Hacker News Reader

Comment by harryf | Hacker News Reader

> Were they able to secure such a treaty, why would there be any expectation that it'd be meaningful?

I would be very meaningful in a symbolic sense. Germany and most of Western Europe are used to seeing themselves as close allies of the US since WW2.

With close allies you expect to be able to reach an acceptable level of trust on topics like spying, even though you know both sides are still going to do it at some level.

By not being able to sign this agreement the message for Germans / US relations is "we trust you just like we trust the Chinese". That will likely lead to a weakening of past alliances...

View on HN

Found this interesting tidbit on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall

The National Security Agency was the only American intelligence agency that was aware that East Germany was to take action to deal with the brain drain problem, i.e. the outflow of East-Germans via Berlin. On 9 August 1961, the NSA intercepted an advance warning information of the East German Communist Party's plan to close the intra-Berlin borders between East- and West-Berlin completely for foot traffic. The interagency intelligence Watch Committee assessed that this intercept "might be the first step in a plan to close the border." This warning reached not U.S. President John F. Kennedy until noon on August 13, 1961, who was vacationing in his yacht off the Kennedy Compound in Hyannis Port, Massachusetts. While Kennedy was angry that he had no advance warning, he was relieved that the East Germans and the Soviets had only divided Berlin without taking any action against West Berlin's access to the West. However he denounced the Berlin Wall, whose erection worsend the relations between the United States and the Soviet Union.

That's pretty much my view. If the US persists, then there's basically no real alliance anymore. NATO is dead.

Yea but I guess it's at least more honest this way ;)

Let's say "honest in the eyes of the citizen/voter", b/c no politician would seriously consider putting any real trust in any such agreement.

Germany is not a sovereign country, there is no peace contract. "Seeing themselves as close allies" is kinda lol looking from the fact that we are occupied since 60 years.

The fact that Germany still allows the presence and construction of extremely expensive and big NSA surveillance centers (tapping into German infrastructure) such as the "Dagger complex" [0] certainly says a lot with regards to "sovereignty".

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger_Complex

And just so you don't think this is over soon when they shut down Dagger, they reopen in Wiesbaden-Erbenheim, about 30km north-west of their current location.

"extremely expensive and big"? You're joking, right? Look at the pictures... or are you claiming there's some gigantic underground complex underneath those two small office buildings?

Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany (http://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/2plusfour8994e.htm):

"Welcoming the fact that the German people, freely exercising their right of self-determination, have expressed their will to bring about the unity of Germany as a state so that they will be able to serve the peace of the world as an equal and sovereign partner in a united Europe;"

"(1) The French Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America hereby terminate their rights and responsibilities relating to Berlin and to Germany as a whole. As a result, the corresponding, related quadripartite agreements, decisions and practices are terminated and all related Four Power institutions are dissolved."

"(2) The United Germany shall have accordingly full sovereignty over its internal and external affairs."

Sorry to insert fact...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com