The traffic light advocates a restrictive armaments policy, according to the coalition agreement.
It does not provide for arms deliveries to crisis areas.
And yet there are voices from the FDP to think about defensive weapons for Ukraine.
The SPD and the Greens are unlikely to be met with enthusiasm.
When the head of the Greens, Robert Habeck, demanded the same thing last year, his party was deeply outraged.
A few rhetorical contortions were necessary before the Greens had caught his statements again.
Earlier this week, Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock once again rejected Ukraine's corresponding demands.
But if the pressure mounts, the Greens could face another reality check.
A second Nord Stream 2?
Chancellor Olaf Scholz also announced on Wednesday that the federal government would not supply "lethal weapons" - this also applies to defensive weapons if they could be used deadly.
Perhaps this emphasis already hints at a way out of the threatening conflict within the coalition.
The Greens did not do it much differently after Habeck's advance, interpreting it as meaning not weapons, but rather night vision and reconnaissance devices.
And Scholz has already proven in his treatment of Nord Stream 2 that he is quite capable of gallantly moving away from his original positions.