Scholz must explain his tank deal
Trust me, Chancellor Scholz said after his tank deal with Ukraine and the USA. But that is not enough. He must explain himself, also and especially to the German citizens. A commentary.
It has come as it had to come: no sooner has Scholz given the green light for the tank deal than the next demands are being made. Fighter jets, long-range missiles and even the outlawed cluster munitions are demanded by his friend (?) Selenskyj.
Once again, Germany is under pressure. Once again, the government line is blurred. Scholz is against fighter jets, but his new defence minister Pistorius is keeping all options open. We will have to talk about that later, he said.
Not even the tank deal is clear. While Pistorius says he wants to deliver as early as March, US President Biden is taking his time. The first Abrams are not expected until autumn, so Germany is alone in the rain for the time being.
No one can understand this - not even those citizens who are in favour of further arms deliveries. Scholz must therefore explain what he has really negotiated. Were there secret agreements, are there American security guarantees?
Above all, he must explain his strategy. It is not enough to say that Germany is not going it alone. We want to know what Germany's goals are in this war - and how far the German government is prepared to go.
Are German "leopards" now allowed to fight their way into Crimea? Will we give Ukraine a free hand? Will there be more assassinations in Moscow and drone attacks on airfields in the Russian hinterland - with German acquiescence?
War is the continuation of politics by other means, says Clausewitz. But in the Ukraine conflict, German policy seems to have abdicated. It provides the means, but does not name the goals. That is dangerous.
Of course, Scholz is not a hardliner. He does not talk about "victory" for Ukraine, as the EU does. But he supports the EU decisions. And he allows himself to be driven. In the tank dispute, the Kiev-Warsaw-Washington axis set the tone, Berlin was shown up.
And there is another thing Scholz has to explain. What is it about Germany's claim to leadership in military policy? Does Germany want to take the lead in the war against Russia that Baerbock is talking about?
Is even more money going into the military now, while the food banks are overflowing and the refugee shelters are overcrowde
d? Will Rheinmetall get a blank cheque? Is there even a threat of a war economy, as demanded by CSU European politician Weber?
And how can the new claim to leadership actually be reconciled with the Franco-German "motor" and the EU? Joint armament projects have fallen by the wayside in the tank deal, Scholz trusts only the USA.
That may be reassuring when one plunges into a new military adventure. It is not European. And I also dare to doubt that the majority of German citizens is in favour of building the largest army in Europe...
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) The original version (in German) is here