Berlin, Germany (Weltexpress). For just one generation, Europe managed to survive without being criss-crossed by mine-protected borders. However, what the Poles and some others are planning is only at first glance directed against the supposed Russian enemy.
‘Yes, but the Wall deaths’ – I have heard this mantra about the GDR for as long as I can remember. A recent commentary in the Berliner Zeitung reminded me of this again, but at the same time it reminded me of other borders in the present. And once again, the two situations seem like a musical motif and its inversion…
Essentially, it is just a few sentences that make this connection. The author of this commentary was in the People’s Navy of the GDR and is now a publisher. He aptly summarises the aspect that is often overlooked in the whole ‘Wall deaths’ narrative:
‘Until September 1990, neither Berlin nor Bonn had any say over the alliance border on the Werra and Elbe rivers and the border regime there. (…) This border was a military one, which is why it was secured by military means. This describes the dilemma of the GDR leadership, which was not only held materially responsible for the border regime.’
And what a military border it was. Until the early 1980s, the entire NATO concept was called ‘forward defence’ and involved, as a first step in a possible conflict, pushing the front line as far east as possible – i.e. right into the GDR. Officially, this was anything but a secret. So there were minefields, whose purpose was to provide initial protection against this tactic. But even in the 1970s, they were always described as if their main task was to prevent GDR citizens from leaving the country.
However, in addition to this memory and the debate about it, which is still primarily propagandistic and not historical, there is now a current event. Namely, Finland, Poland and the Baltic countries have withdrawn from the Ottawa Convention on landmines, arguing that they need to secure their borders against the Russian enemy that threatens them.
However, such minefields are of little use against an actual military threat; the military has the means and methods to clear them, and before ground troops would even be tempted to try to find a way through, many missiles would have been fired back and forth.
But what if the second motive, which is always put forward in relation to the GDR border, also played a role here, only not in relation to those leaving, but to those entering? Incidentally, these minefields also block a few migration routes, with little manpower but maximum danger for migrants.
It’s a little strange that in Germany, a large apparatus of NGOs and lawyers is being mobilised to prevent migrants from having to stay in Poland instead of being allowed to enter Germany, and that this entire apparatus has so far remained silent on the planned minefields along the eastern borders… And this despite the fact that the difference between staying in Germany and staying in Poland is purely quantitative, while the risk of being torn to pieces when crossing the border does not seem entirely proportionate to illegal entry.
Yes, bizarrely, what the GDR was always accused of is now actually being practised by Poland et al., a militarisation of the border that is primarily directed against people who want to cross it. Just imagine if Salvini’s government in Italy had not prevented the ‘sea rescue’ ships from entering the ports, but had mined the Italian maritime border. There would have been a justified outcry.
But it works brilliantly to tell the story of the Russian threat, when ultimately it is Afghans and Pakistanis who are meant. Just as the narrative about the GDR’s border security installations always pretends that there was no NATO strategy and no contact line between two military alliances, today the aspect of migration routes in connection with landmines (correctly called anti-personnel mines) is completely ignored. Because today, all you have to do is wave the evil Russian flag a little, and any further thought is successfully shut down.
Yet there is ample evidence that the type of border fortifications that Poland has erected on its eastern border in recent years has already claimed victims, even if this is no longer as visible as it was in 2021, when large groups attempted to break through the border fence. In 2023, there was a highly acclaimed Polish feature film on this subject: ‘Green Border’. If Poland actually mines its border as planned, these mines will certainly kill migrants, while the ‘Russian threat’ is nothing more than a hypothesis. Incidentally, in February, the Polish parliament suspended the right to asylum for the time being.
The same applies to all other countries that have withdrawn from the Ottawa Convention. Even if neither Poland nor the Baltic countries are the actual targets. The fact is that the networks that profit from transporting migrants ultimately do not care whether the human cargo reaches its destination; they will use any route that appears viable.
But if you look more closely at what happened or will happen at these borders, there is one crucial difference: those who entered the border fortifications of the GDR knew what to expect and decided to take the risk. Those who encounter a mine belt on NATO’s eastern border will probably not even understand the warning signs. Yes, perhaps this border design will lead to a shift in routes in the long term; but since different criminal networks control the business on each route, this will happen very slowly, especially since even those who mine the border have no interest in this aspect receiving too much public attention.
Admittedly, that would just be another round of the practical cynicism that is so popular in the EU in this context. Take the ‘sea rescue’ operation, for example, which has helped to establish the Mediterranean route because the rubber dinghies that are usually seen cannot cover longer distances and only cover the last leg of the journey to the ‘rescue ship’.
So while in the EU itself any form of rejection is attacked as inhumane, even if it ultimately reduces the risk to life for those affected, the same EU is turning its external border into a deadly trap under the pretext of the ‘Russian threat’. Moral outrage, however, remains reserved for the long-vanished border between the Warsaw Pact and NATO.
