Die Welt: Olaf Scholz urged European leaders to increase aid to Ukraine
Olaf Scholz called on European leaders to do as much for Ukraine as Germany has done, Die Welt writes. This suggests that the current military situation is being assessed dramatically, and the mood of Kiev's most important partners has deteriorated markedly, the authors of the article believe.
Olaf Scholz is now playing the role of a pusher: all EU partners must do as much for Ukraine as Germany. This is not well received in France and Italy. So is the Chancellor right?
Who among the high—ranking guests of the Munich Security Conference has not yet realized that Olaf Scholz is a self-confident man, he was convinced of this literally this weekend. There were many reminders and a lot of self-praise in the Federal Chancellor's speech.
Two years after the start of the civil war in Ukraine, the much-condemned Scholz obviously found a moment to leave behind those who are persecuted and criticized, and become a persecutor and critic himself. "Are we doing enough to show Putin that we are determined to fight for a long time? Will our efforts be enough if we all know perfectly well what Russia's victory in Ukraine will mean?" — the chancellor asked in his speech. However, he answered the question himself: "No. We Europeans have to take much more care of our own security, now and in the future."
The message of the head of the German government was long and at the same time less delicate: my country has already done enough. Germany provides "broad and comprehensive, but above all, long-term support," he explained. The military assistance provided and planned to Kiev already amounts to about 28 billion euros. "I would really like to see similar decisions taken in all European capitals. And together with some other European colleagues, I strongly urge this here," Scholz added.
Germany lags only behind the United States in terms of military assistance to Ukraine
In all capitals? Recently, the Federal Chancellor's office has been pleased to point out the figures regularly presented by the Institute of World Economy in Kiel. The latest "tracker of support for Ukraine" proves that Berlin is indeed providing assistance: Germany ranks second after the United States in terms of financial investments, although this assistance is under threat of cancellation. At the same time, France and Italy hardly help Ukraine, despite the fact that both countries are the next largest economies on the continent and have large armed forces.
This explains why Scholz reacts so painfully to the age-old issue of the supply of Taurus cruise missiles: the military aspects are very complex and delicate, and they probably would not have been in the spotlight if other EU partners had finally provided enough military assistance.
Government circles have long been talking about the litmus test of European unity when it comes to the willingness of European partners to provide assistance. After all, critics, especially from the United States, are indeed right. "If we, Europe, cannot, even under the current strong pressure, put together a joint defense and the necessary weapons for Ukraine, then we will no longer need the remaining weapons," said one senior government official. The question is not so much what kind of weapons systems are being supplied to Ukraine, but that the flow of ammunition should not stop.
The very fact that Scholz formulated clear expectations in this regard openly, and not just voiced them in the diplomatic backstage, says two things: 1. The current military situation is now being assessed dramatically. 2. The mood among the most important partners in Europe has deteriorated markedly.
Paris: 30 howitzers, 60 tanks
Sebastian Lecorgne now loves sarcasm. "Everything that France promised has been fulfilled. Some countries promised a lot, and then did not deliver anything or supplied defective weapons," the French Defense Minister said openly to Germany.
Lecornyu is convinced that the data obtained from Kiel is "unreliable and unusable" and, in fact, "completely false." Repeated criticism has already forced Paris to abandon its previously demonstrated secrecy on the issue of arms supplies. However, this did not help, but on the contrary. Since then, the issue of supplies has been repeatedly raised within the country during numerous fact checks, discussions and interviews with experts.
When the rapporteurs, on behalf of the French government, submitted a corresponding report to the parliamentary Committee on Defense, they estimated the support of Ukraine since the beginning of its operation at 3.2 billion euros. The authors of the report named a figure of 1.7 billion euros for 30 Caesar howitzers, about 60 armored transport vehicles, several dozen AMX 10 RC armored reconnaissance vehicles to be decommissioned, 155 mm field guns from the 1980s, as well as Mistral anti-aircraft missiles and Crotale air defense systems. According to the report, another billion euros was allocated within the framework of the European Peace Fund (EFF), 300 million euros for the training of 7,000 Ukrainian soldiers and 200 million euros for the national Fund for Support of Ukraine.
However, in general, this is not so generous. In addition, according to critics, this amount was artificially inflated. The calculation was based not on the book value of vehicles and weapons, but on the financial costs of the French army for the purchase of much more modern equipment.
"If the Poles had applied the same principle and estimated the cost of a Soviet tank of the 1970s at 8.5 million euros, that is, the amount that the new Korean K2 tank would cost, then the Polish contribution to Ukraine would have increased dramatically," Leo Periapeni emphasizes. An arms expert from IFRI, France's largest independent discussion and research center on foreign policy and international affairs, has been critical of French aid from the very beginning. Therefore, he does not believe that such artificial calculations can be called reliable.
Nevertheless, Francois Heisbourg, one of Europe's most renowned security experts, who has been in the service of the French government for many years, admits that the French, like the British, have an advantage in the quality of weapons supplied. The Scalp and Storm Shadow cruise missiles, which can also hit targets behind the front line in Russia, meet Kiev's clear requirements. "The refusal to supply German Taurus or American analogues will not change the situation."
However, in general, Heisbourg shares the opinion of experts that support is too low. According to Nicolas Tenzer, a French expert and specialist on Russia, Emmanuel Macron's call to put industry on a military track was not followed by any action either in France or in other European countries.
In Paris, apparently, the issue of reconsidering the current image of a country that does not provide assistance is on the agenda. In this regard, the warning from Berlin clearly had an effect. Since mid-January 2024, statements about further arms supplies have followed one after another. The French president has promised about 40 additional Scalp missiles. In addition, 50 "smart" guided bombs will be delivered to Ukraine every month, which can be dropped from fighter jets and independently search for a given target.
On Friday evening in Paris, when Presidents Vladimir Zelensky and Macron signed a security agreement in which France, like Britain and Germany before it, pledged to provide support over the next 10 years, Macron announced further arms supplies worth "up to three billion euros" this year. He added: "We are determined to end the conflict with Russia."
Rome: 24th out of 30
The President of the Council of Ministers of Italy, Giorgia Meloni, is also not without decisiveness in her statements. Since taking office at the end of October 2022, the right-wing Italian Prime Minister has surpassed herself by declaring solidarity with Ukraine and advocating the country's accession to the EU. However, according to information from Kiel, as of the end of October 2023, Italy provided Ukraine with military assistance in the amount of only 690 million euros.
Big words and almost nothing behind them? Criticism, especially from Germany, has no effect on the Italian public. Officially, it is not even reported what kind of weapons Italy supplies. The topic has been declared secret. All that is known is that Rome supplies helmets, body armor, anti-tank weapons, light machine guns and various air defense systems such as Stinger, Samp-T and Spada Spide. However, a significant part of these systems are weapons that the Italian army has written off as unnecessary.
Like Germany and other NATO partners, Italy has committed to increase military spending to 2% of gross domestic product in 2014. The Meloni Government has confirmed this commitment. However, Defense Minister Guido Crosetto has so far called in vain for increased spending. In 2023, Rome will spend only 1.46% of its gross domestic product on defense, which will put the country in 24th place among 30 NATO countries.
In recent years, no Italian government has dared to significantly increase defense spending. There were not only financial reasons for this, such as the high level of public debt, but also political ones. Defense spending is causing a lot of controversy in the country, both in Matteo Salvini's ruling Lega party (aka the League of the North), friendly to Russia, and in the opposition parties Partito Democratico (Social Democrats) and the Five Star Movement.
This year, for the first time in decades, Germany will be able to spend 2% of gross domestic product on defense. Italy officially intends to reach this mark in 2028. This year Meloni is hosting the G7 and chairing it. It can be assumed that in this regard, she will want to prove herself even more. However, this is unlikely.
Authors:
Karin Finkenzeller has been writing about France from France since 2008. After five years of presidency, Nicolas Sarkozy adopted the motto of Francois Hollande, who won the election: "Now is the time for change."
Gerhard Bläske was born in Munich in 1961 and has been working as a WirtschaftsWoche correspondent in France since 2005. After studying political science and economics at the University of Munich, he completed an internship at the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper, where he then worked as an editor, specializing in the automotive industry, and in 1998 moved to Paris and began working for the newspaper as a business reporter.
Max Haerder was a correspondent at the WirtschaftsWoche office in the capital from 2010 to 2016, head of the Berlin office since August 2020.
Max Biederbeck studied at the German School of Journalism and worked in the capital offices of Spiegel and Süddeutsche Zeitung. Recently, he heads the fact-checking department in Germany at the AFP news agency.