Even the opposition is not ready to take responsibility for the German government/Channel 24 website collage
Berlin, by inertia, still continues to observe the concept of “Merkelism” in its foreign policy. This is especially harmful to Ukraine now. Even after the start of a full-scale war, the Germans continue to demonstrate indecision in supporting our state.
What caused the deletion of all heavy weapons that were on the German list for Ukraine, how German gunsmiths wanted to correct the situation with heavy weapons, how the Bundeswehr was bled under Merkel and Steinmeier – in an exclusive interview with the Channel 24 website, said a senior analyst at the Western Institute in Poznań Viktor Savinok.
Arms for Ukraine
Viktor, what is this group of 14 people who are coordinating arms supplies for us from Germany?
This is a group of experts at the German National Security Council in the Office of the Chancellor. They are looking into this issue and are trying to find some solutions for the supply of weapons from the stocks of the Bundeswehr or directly from the firms involved in the production of weapons.
The expert analyzed the actions of the Bundeswehr/Photo courtesy of the speaker< /p>
However, the effectiveness of the work of the expert group leaves much to be desired. All she managed to achieve was the replacement of anti-aircraft systems for Slovakia and the declaration of intentions to replace Soviet tanks in Slovenia.
What could have caused heavy weapons for Ukraine to be struck off the German list?< /strong>
The fact is that there were several of these lists, according to the German press. They began to form even after February 24. First, lists were made of what the Bundeswehr could give directly, then it was the turn of a list of what the German arms industry could give. The Ukrainian side also conveyed its wishes regarding weapons. The Germans, in response, made generalized lists.
In the end, the German bureaucracy got lost in these lists. On the one hand, the “efficient” German bureaucracy can be blamed for dragging out the process. It concerns not only weapons, but also other issues related to the war. On the other hand, we can really talk about certain political motives. The latter are completely unknown to us.
We cannot look into the head of, for example, Secretary of Defense Christine Lambrecht, who also had a hand in drawing most of the weapons off the lists. Or Scholz, who says that certain systems cannot be transferred due to the need to additionally teach the Ukrainian military how to use these systems.
As the representative of the Bundestag Defense Committee said: “If they do not know how to use these systems, they will become cannon fodder.”
So it is not clear who is to blame in the end. Because if we take the factor of bureaucracy, then ping-pong is already starting here. The German Ministry of Defense says that they did nothing wrong, the Ministry of Economics, which is responsible for export control, says that it makes decisions on export control very quickly, the Chancellor's office says that the security council is also working quickly, and so on.
If we take political reasons, then, probably, personal decisions in the Ministry of Defense and the personal decisions of the chancellor play a role here.
The Scholz scandal
What can the conflict between Scholz and the German gunsmiths lead to?
The gunsmiths have been signaling, since the end of February, that every opportunity to supply us with weapons of their own production, or take weapons from the arsenals of the Bundeswehr and very quickly replace them with new ones.
That is, it would be possible to take the old tanks and armored personnel carriers of the Bundeswehr, give them to Kyiv and replace them with brand new tanks from German factories. However, this could be done very quickly. However, various debates began at the political level, which led to the fact that these decisions were stalled.
Now we are dealing with two consequences. The first is the problems that Scholz had not only with the defense industry, but also within the ruling coalition. His allies, including the Greens and Free Democrats, are now demanding the delivery of heavy weapons to Ukraine. Including tanks and armored personnel carriers, which our country has been requesting for a week already.
The second question is that within the Social Democratic Party itself there is no unity on the issue of weapons. This puts pressure on Chancellor Scholz. Because, on the one hand, there are realists in the party milieu of the Social Democrats. And they say that Russian aggression against Ukraine is indeed a huge threat. Accordingly, Kyiv must be supported in every possible way.
On the other hand, we are dealing with the left wing of the party, which insists on looking for opportunities for dialogue with Russia. They say that the supply of heavy weapons will be a signal for Moscow that Germany has joined in military operations. They almost say that providing German tanks to Ukraine is a step towards the Third World War.
Given the great weight of the left wing of the Social Democrats in the party, Mr. Scholz maneuvers like this, says the analyst /Photo “Public”
The German opposition is now going to announce a vote of no confidence to Scholz. What can come of this?
In fact, I think that if there had not been a large-scale war in Ukraine, Scholz would probably have lost his position with a high probability. Since his fundamental initiative – the introduction of mandatory vaccination against covid – failed miserably.
Now I think that even the opposition is not ready to take responsibility for the government. The opposition Christian Democrats are the second largest faction in the Bundestag. Accordingly, they must nominate a new chancellor. I'm not sure they are ready for this development.
By the way, we should not forget that it was the Christian Democrats who have been in power for the past 16 years. It was their policy that led to the taboo on the supply of weapons to Ukraine and the chronic underfunding of the Bundeswehr.
Are we now seeing a kind of “neomerkelism” in the performance of the new chancellor?
In the past 16 years, Merkel has created the illusion of her indispensability as head of government. Consequently, the illusion that there was no alternative to her view of politics was created.
This model of politics was at the very epicenter of political discourse. Any deviation from it to the right or to the left already seemed too radical, out of touch with reality.
It is very difficult for the German political establishment to move away from this concept. Although today it is already happening little by little. First of all, given the full-scale Russian aggression against Ukraine.
The process of abandoning the stamps of “Merkelism” will be very difficult. In the end, he must return Germany to realism in her politics. A mandatory component of a real assessment of the state of affairs should be a review of the values on which German foreign policy is based. And what does she want to achieve in Europe and the world.
How can one connect the words of the chancellor about the impossibility of supplying weapons with the information that last year Germany earned 1.5 billion euros by exporting weapons to third countries?
As already mentioned, for 16 years the Bundeswehr has been chronically underfunded. There are not enough different types of weapons and equipment.
Looking at the state of the German army now, we can see that it is far from being in the best condition. This is recognized by the Germans themselves. This army can field only one brigade in combat readiness, which can fully carry out the combat missions assigned to it within the framework of the obligations stipulated by participation in NATO.
Functionally capable equipment is only enough to equip one brigade with it. For a country like Germany, this is very, very little. Therefore, Scholz is right here on the one hand, saying that the resources of the Bundeswehr are not enough. The Germans, in terms of what they have, still need to maintain the proper level of combat capability of their own troops, which they now have.
But on the other hand, indeed, the FRG supplies weapons to various countries. Even before the start of the war, I criticized this position. Especially considering the stories of German partners that they do not give weapons to countries involved in any international conflicts.
However, this did not prevent last year from supplying weapons to Egypt, which was drawn into both the war in Libya and the confrontation in Yemen. Also, weapons were supplied to Saudi Arabia and Israel without any warnings.
For some reason, German officials were very afraid to supply any weapons to Ukraine even before the start of the big war. At that time, this tragicomic story about German helmets arose.
The situation with Steinmeier's visit
Viktor, do you think it was right to refuse to receive Steinmeier in Kyiv?
I believe that it was necessary to do so that the Germans came to Kyiv with specific proposals. In fact, they had nothing to go with. And, as a matter of fact, to come here in the company of leaders of states who support Ukraine without any reservations is not appropriate for a representative of Germany. Steinmeier did not fit such a company. Especially given his position on Nord Stream 2.
