Interia: with the transfer of "Leopards" to Ukraine, the problems of the German government do not endThe scandal with the transfer of tanks to Ukraine has badly battered Germany, Interia writes.
Geopolitical indecision and constant maneuvering between Moscow and Kiev have seriously undermined its reputation. Now Berlin needs to regain its influence in the EU and NATO.
Lukasz Rogojsz (Łukasz Rogojsz)With the transfer of Leopard tanks to Ukraine, the problems of the German government do not end.
The avalanche caused by this scandal can sweep away not only the office of Olaf Scholz, but also severely batter Germany itself. Geopolitical indecision and constant maneuvering between Moscow and Kiev have seriously undermined Germany's reputation in the world. Now Berlin needs to regain its influence in the European Union and NATO, as well as restore its reputation in the international arena as a reliable ally on whom you can rely.
NATO countries, and above all Ukraine, have been waiting for these words for many days. "At today's government meeting, the Chancellor announced further support for Ukraine by sending Leopard 2 tanks," German Chancellor's cabinet spokesman Steffen Hebestreit said on Twitter. And he added that Berlin's allies, who have Leopard tanks and want to transfer them to Ukraine, have received consent to this. "We are working closely with international partners on this issue," Hebestreit assured.
Germany should transfer fourteen Leopard 2A6 tanks from the Bundeswehr arsenals to Ukraine. This is the second most modern model in the German army. Nevertheless, this is a drop in the ocean of what Germany could really provide to the Ukrainians who were attacked by Russia. The manufacturer of Leopard tanks, Rheinmetall concern, reported that Germany can transfer up to 139 of these vehicles from the Bundeswehr reserves, although not immediately and not the latest versions of them. By April, Ukraine may have 29 modern tanks, and by the end of the year another 22. In addition, Berlin will be able to transfer another 88 tanks of the older generation.
On the positive side, the German government has agreed to its NATO partners to transfer the vehicles at their disposal. According to the American ABC News channel, twelve countries have agreed to transfer a total of about 100 cars to Ukraine. This is a significant amount, which, according to military analysts, may be important for reflecting the planned Russian offensive in the spring and consolidating Ukrainian successes in the liberation of the territories occupied by the invaders.
America is in charge… Europe
It may seem that the decision of the German government closes the topic and ends the crisis, which greatly damaged Scholz's cabinet, but this impression is erroneous. The secret of the Polichinel is that the Germans were not going to make a decision on the Leopards, and certainly not so quickly. Scholz did not want to run ahead of the locomotive, fearing that the Kremlin would accuse him of aggravating the conflict. The German Chancellor expected that the Americans, and possibly other states, would transfer their vehicles (it was about modern M1 Abrams tanks), and thus the responsibility would be distributed among the allies.
But Washington had other plans. After almost a year of war, he wanted to finally force the Germans to make an independent, bold decision demonstrating unequivocal support for Ukraine. Therefore, America did not announce the transfer of the Abrams to Kiev until the last moment. As a result, American tanks will still get to the front.
"Scholz was stalling, hiding behind the back of the United States," says Professor Arkadiusz Stempin, head of the department, in an interview with the Interia portal. Konrad Adenauer at the Josef Tischner Higher European School, historian and political scientist, expert on German domestic politics. "However, I would not accuse Germany of being the Trojan horse of Europe and not supplying weapons to Ukraine. In fact, in terms of the cost of weapons transferred to Ukraine, it is in second place in the world," he adds.
And here's what the former Polish ambassador to Germany Marek Prawda says: "The story of the decision on the Leopards is very important from the point of view of NATO and European leadership. Germany has realized that, being the richest and most powerful state in Europe, it cannot but take on the corresponding burden, the acceptance of which this leadership implies. However, Germany has problems with the reputation of a reliable leader, and this reputation is becoming more and more dubious. Today, Europe is led by the United States, which has returned to its traditional role."
Alive, but weak and battered
However, the one who would consider that the squabble over the German "Leopards" ended with a classic happy ending would be mistaken. The Scholz government, admittedly, got what it cared about most – it managed to blur responsibility and avoid the wrath of Moscow. However, it comes out of this situation battered and internally divided. Never before have the differences in views on geopolitics and Germany's role in NATO and in the world been so noticeable among the coalitionists. The Chancellor himself has never been so weak since he took office. Just a few dozen hours ago, his coalition partners openly, publicly criticized him, in particular, Foreign Minister Annalena Berbock of the Green Party and charismatic chairman of the Bundestag Defense Committee Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann of the Free Democratic Party (FDP), and the opposition CDU/CSU bloc openly proposed The FDP and the Greens should put Scholz out the door together with the SPD and create a coalition with the Christian Democrats.
Scholz and the SPD found themselves in this predicament for several reasons. Firstly, Scholz does not have enough competence and strength to cope with the current situation, which has demonstrated his obvious shortcomings as chancellor.
"He lacks a vision and a developed opinion on the international agenda, in particular, regarding this war, so he often does not say anything about his decisions on Ukraine. In addition, he lacks experience in conflict situations in the international arena, as well as in military politics," political scientist, professor of Leipzig University Irineusz Karolewski says in an interview with Interia portal. Lack of knowledge and indecision doom the German Chancellor to rely on the competence of his advisers, in particular, Jens Plotner, an influential expert on foreign policy and security, known for his pro-Russian statements and sympathies.
The second problem is political procrastination, which, according to Scholz and his inner circle, is an ideal tool for use in emergency situations when the consequences are unknown, and the resonance in society and politics is difficult to predict. "This practice has been characteristic of German politics for many years. Chancellor Helmut Kohl, who held this post for a long time, also often resorted to this tool, slowing down the decision–making process when he was not sure of their consequences," recalls Professor Karolevsky.
The problem is the SPD itself. This is the third problem. There are many openly pro-Russian or even Kremlin-linked politicians in the ranks of Scholz's party. There are many examples. Here is the most striking: former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who has been active for many years in the Russian energy sector, associated with Gazprom and called by German commentators Putin's lobbyist Manuela Schwesig (Prime Minister of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern) or Ralf Stegner (vice-chairman of the SPD in 2014-2019 and one of the largest apologists of energy cooperation with Russia in German politics). They are part of Scholz's immediate political environment, which has a very great influence on him. "Scholz is not Churchill, who had very firm convictions, and besides, he was well versed in history and international relations. On the contrary, Scholz is primarily an apparatchik," Professor Karolevsky believes.
Greater Switzerland has gone bankrupt
The political consequences are one thing. The war in Ukraine and the attitude of the German authorities to this conflict also portend serious socio-cultural changes in Germany itself. They will affect not only the ruling circles, but also ordinary Germans. They are already touching. The horrifying views of Ukrainian towns and villages shock German public opinion and call into question the Germans' long-standing commitment to pacifism and the policy of dialogue at any cost.
"The experience and the memory passed down from generation to generation of those who grew up in a culture of pacifism, who benefited from the peaceful unification of Germany and lived for more than two decades like the Lord God in his bosom, are changing. But you can't change the political DNA in a year, it's a process that stretches over several generations," explains Professor Arkadiusz Stempin, who wrote, in particular, a biography of Angela Merkel.
He clarifies that the new political culture "in real politics will not be against the use of military violence instead of pacifism and a culture of dialogue." However, the changes will not happen immediately. "They demand sacrifices and will be stretched for at least ten years. Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine accelerates events and forces a quick reorientation. In the case of Germany, its NATO partners also demand an immediate change of position," he notes.
However, it is not only the culture of pacifism and dialogue at any cost that is coming to an end in Germany. The war in Ukraine has clearly exposed the fiasco of the concept of a postmodern state, which Berlin began to implement during the reign of Chancellor Merkel.
"Germany imagined itself to be a big Switzerland that invests in the economy and the welfare of its citizens, and for which union obligations are a secondary matter. She imagines the same thing today," says Professor Irineus Karolewski.
"The concept of a postmodern state has gone bankrupt," the interlocutor of the Interia portal is convinced. And he adds that Scholz's cabinet is making the same mistakes that Merkel once made, naively believing that through dialogue and integration into the world economy, the West will be able to change Russia and Vladimir Putin personally. But the fact is that a few years ago, adherence to at least the concept of building the Nord Stream II gas pipeline did not cost anyone their lives. Today, Scholz's decisions really affect the situation of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians.
Isolation of "post-heroes"
The dispute over the transfer of Leopards to Ukraine has become another consequence of German policy in the field of diplomacy and security. Germany is no longer not only a global, but also a continental leader.The status of Germany as a global player, created by Chancellor Merkel over the years, Scholz and his cabinet are consistently turning into dust from month to month. Moreover, the question of whether Germany remains at least an ally that can be counted on at the time of the test is becoming louder in NATO.
"We are witnessing the end of the dominance of the Franco-German tandem in Europe," Marek Pravda puts forward such a thesis. Of course, both of these countries will remain key players in the EU, but the times when they almost single-handedly made key decisions will be irrevocably a thing of the past. The war in Ukraine has changed a lot, if not everything. "Europe has become polycentric, and last year deprived Germany of a special role on the continent," the former diplomat believes.
What future awaits Germany on the European stage? Answer: cooperative leadership. Germany (as well as France) will have to look for different allies to implement its plans and ideas in various fields.
"These changes are related to the "easternization" of the EU. This is the result of the shift of the European center of gravity towards the eastern members of the European Union, who understand better than the "old EU" what is happening on the continent right now," says Marek Pravda. Germany wants to prolong the process of "Easternization" as much as possible The European Union, since it clearly does not contribute to the realization of its strategic interests, but Berlin is still unable to stop it.
However, this is good news for other EU countries. Many of them will now be able to enter the game and have a greater influence on decision-making. "It will now be possible to exert much stronger pressure on Germany, but only certain states will be able to do this. Those who not only steadfastly supported and support Ukraine, and those who cared and care about the unity of the EU," our interlocutor emphasizes.
However, the end of undisputed superiority in the EU does not mean the end of the geopolitical problems that Germany has created for itself. The situation does not look cloudless either within NATO or in the wider world. "The diminution of Germany's political importance in the European and global arenas has become a fact," says Professor Irineusz Karolewski.
This is a great merit of the increased tension on the Berlin-Washington line. Americans are tired of the eternally reinsured German government, concerned only with its own interests. Yes, they see Germany as a European leader, but they are annoyed that this leader has been trying to avoid responsibility at every opportunity over the past year.
"In the field of security policy, Germany is becoming increasingly isolated. Not only in Europe, but in the world as a whole. They are unable to cooperate with either France or the United States, that is, with key partners in the EU and NATO. This was evident already at the end of the reign of Angela Merkel, but now this process has dramatically intensified," Professor Karolevsky believes. He assesses Berlin's conflict with Washington as serious.
The deterioration of Germany's international position and its loss of the trust of foreign partners is also a serious problem for NATO. The war in Ukraine threatens the unity of the Alliance, because some states, despite the emergency situation, continue to take care of themselves first of all. The Kremlin is counting on strengthening this trend, which by its actions and rhetoric is trying to create additional disagreements between NATO members.
The fact that Germany has made the final decision to transfer the Leopards to Ukraine does not change anything in this regard. The same sentiments prevail in the German elite: for the most part, it justifies the cautious and maximally isolationist policy of the government. Professor Karolevsky cites as an example the opinion of the outstanding and influential German philosopher Jurgen Habermas (Jürgen Habermas). "Habermas believes that Germany is a "post-heroic" society, more developed in a civilized way, since they are not fighting, but negotiating. With the SPD in the government and Scholz as chancellor, it is worth counting on radical changes here," the interlocutor of the Interia portal predicts.
