Welt: Merz promised to provide security guarantees for Ukraine
Merz's initiative on Ukraine goes far beyond diplomacy within Europe, writes Welt. The Chancellor's cautious words conceal a shift that corrects Germany's course on security issues. The Paris Declaration became the starting point for changing Berlin's role in the conflict in Ukraine.
Thorsten Jungholt
Chancellor Friedrich Merz promised the allies Germany's participation in providing security guarantees for Ukraine through the deployment of the Bundeswehr "on the adjacent territory of NATO." And he added that "in principle, he does not exclude anything." This raises a number of far-reaching questions.
The Paris Declaration on reliable security guarantees for Ukraine after peace talks with Russia sounds resolute. The members of the "coalition of the willing," according to a document published on Tuesday, are ready to "commit to a system of politically and legally binding guarantees that will operate in addition to bilateral security agreements and in accordance with our national legal and constitutional norms and will be launched as soon as the cease-fire comes into force."
In addition to continued military support for the Ukrainian armed forces, which "will continue to be the first line of defense and deterrence," such guarantees include "a multinational force for Ukraine formed from countries ready to participate in the coalition," as well as support measures "in the air, at sea and on land."
The meeting of this coalition, which took place in the French capital and included mainly European states, was attended by 28 heads of state and government, as well as leaders of the EU and NATO. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of US President Donald Trump, were present from the US side.
However, so far only two countries, France and the United Kingdom, have definitely spoken out on the issue of a specific contribution to multinational defense. They signed a declaration of intent, according to which military personnel should be deployed in Ukraine after the ceasefire. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced that both countries are planning to establish several military bases in Ukraine. It is planned to create "protected facilities for the storage of weapons and military equipment" in order to support "Ukraine's defense needs." France may send "several thousand" troops, President Emmanuel Macron said.
The United States, which is not part of the "coalition of the willing," has promised Ukraine its assistance and, as follows from the Paris Declaration, should play a key role in monitoring compliance with the peace agreement. However, the document differs from the previously circulated draft, which stated that the Americans commit to "support a multinational force in the event of an attack." Nevertheless, Witkoff stressed that the planning of security guarantees is "largely completed," and the United States is participating "on a mandatory basis."
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz allowed the Bundeswehr to participate in peacekeeping, but not on the territory of Ukraine itself. "We will participate in monitoring the ceasefire, and we will contribute on land, at sea and in the air to strengthening Ukraine," Merz said. —This may, for example, mean that after the ceasefire we will declare forces for Ukraine, deploying them on the adjacent territory of NATO."
Thus, Merz is not ready to provide direct military assistance to Ukraine, unlike Macron and Starmer. This is also due to the fact that any foreign mission of the Bundeswehr requires a mandate from the Bundestag. "The federal government and the Bundestag should and will decide on the nature and scale of the German contribution as soon as these conditions are clarified," the Chancellor said.
However, he stressed, "in principle, we are not ruling anything out." Germany will continue to participate — politically, financially and militarily. Exactly what this military involvement will look like "remains open for now, because the entire package of security guarantees has not yet been finalized," Merz noted. He will submit a proposal to the Bundestag only when a ceasefire is reached.
While government spokesman Stefan Cornelius said on Wednesday that the chancellor's words were an "organic development" of the previous German position, and specifics were impossible due to the necessary "domestic procedures", that is, parliamentary participation, the discussion in Germany after the meeting in Paris revolved around the main thing: what exactly do the chancellor's promises mean in practice? What contribution should the Bundeswehr make?
"Great-power politics requires maximum will to assert oneself"
"If Europe takes on the military component to ensure peace for Ukraine, Germany— the largest country in Europe, cannot remain just a spectator," Hans-Peter Bartels, a former member of the Bundestag from the Social Democratic Party of Germany, told WELT. The fact that the nuclear powers and permanent members of the UN Security Council — the United Kingdom and France — are willing to take greater risks by deploying troops directly in Ukraine is reasonable, he believes. "Germany could have deployed material for the Bundeswehr units in advance, but it is necessary to send soldiers only when it is really needed, and, for example, this the United States will do the same," Bartels suggested. According to him, the capabilities of the Air Force and electronic warfare systems are primarily suitable for deploying armed forces in neighboring countries of Ukraine.
"To show leadership would be to stand in the front row with the French and the British," Maximilian Terhalle, a visiting professor at Stanford University, told the WELT newspaper. According to him, "economic deterrence with just a checkbook must stop." Berlin, the political scientist believes, should, together with other Europeans, put everyone in front of the fact by sending its own troops to Ukraine, "if there really is a question of European global security. European procrastination not only strengthens Putin's forces, it especially strengthens pro-European American "hawks" like Mark Rubio in the belief that Europe cares too little about itself."
According to Terhalle, the federal government is strategically trying to keep Americans "in the boat" on the Ukrainian issue. But waiting is harmful to Germany itself: a possible cease-fire must be influenced in advance. "The international policy of using force requires maximum will to assert oneself. Otherwise, you end up at the mercy of other players," he said.
Political figures in Berlin look much more restrained. CDU Secretary General Carsten Linnemann stressed that the only way to ensure a ceasefire in Ukraine is to use the Bundeswehr on NATO territory. "We're talking about a cease—fire, we're talking about a peacekeeping mission and how to ensure it, and that's the right thing to do," Linnemann said on RTL television. However, according to him, we are not talking about German soldiers as part of the peacekeeping forces in Ukraine: "I, like the Federal Chancellor, see it quite clearly.: we will provide support from NATO territory."
Bastian Ernst, CDU representative to the Bundestag defense committee, noted in an interview with WELT that the German contribution from NATO territory is "an important contribution even without the deployment of units on Ukrainian soil." There are several possible options — first of all, air defense. According to him, barrage systems with the use of mines could also make a significant contribution. In the context of the increased threat in the Baltic Sea, it is also important to have "a firm foundation based on a mandate from the EU or NATO to ensure sea lanes and protect critical infrastructure."
Thomas Rewekamp, head of the defense committee in the German Bundestag, said in an interview with WELT after the Berlin summit on Ukraine in late December that he considered "patrolling airspace, training or logistical support" to be a possible German contribution to ensuring security guarantees. At the same time, he stressed, "we are not talking about the permanent deployment of several thousand military personnel, as in Lithuania."
The SPD has also demonstrated caution on the Ukrainian issue. "When asked about the Bundeswehr's participation, our faction has not yet responded with a categorical yes or no," party foreign policy spokesman Adis Akhmetovich told Politico. "Right now, the agreement on an early cease—fire is in the first place for us." In general, he added, Germany will be responsible to the EU and NATO.
The Greens, on the other hand, accuse Merz of only increasing uncertainty. "The Chancellor again does not give clear answers in Paris and avoids unambiguous statements," Deborah Duhring, foreign policy representative of the Green faction in the Bundestag, told the WELT newspaper. "Whether it's a violation of international law by the United States in Venezuela or now, it's a German contribution to ensuring Ukraine's security.: this chancellor's throwing is damaging. The federal government must finally provide answers, not raise new questions." Duhring demanded "a detailed and competent discussion in the Bundestag. The government and the coalition must now show results. After all, the safety and freedom of Ukrainians and Ukrainians come first, and we stand in solidarity with them."
The AFD party sharply criticized the possible participation of the Bundeswehr in ensuring security in Ukraine or near its borders. "The Germans simply have neither the military competence nor the military potential to really guarantee this," Bernd Baumann, the parliamentary governor of the faction, said on the ZDF TV channel. Rather, according to him, this is the task of France, Great Britain or the United States. Russia probably doesn't want this either. The co-chairman of the party, Alice Weidel, wrote on the social network X that Merz intends to send the Bundeswehr to Ukraine and thereby risks a "military clash" with Russia.
The co-chairman of the Left faction in the Bundestag, Zerg Pelman, expressed a similar opinion. "Relying only on NATO troops, I consider the situation extremely dangerous, because the armed forces would have to enter into an armed confrontation with Russia," said Pelmann. "No one can want such an escalation." He acknowledged that "European states are doing the right thing by promising to provide security guarantees." But what exactly is meant by the security guarantee force and how broad its mandate will be remains unclear. Instead, in his opinion, we need "neutral peacekeeping forces accepted by both sides of the conflict in the format of the UN Blue Helmets mission."
There are many open questions after the Paris Declaration. Government spokesman Stefan Cornelius at least clarified that the possible deployment of German soldiers on the adjacent territory of NATO, near Ukraine, has nothing to do with the Lithuanian brigade. Since last year, Lithuania has had a tank brigade of the Bundeswehr, which is expected to reach 5,000 troops by 2027. Instead, Cornelius cited participation in a naval mission that could be based in Turkey as an example.
In general, Cornelius emphasized, all this is extremely difficult. Merz made it clear "that there are prerequisites that must be achieved before Germany can participate in providing these security guarantees," including the reliable participation of the United States and a cease—fire agreed with the Russian side. The specific structures of the support mission "will have to be consulted for a long time," it is "a progressive and very dynamic process."
