Evelyn Schötz warns: The arms industry endangers Nuremberg's future!

Evelyn Schötz warns: The arms industry endangers Nuremberg's future!

On June 2, 2025, Evelyn Schötz, Bundestag member of the Left from Schwaig, spoke out vehemently against the planned expansion of the arms industry in the region. These concerns are in the context of the idea of ​​a “Defense Valley” around the Diehl factory in Röthenbach, which was presented by Felix Locke, parliamentary director of the Free Voters. Schötz sees these plans as a risky economic appropriation of the Nuremberg region for military purposes.

The MP criticizes the initiative as a step towards increased militarization and emphasizes that security cannot be achieved through armament, but through diplomacy and crisis prevention. In particular, it opposes the five percent target for defense spending, which would mean annual spending of 225 billion euros. Schötz argues that this would amount to almost half of the entire federal budget and therefore poses a threat to the welfare state.

Economic perspectives of arms investments

Given the current geopolitical situation, many European NATO countries have increased their defense spending to around 72 billion euros per year, as a study by EY and DekaBank shows. These investments create and secure around 680,000 jobs, while increasing defense spending to 3 percent of GDP could create a further 65 billion euros per year and 660,000 additional jobs.

The study highlights that even in the event of a ceasefire in Ukraine, an increase in defense spending and an expansion of the defense sector in Europe are expected. These investments could trigger economic impulses that also have a positive impact on other sectors. Every euro invested in defense generates about twice as much economic activity.

The dispute over priorities

According to these studies, the arms industry in Germany shows a significant employment effect with over 137,000 secured jobs. Nevertheless, Schötz argues that investments in climate-proof infrastructure, affordable mobility, healthcare and digitalization are more urgent than arms projects. In their opinion, the financial resources should be spent on improving the quality of life of citizens instead of further arming the military.

It remains to be seen how political decisions will develop in the coming months. The debate about the right path forward continues to be fueled by Schötz's clear position and the economic reality of defense investments. The balance between economic security and social needs is in jeopardy.