[ad_1]
Now is not the time to get lost or bicker over Ukraine. But that’s what’s happening in Germany and in Europe.
German Social Democratic Party Chancellor Olaf Scholz is locked in a dispute with his coalition partners and the main conservative opposition party, the Christian Democrats (CDU), over whether to send Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine.
So far, Scholz has not changed his position.
For him, and for the left wing of his party, sending such missiles has three implications. First, supporting Kiev would require German military experts on the ground in Ukraine, a red line Scholz would not cross. Second, Germany would join the war. Indeed, the fact that Berlin has provided more than 17 billion euros ($18 billion) in military and other aid to Ukraine confirms that Berlin is Ukraine’s champion. And third, it would provoke Russia. Well, Russia hardly needs provocation. It invaded Ukraine 10 years ago. The latest attack on the eastern city of Kharkiv is not only a reminder that President Vladimir Putin has little intention of stopping the shelling of the country.
Both within and outside the coalition, both those in favor of and against the deployment of Taurus missiles, revealed that secret discussions were taking place among the top German military commanders about the implications of sending such a weapon. I was stunned. Questions included the missile’s range and whether it could attack the new Kerch Strait bridge that connects Crimea to mainland Russia. The conversation was hacked and broadcast by Margarita Simonyan, head of Russia’s state-run RT channel.
It was the perfect propaganda coup for Putin. Germany’s overall digital illiteracy aside (the conversation took place on her Webex rather than a highly secure system), the leak was aimed at dividing Germany and its allies over Ukraine.
Europeans are not perturbed as such. It’s something more fundamental. It’s not Scholz’s fault, it’s the lack of trust between the allies. He recently gave an interview to the DPA news agency in which he said that French and British special forces are helping Ukraine identify, scan and program the missiles it supplies to Kiev.
Whether it was an open secret or not, these military issues tend to be discussed behind closed doors. Perhaps Scholz was unhappy with President Emmanuel Macron, who recently raised the idea of sending European ground forces to Ukraine without explaining the details or consulting his allies first. do not have.
Both leaders are currently taking swipes at each other. Britain also joined the fray. Alicia Kearns, chair of Britain’s Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee, said Scholz’s comments were “wrong, irresponsible and a slap in the face to our allies”.
Now is not the time for Europe’s three great powers to fight over how to support Ukraine militarily. And this is especially true at a time of disagreement within the United States over further funding to Ukraine, not to mention the uncertainty ahead of the presidential election. Indeed, this should be an opportunity for Europe to become Ukraine’s primary financial, political and military defender.
Since the end of the Cold War, Europe has repeatedly failed to take strategic action. The war in the former Yugoslavia divided Europe, with Germany supporting Croatia and France supporting Serbia. Without American military support, especially the logistics that NATO’s European allies completely lacked, the war would have dragged on.
Europeans did not learn from those weaknesses. The need to increase military strength was not addressed, and divisions continued. In fact, these mistakes were repeated 20 years ago when the George W. Bush administration decided to invade Iraq. Germany and France joined forces with Russia to oppose the war. Britain, along with the Central European countries and the Baltic states, supported the American invasion. The NATO alliance was fragmented and in a state of ups and downs. Healing took a long time.
And also to Ukraine. This war is testing Europe’s resolve. Since February 2022, when Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the EU and NATO have shown remarkable unity. When Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, major European powers largely ignored or downplayed it, but there is now a recognition that the continent’s security is at stake. If Ukraine loses, the implications for other Eastern European countries are clear. Russia will make them part of Putin’s imperial ambitions.
The proposal for Europe to have a security architecture that includes Russia has been defended many times in Paris and Berlin in the past, but is now being ignored. Ukraine provides security to Europe.
However, there is one particular factor that influences the way Germans think. That is “the past”.
When the German military talks were leaked, President Putin’s spokesperson said: [military conversation] This in itself suggests that plans for an attack on Russian territory are being discussed in a substantive and concrete way within the Bundeswehr. ” Such comments are intended to further divide Scholz’s Social Democrats, some of whom still aspire to a special relationship with Russia forged after World War II. There are some people.
Mr. Scholz sought to reassure Germany’s allies. “This hybrid attack is designed to cause anxiety and divide us,” a government spokesperson said on Monday. “And that is exactly what we will not tolerate. We are in constant communication with our partners.”
Maintaining and growing support for Ukraine will require more than these words. It’s about Berlin assuming European leadership.
Britain is skeptical. Ben Wallace, Britain’s former defense minister, said Scholz was “the wrong person in the wrong job at the wrong time”. It was he who approved the delivery of long-range Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine last year. Will Mr. Scholz succumb to pressure?
[ad_2]
Source link
