Politics is about incentives. If due to the rightful share of resources received from the refugees the German state can legally seize Syrian oilfields with UN armed support and setup a oil fund for their citizens—it will be popular. But the seized resources must be setup to pay dividends to citizens.
Imagine every German citizen receiving a 1000$ a year due to an oil fund like they do in Alaska .
Peace and stable borders are very valuable. You basically propose getting rid of the Hague Conventions. 1000$ per year per citizens is not worth giving up the Hague Conventions and all the trouble that comes with that.
If there was peace and stable borders everywhere then there would be no refugees. We need to modify these old conventions to cover present conditions. Let us put it to the vote in the refugee receiving country, I speculate that for a 1000$ a year the average voter will be happy to vote for anyone who will get them their cash.
Nothing in that questioned any of the borders of Afghanistan. It doesn’t violate the Hague Conventions. Furthermore, it doesn’t change the fact that for inner-European peace depends on Germany’s promises about respecting the sanctity of borders being believed.
You also ignore that the money would not come immediately but only after some time and only if the cost of the military to defend the territory is less then the revenue. Military is expensive and might very well be a net cost.
Politics is about incentives. If due to the rightful share of resources received from the refugees the German state can legally seize Syrian oilfields with UN armed support and setup a oil fund for their citizens—it will be popular. But the seized resources must be setup to pay dividends to citizens.
Imagine every German citizen receiving a 1000$ a year due to an oil fund like they do in Alaska .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund
Peace and stable borders are very valuable. You basically propose getting rid of the Hague Conventions. 1000$ per year per citizens is not worth giving up the Hague Conventions and all the trouble that comes with that.
If there was peace and stable borders everywhere then there would be no refugees. We need to modify these old conventions to cover present conditions. Let us put it to the vote in the refugee receiving country, I speculate that for a 1000$ a year the average voter will be happy to vote for anyone who will get them their cash.
Germany is willing to meddle abroad, as an example they have been in afghanistan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Armed_Forces_casualties_in_Afghanistan
Basically, let’s destroy the power of the German political institutions before we start.
Nothing in that questioned any of the borders of Afghanistan. It doesn’t violate the Hague Conventions. Furthermore, it doesn’t change the fact that for inner-European peace depends on Germany’s promises about respecting the sanctity of borders being believed.
You also ignore that the money would not come immediately but only after some time and only if the cost of the military to defend the territory is less then the revenue. Military is expensive and might very well be a net cost.