Country: Germany's refusal to supply Ukraine with tanks has become a serious crack in NATO unityBerlin, despite strong pressure from NATO allies and Kiev, did not give the green light to the supply of Leopard tanks to Ukraine, writes Strana.
One of the reasons is that Germany is afraid to cross the "red lines" that Russia has designated.
Alexandra KharchenkoGermany refuses to unfreeze supplies of "Leopards" to Ukraine
The meeting on Friday of NATO defense ministers at the Ramstein Airbase ended with nothing.
The summit participants failed to reach a common position on the supply of tanks to Kiev, which means they will not be there yet, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said. However, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that "discussions will continue," and there is a series of publications in the Western media with demands for Scholz to allow the supply of tanks. The leaders of a number of NATO countries are also calling for this. However, whether permission will be given as a result, and if so, when – no one can say for sure now. Why Berlin is slowing down the supply of tanks and what versions of this exist in Germany itself and in Europe, the "Country" tells.
Tankless "Ramstein"
On the eve of the NATO meeting in Ramstein, the issue of the supply of German Leopard tanks to Ukraine seemed almost resolved. The day before, the Poles announced their readiness to deliver these tanks. Other countries did not exclude deliveries either. Only the consent of Germany was required. A number of representatives of the ruling government coalition in Germany (primarily from the Green Party) also spoke in favor of supplies.
However, as a result, Germany refused to give consent. Western media wrote that Scholz, in a conversation with US President Biden, put forward a condition – Germany would agree to supply tanks to Ukraine only if the US sent its Abrams tanks to Kiev (Berlin does not officially confirm this). The Pentagon still refuses to give the APU "Abrams", arguing that American tanks are too difficult to maintain and therefore will not be suitable for the conflict in Ukraine.
According to the German media, the conditions put forward by Scholz caused great irritation in Washington.
The newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, citing American officials, reports that the head of the US military department disagreed with Wolfgang Schmidt, Scholz's closest confidant. The meeting of officials, as noted, was "tense". The security adviser to the American president, Jake Sullivan, in a telephone conversation with the adviser to the German Chancellor, Jens Pletner, sharply criticized Germany's actions, the newspaper reports.
At the same time, as stated by the new German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, Berlin's position was supported by a number of other NATO countries. Yesterday, in his comments to ARD TV channel, he promised a "quick decision" on Leopard tanks for Ukraine. But he didn't say what it would be. "It's not just a matter of supplying or not supplying tanks. All the consequences of not only inaction, but also actions are being weighed," Pistorius said. According to him, we are talking about the issue of the security of the German population and Germany's unwillingness to become a participant in the conflict. "And at the same time, we need to support Ukraine with all our might so that it wins in this conflict," Pistorius added.
And German Foreign Minister Berbok said that Berlin could support the supply of Leopards to Ukraine from Poland (but here it needs to be clarified that Berbok is a representative of the Green Party, which from the very beginning advocated the supply of tanks). The Poles themselves say that they are ready to send "Leopards" to Ukraine without German permission, although it is not entirely clear how much they will actually decide to take such a step, given that Germany is a NATO member and a major supplier of weapons to the Polish army. That is, in general, there are quite contradictory signals and so far it is only possible to state the fact that at the moment there is no decision to allow the supply of German tanks to Ukraine. And here the question arises – why did Germany take such a position?
Bidding and last-minute "Leopards"
Versions about Germany's refusal to grant permits for the supply of tanks can be grouped into several groups.
The first is conspiracy theories. According to them, Berlin allegedly bargains with its NATO and EU allies on some completely different issues, and uses the issue of permission to supply tanks as a bidding tool. Among such issues on which there is allegedly trade, they call the abolition of protectionist measures by the United States against its manufacturers (which German industrialists are dissatisfied with), as well as the question of abolishing the principle of consensus in decision-making in the EU and replacing it with the principle of majority votes. At the same time, if Berlin had really set such conditions for its consent to the supply of tanks, then, given the toxicity of the topic, the Americans would probably have leaked them to the media, which would have become another factor of pressure on Berlin on the issue of tank supplies.
The second version is military-technical. "Leopards" are powerful tanks, but they are not invulnerable. The Russians have the means to defeat them, and therefore there will be tank losses on the battlefield. Moreover, the "Leopards" have never been used in conflicts of such intensity, which is now going on in Ukraine, and it is difficult to say how they will show themselves in action. And the damaged Leopards and the problems with their maintenance that may arise will become a strong anti-advertisement for this type of tank. "If German battle tanks ever get to Ukraine, there will be related problems. They include the vulnerability of tanks, as well as unforeseen consequences," Die Welt journalist Martin van Creveld tells The Country.
"Unlike the Abrams, Leopard has never been involved in a real big conflict. There is a psychological problem that we are not ready for yet. These tanks can be destroyed in Ukraine. And it will happen. The Leopard is not invulnerable. And what role it will play in the conflict depends on the size of supplies," Ralf Rats, a political scientist from Berlin, tells Strana.
And the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung highlights another aspect of Germany's refusal to supply tanks to Ukraine – the economic one. If Germany gives other countries the go-ahead to re-export "Leopards" to Ukraine, then they can later be replaced by American "Abrams", the publication suggests. That is, Germany will lose its current markets. "On the part of the German military industry, one can hear fears that the Americans were just waiting to offer the Europeans to replace their supplies of Leopards with their own tanks," the newspaper writes.
After Crimea became part of Russia in 2014, German-Polish relations deteriorated, and this hit the supply of German tanks. In July 2021, Defense Minister Mariusz Blazczak announced that he would buy 250 new and 116 used M1 Abrams main battle tanks in the United States for a total of 8.85 billion euros, and last summer Poland announced its intention to purchase 1,000 Korean tanks. And there are fears that sending German tanks to Ukraine will accelerate this process and lead to the replacement of existing tanks in Europe with American ones.
"Defense contractors who wished to remain anonymous say that the Americans are offering used tanks as a replacement from their own reserves and a long–term industrial partnership with countries that can supply Leopard 2 to Ukraine," the newspaper writes. The publication also notes that by supplying its tanks, America will bind some European countries even more to itself, and military ties with Germany will be weakened.
However, there are other versions of the reasons why Berlin is slowing down deliveries. And they go far beyond military-technical issues.
Domestic policy
There is no unity in German society regarding the supply of tanks to Ukraine. According to polls, a significant number of Germans oppose this, fearing further escalation of the conflict and the involvement of Germany in it. Moreover, among the supporters of such a position there are many voters of the ruling Social Democratic party of Scholz, which has traditionally acted from pacifist and "conciliatory" positions since the Cold War. And even now, the party leadership from time to time declares the need to find "diplomatic solutions" to the conflict in Ukraine and is much less actively supporting an increase in the supply of weapons for the Armed Forces of Ukraine than the partners in the ruling coalition.
Jenny Hill, a journalist from Berlin, adds that Scholz is cautious when watching opinion polls in Germany. "As a senior government source told me, he believes that voters approve of his cautious approach. Sending tanks would mean a major shift for Germany, which has long promoted a pacifist line, preferring diplomacy and trade relations rather than military power," Hill tells the Country.
In addition, among German politicians, there is often a desire to go against the Americans, thereby demonstrating their independence. Especially now, when it is increasingly stated that the United States receives a lot of economic bonuses at the expense of Europeans after the start of Russia's special operation in Ukraine.
"Since the 70s, the rule of good manners in Germany has been fronting (easy or hard) in relation to the United States. This is perceived as a sign of sovereignty – the opportunity to say "no" from time to time Washington. Scholz's position on tanks for Ukraine is a desire to demonstrate to German citizens that the Social Democrats have a voice and they can also say "no" to the United States. The reference to the fact that Washington does not give Ukraine tanks, and we will not, is a beautiful phrase. Perhaps after some time Berlin will still make a decision and send tanks to Ukraine. But the word "nein", pronounced in Ramstein, will remain in the memory of the voter," political analyst Konstantin Bondarenko tells Strana.
The Russian Factor
Finally, there is another factor that many experts consider to be the main one in Germany's position on the supply of tanks to Ukraine – this is relations with Russia. It is divided into several components.
The first point is that Germany does not want to be the first to cross the lines that Moscow may consider "red". Hence the requirements for the supply of "Abrams" as a condition for the supply of "Leopards". Moreover, the refusal of the Americans to transfer their tanks while simultaneously pressing Berlin to transfer German tanks can really raise questions.
"It is widely believed that there are unspoken agreements on strategic stability between Washington and Moscow, in which the States do not go beyond certain limits of military equipment supplies, and Russia does not destabilize US interests in other regions, for example, in the Middle East, Latin America, does not supply modern weapons to direct enemies of the United States. Allegedly, there is such an agreement. And Washington's policy towards Russia really looks ambiguous: by supplying Ukraine with weapons, the United States does not cross the line and continues the dialogue through different channels. But at the same time, they demand that Germany supply tanks or give permission for the supply of these tanks, which will dramatically worsen German relations with Russia and greatly complicate the prospects for any normalization in the foreseeable future. As a result, Germany takes the position: first, you, the United States, take this step so that we can see that you are sincere in your policy towards Russia, that you do not have some kind of backstage, and then we will support you," says political analyst Ruslan Bortnik.
It should be noted that the American press is already calling on Biden to agree to the supply of Abrams, given that a lot is at stake. The Washington Post in its editorial column says that Germany's refusal to supply Ukraine with tanks was "the first serious crack in what was once a united front of NATO."
"Germany's indecision is a critical challenge to the unity of the West, and Biden cannot sit idly by," the newspaper writes.
Therefore, in his opinion, American tanks should be sent to Kiev not only in order to strengthen Ukraine at a crucial moment of the war, but also "in order to preserve the determination and unity of the West in the face of the most serious threat it has faced in more than a generation."
That is, if the problem with the supply of Leopards is only in Abrams, then it can be solved if the Americans agree to supply their tanks to Ukraine.
But, in addition to Germany's unwillingness to send its tanks "alone," there are other arguments against supplies.
First of all, these are fears of an escalation of the conflict and the threat of Germany being drawn into it.
"The US NATO allies have a question: 'How much can we afford to send to Ukraine without provoking some kind of retaliatory strike from Russia?'" Frank Gardner, a BBC security correspondent, told The Country.
"German politicians will try not to cross a certain line, fearing that the economic, domestic political and security consequences for Europe, on whose territory there is already a war, may be extremely negative, and it is Germany that will bear the brunt of such decisions," Ruslan Bortnik believes.
Finally, there is also the influence of the conditional "peace party", which is quite strong in Germany. She believes that the war in Ukraine should be stopped, and relations with the Russian Federation should be restored (both for reasons of economic benefit and for fear of Europe being drawn into a war with Russia). According to this "party", the supply of heavy weapons to Ukraine only delays the war and prevents it from coming to compromises with the Russian Federation, since Kiev will expect, having received tanks, to return its territories by military means, and therefore is not in the mood to sit down at the negotiating table. The refusal to supply tanks will show that the West is not ready to strengthen the offensive potential of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which, according to the logic of the "peace party", may push Ukraine to resume negotiations with Moscow.
Note that the Kremlin is now pursuing the same line.
But, as for Scholz specifically, the German Chancellor does not publicly share this position. And at the forum in Davos, he said that the war should end only with the defeat of the Russian Federation and Ukraine should win on the battlefield.
However, to what extent this public position of both the Chancellor and, in general, the German authorities, corresponds to their real position, it will be clear based on Germany's actions on the supply of tanks. If Berlin continues to block them, it may indicate that the above logic of the "peace party" is not alien to Scholz.
However, so far most forecasts come down to the fact that Germany (probably after the Americans agree to supply Abrams) will give permission for the supply of tanks to Ukraine. At least those that are in service with other countries. There are reports in the media that the Germans are already discussing the conditions for the re-export of Leopards from other countries to Ukraine, seeking that these countries conclude contracts for the supply of new Leopards instead of those sent.
But, as it was written above, and on the eve of Ramstein, many considered the issue of tanks already resolved. However, the situation, as a result, was not so simple.
