the persecution of Jews during the Second World War. Israel depends on Russia, allowing Israel’s air force to target Iran via Syria. So many good reasons make it difficult to take sides. The world understands Israel’s dilemma! The world understands Switzerland’s proverbial neutrality. However, the world does not understand Germany’s restraint! In the summer of 2022, Germany is facing a gigantic energy crisis. This is because it does not want to and is not allowed to use NordStream2. Russia is sabotaging NordStream1, energy prices are rising immeasurably due to the market structure, and the resulting inflation is making life difficult for the population. Everyone is looking forward to the coming winter with fear. When a German politician suggested that we should now open NordStream2 to supply ourselves with Russian gas, war or no war, there was a moral outrage by a national and international Ukraine Solidarity Alliance. But I wonder why Spain was able to increase its import of Russian gas by two-thirds in June and July without the Ukraine Solidarity Alliance taking a moral lash out. German-Russian relations – a mistake? My country’s representatives of politics and media representatives take sides with Ukraine loudly, tirelessly, financially and compassionately. Yet there is a constant torrent of criticism and malice. At times, one even could get the impression that Germany is to blame for the Russian invasion of Ukraine because it maintained economic and cultural relations with Russia and insisted on diplomacy at a time when others, the USA, in particular, were ranting about Russia’s belligerence. The long tradition of good relations initiated by Willy Brandt (SPD chancellor) during the Cold War is now declared a mistake, a crime, and a conspiracy. So, who is accusing Germany? It is, of course, Poland that still has historically justified reservations towards Germany and makes reproaches! Then, of course, Ukrainian politicians, and above all, the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany, Andrij Melnyk! American patriots, too! Also, many German politicians and many German journalists! Ex-Chancellor Schröder (SPD) is being massively attacked for his professional and personal relationship with Russia and President Putin. As a result, his staff is quitting. Furthermore, he is threatened to have his honorary titles revoked, and his salary as former chancellor cancelled. The public is snarling! The media pressure on the German President Frank Walter Steinmeier to be ashamed of his commitment to diplomacy, de-escalation and Nordstream2 was so intense that he finally apologised for his “mistake”. Has everyone forgotten why the European Coal and Steel Community (Montanunion), the first step towards the EU, was founded between France and Germany, the known arch-enemies after the Second World War? Economic relations – initially focused on coal and steel – were initiated to prevent future European wars. Over time, the alliance was expanded and strengthened politically and connected even more closely economically. A war in Europe? Unthinkable! So what is wrong if this political approach should also guide relations with Russia?! One could instead ask all those politically responsible why Europe-Russia relations have been so half-heartedly, so fragmentarily and hesitantly. Why, instead of openness, mistrust prevailed long before the Ukraine war? One aspect plays a decisive role here. The USA had nothing against the Franco-German connection but had reservations about Germany-Russia or Europe-Russia relations. If France had been so suspicious of dealing with Germany in the post-war period under pressure from the USA, there would be no EU today. Another event shows the pressure exerted on Germany to turn away from its peace-oriented policy based on diplomacy. Weapons seem to count more than humanitarian aid or peace efforts. German President Frank Walter Steinmeier, unlike any other European head of state, was not welcome in Ukraine initially because of his previous stance on Germany’s policy towards Russia. So when he planned to travel to Kyiv with the heads of state of some Eastern European countries, the German president was disinvited. In contrast, President Selensky happily received British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in Ukraine. Germany has accepted over 380,000 Ukrainian refugees by the end of April 2022 and is still holding the gates wide open. The UK is the only European country requiring visas for Ukrainians to enter the country. At the same moment in time, 117,000 visa applications had been submitted. But only a few managed to pass the hurdles and enter the country. In May, it was reported that in many families, almost all members received a visa, except for one person, for example, a minor child or another family member. There is no need to explain the effect of this! Ukrainian families react like most families in such a situation: all or none! I wonder whether this is the intention of the UK government to regulate the arrival of Ukrainian refugees. However, the UK supplies weapons, which seems to be more important to President Selensky than the welfare of his refugee compatriots. Consequently, Prime Minister Boris Johnson is a friend, and Frank Walter Steinmeier is not. This is because Germany had resisted and tenaciously against delivering heavy weapons to Ukraine for a long time. It legitimately did not want to escalate the war or be drawn into the war. The decline in taboos due to the war and war propaganda makes it acceptable that the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany, Andrej Melnyk, publicly insulted the German chancellor as getting into a huff. He did so when Chancellor Olaf Scholz refused to consider a visit to Ukraine because of this insult towards Germany’s elected president. Such behaviour shows traits of a witch hunt. I feel challenged to “think outside the box”, which is best done by asking questions. (TA) Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 2/1 War in Ukraine - part 2/2 War in Ukraine - part 2/3 War in Ukraine - part 2/4 War in Ukraine - part 2/5 War in Ukraine - part 3

WHAT IF…? (De) (April/May 2022) In the course of my research and reflections, I have developed an urgent desire to ask questions that are currently taboo. I can live with being wrong and being forced to row back, but I don’t want to have scissors in my head that prevent me from making specific considerations. I’ve pondered over Russian objectives and interests. Now I am taking the liberty of running through corresponding intentions on the Western side. What if the USA and NATO wanted this war? This question is frightening and disturbing, given the destruction in Ukraine and the suffering of Ukrainians. It also starkly contrasts the declarations of those with political responsibility in Europe and the USA, avoiding being drawn into the war. It no longer seems absurd because the Europeans and the USA, and thus also NATO, have long been a party to the war. Through the massive financial support; the deliveries of heavy weapons even from Germany; training camps in Ramstein (Germany); the transmission of real-time data on the whereabouts of Russian units and officers by the USA to the Ukrainian army, and sanctions, Neither Ukraine nor the USA nor NATO started this war, but that does not mean that it was not provoked. There are unconfirmed isolated rumours in the media that plans existed for Ukraine to retake the separatist areas or the people’s republics in the Donbas and Crimea. Such allegations surface but are not being picked up by the major media. Perhaps because there is nothing to it, or this information would be counterproductive for a Western assessment of what is happening. However, the fact that a joint NATO manoeuvre took place in Ukraine in September 2021 is undisputed. The reasons can be derived from the dreaded threat posed by Russia, which, for its part, naturally felt threatened by the very fact of this joint NATO military exercise. This manoeuvre was definitely a provocation. However, nowhere in the media is a connection made with the attack by Russia a few months later. Most of the people I spoke to knew nothing about this manoeuvre. My consideration, however, is that by looking at the development of arms expenditures before the war, one could conclude there was a desire for war or at least an expectation of war or attack. So I consulted statistics to get an insight. -Global defence spending increased significantly between 2020 and 2021 https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/36397/umfrage/entwicklung-der-weltweiten-militaerausgaben/ So, were they preparing for war? -Nato has been rearming heavily since 2015. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1001947/umfrage/militaerausgaben-der-nato-staaten/ -Ukraine was willing and able to more than double its military spending from 2016 to 2020 https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/315946/umfrage/entwicklung-der-militaerausgaben-der-ukraine/ And yet it was probably not enough. Ukraine’s arms demands were massive from the start and had nothing of a plea for support. It even asked to establish a no-fly zone over Ukraine and guarantee its compliance. The fact that this would have meant a confrontation between NATO and Russia and thus the entry of the NATO countries into the war gave the Ukrainian president no comprehensible reason to reject this request. And again and again, Germany was put under moral pressure. It was argued that Germany had a historical responsibility towards Ukraine. The massacre of Babi Yar and the atrocities committed by the German Nazis in Ukraine during World War II were brought into play. Germany should, therefore, get more involved and supply tanks or anti-aircraft tanks and other heavy equipment. Well, Ukraine got its way in the end. The reasons for the armament are apparent. Russia occupied Crimea in 2014 and supported the aspirations of the separatist areas in the Donbas to join Russia. As a result, Nato and Ukraine expected a military confrontation with Russia. How about Russia’s preparation for its war of aggression? Russia is in 5th place among the 20 countries with the highest military spending in the world in 2021. However, Russia either saw no reason or did not have the financial means to increase arms spending. On the contrary. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/150888/umfrage/militaerausgaben-von-russland-seit-2000/ Was Russia waiting with its war of aggression until Ukraine and the NATO states were optimally equipped? That would be a highly peculiar strategy! But there is a qualitative aspect to consider! Russia has a military advantage as it has had hypersonic missiles since 2019, which are controllable despite this speed, can be equipped with nuclear warheads and have a range of 2,000 kilometres. Especially since the Western powers have nothing like that, although they have long been working on such weapons systems. Moreover, the West has no defence systems at its disposal, so it is relatively helpless. Did Russia possibly invade Ukraine as long as it still had this “miracle weapon” as the only party to the war? But then, where are the military successes? Did the Russian president expect the Nato states to hold back because of this fearfully? So far, the course of this war does not give the impression that a well-prepared warlord has deliberately descended on a neighbouring country to subjugate it. Another incident makes me doubt that Russia voluntarily launched a war of aggression “on a whim”. According to Express UK, on the Russian anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany in the Great Patriotic War, on 09 May, a former colonel of the Russian Air Defence Forces, Mikhail Khodaryonok, spoke on Russian television. He said that with its outdated weapons, Russia had no chance against Ukraine, which the West had highly armed. Headline: Putin humiliated on state TV as Russian colonel admits military “cannot compete” with Kyiv Link: https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1607220/Vladimir-Putin-state-TV-Russia-military-colonel-Victory-Day-mobilisation-latest-news-vn/amp The BBC also picked up on the Russian colonel’s criticism almost two weeks later. BBC’s Steve Rosenberg reports on the unusually harsh criticism on https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61484222 No other media has acknowledged this news, which is a sensation in two respects: Firstly, the military inferiority of the Russian army is an aspect that was never communicated in this way either by President Putin or the Western powers. Secondly, how can it be that in a country where war must not be called a war but a special operation, a retired colonel is allowed to make such defeatist statements about his country’s military publicly? Politicians and the media have reportedly noted the non-escalation in Putin’s 09 May speech with relief. However, with the colonel’s statement on Russian television, this could be almost a peace offer, or at least a signal of willingness to negotiate, even considering that the war in Ukraine continues unabated, as reported in the German media. What conclusions could we draw from the fact that not every opportunity, however small, is being used to end the war through negotiations? Either I overinterpret the signals, or Russia’s potential willingness to make peace does not fit into the concept. What if there were reasons for the West or the USA to escalate this conflict? Like all the highly armed Western states, US President Joe Biden predicted, increasingly urgent, that Russia would invade Ukraine. No one could comprehend this, considering all the facts available to the public. I have already pondered Russia’s and President Putin’s possible objectives and motives. However, it would be very one-sided if I did not also consider the potential objectives and motives of the big and powerful adversary, the USA. Close economic ties between Russia and Europeans, especially Germany, have always been a thorn in the side of the USA. Nordstream 2 had been completed just before the Russian invasion, ready to be connected. The USA had torpedoed this project for years because it meant that Europe, above all Germany, would be closely linked to the enemy Russia, indeed downright dependent on it. Germans and Europeans would not be able or willing to participate in a trade war or even in military proxy conflicts, in which Russia, in the opinion of the USA, would have to be sanctioned. If the liberal, peaceful, economically strong, and politically influential Germany was weakened, the EU as a united force would also be weakened and could be much better influenced and manipulated. Right at the beginning of this war, not only was the use of Nordstream 2 made impossible, but a strong Ukrainian support alliance also demanded the enforcement of a complete gas and oil embargo against Russia. Such an embargo was a significant problem for Germany’s economy and the Germans with even more inflation, rising costs, supply shortages and provision difficulties as consequences. This would possibly even lead to a destabilisation of the country in the medium term. Ukraine and Poland are at the forefront of those countries vehemently demanding this. However, the Biden government held back and showed understanding. Just like in any detective story: good cop, bad cop! The closing of Nordstream 2 also meant substantial financial losses for Ukraine, as they would lose transit fees in the billions. Despite Germany and the EU wanting to make compensation payments, this project would be a loss-making business for Ukraine. Whichever way you look at it, for the Europeans, this war means weakening their economy, increasing debt, more arms spending and closer ties to the US. So a Europe that is economically weakened, loyal to the US, and separated from Russia would be good news for the US. Annihilating Russia would also be a worthwhile goal. Russia has been aligning itself for some time with the USA’s other adversary, China. If Russia were involved in a war with Nato, it would no longer be eligible as a partner for China because it would be completely useless. The words that US President Joe Biden let slip during the closing speech of his trip to Poland on 26 March 2022 about President Putin, “For God’s sake, this man can’t stay in power!”, could be part of a programme. However, regime change in Russia cannot be achieved with the help of propaganda alone, nor with the help of sanctions alone; it can only be achieved with violence from within (coup, revolution) or from outside (war). Is the world mentally preparing for a world war? Russia has now wronged the world with this war. Putin is evil par excellence. All war atrocities are portrayed as specifically Russian atrocities and attributed to Putin’s specific war criminality. The fact that such atrocities happen in every war and are carried out by all warring parties is irrelevant. So if Putin were to be stopped by force of arms, it would be a good deed, like the fight against Hitler’s fascist Germany in the Second World War. I find the continuation of this train of thought extremely disturbing. Will we reach this point soon? Should the US have an interest in escalating or expanding the war, then not only Ukraine and Russia would be destroyed, but probably large parts of Europe as well. Would there be beneficiaries in such a scenario? What if the arms industry sensed an opportunity? Germany’s government, above all Chancellor Olaf Scholz, tried continuously and increasingly desperate to resist the general mood of war. No war participation! No delivery of heavy weapons! In the meantime, all that is more or less history. The pressure was so gigantic that Chancellor Scholz had to agree to a weapons ring swap. Although Ukraine had accepted direct payments, they were considered far from sufficient. This ring swap – sending old, originally Soviet weapons, for example, from Slovenia to Ukraine and delivering new modern weapons to these countries as compensation – directly benefits the arms manufacturers. A classic scenario: destroy the old weapons stocks in the war and order new ones from the arms industry! A great deal! You almost can’t believe that this is happening. In my youth, such scenarios were patterns. Real politics was considered more complex. That no longer seems to be true. German politicians, media, and foreign opinion makers called the German government hesitant and a coward if it did not deliver the demanded “Marder” or “Leopard” directly to Ukraine. On 28 April, almost all parties in the German Bundestag, except for “Die Linke” and the “AfD”, voted to supply heavy weapons to Ukraine. Well done, arms lobby? The arms companies will have been pleased. Since the end of the Second World War and the Cold War, Germany has never shown such readiness for war! What if it is not democracy that is being defended in Ukraine? In political speeches, it was and is always emphasised that it is democracy that has to be defended in Ukraine. But is that really the case? Does Ukraine stand for democracy and Western values (whatever they are!)? In 2021, Volodimir Selensky had all oppositional broadcasters and media closed down by decree. The news about this can be found in German media, even in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, which cannot exactly be accused of pro-Russian agitation. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/ukraine-weitere-sender-der-opposition-geschlossen-1.5497836 I don’t remember Western media and politicians getting publicly outraged about this or even standing up for freedom of expression in Ukraine. Now there is war in Ukraine, and there is only the voice of the government. Even the Ukrainian former Minister of Education and MP for the liberal party “Voice” is surprised that there seems to be more or less only one opinion in Ukraine. “We don’t criticise our president in international media,” she apparently told the Süddeutsche Zeitung in an interview on 09 August 2022. The whole interview can be read at: www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/krieg-ukraine-fake-news-medien-1.5636261 Is this the kind of democracy Putin is looking so fearfully at that he has to go to war with the country to contain the democracy movement at home? (TA) Links to articles - War in Ukraine War in Ukraine - Series War in Ukraine - part 1 War in Ukraine - part 2 War in Ukraine - part 2/1 War in Ukraine - part 2/2 War in Ukraine - part 2/3 War in Ukraine - part 2/4 War in Ukraine - part 2/5 War in Ukraine - part 3

(EN) That night, I must have slept deeply and woke up very slowly. It is as if gentle waves were flushing me from the realm of dreams into reality. Curled up like a cat, I lie on my pillows when I finally open my eyes. Daylight is already seeping in thin streaks through the cracks of the closed blinds. Softened by the heavy red curtain, the room is bathed in dull twilight. My gaze wanders over the dimly discernible furniture: to the left of my bed, the old chest of drawers with shiny brass fittings; on the wall opposite, my desk with the Chinese vase that my Asian lover gave me as a farewell gift many years ago. Under the window with the red curtain is my little chaise longue with the richly embroidered Indian throw and the beaded decorative cushions. On the wall above, you can see the matt gold frame of a painting whose motif is still hidden in the dark. To the right is a delicate bookcase with turned feet and struts, where my favourite books have their place. The green lily also feels at home there and sends its arching spurs into the room. A small chandelier that I bought at a flea market a long time ago hangs from the ceiling. Narrow crystal rods are attached to the round brass ring, which breaks the light into many facets and hangs down like glittering fringes when the light is switched on. Now you can only guess how pretty this lighting looks in the evening when it casts shadows on the ceiling. Not a single sound penetrates the room from the outside. This is unusual, and for a moment, I smile, imagining that the world has ended without me noticing. No birds chirping, no noisy neighbourhood children on their way to school, no engine noise from the road passing nearby - nothing, simply nothing. I listen into this silence and sink into a kind of trance. A deep inner calm spreads in me. I remain motionless and hear myself breathing steadily. A rarely experienced feeling of happiness and deep inner contentment flows through me. It is a wonderful start to a new day. Then I get up and go down to the kitchen. I prepare breakfast and turn on the radio. I catch my breath: the morning news reports a further spread of the pandemic. The curfew and the lockdown that have been in place for weeks are being extended. Schools remain closed. Employers are asked to allow home offices as far as possible. The wearing of FFP2 masks is now compulsory. A new, even more contagious variant of the virus has been discovered. The silence will probably last for a long time, and the feeling of happiness is over for this day. 30 January 2021 (Monika L.)