In his introductory remarks, Olaf Scholz himself addresses the topic that dominates the questioning of the Federal Chancellor in the Bundestag on Wednesday.

Since Russian President Vladimir Putin is not ending his "destructive and self-destructive war" against Ukraine, the German government is supporting Ukraine with weapons.

"Everything that makes sense and is possible will be delivered," promises the Federal Chancellor.

His government has "unlike the previous government decided to deliver weapons, and that's why we're doing it," Scholz formulates a sentence that sounds as if the SPD wanted earlier deliveries of arms to Ukraine, but because of the resistance of the former coalition partner CDU/ CSU would have failed.

Markus Wehner

Political correspondent in Berlin.

  • Follow I follow

In addition, the EU will increase the pressure on Russia with another, the fifth sanctions package.

This applies not least to the atrocities committed by Russian soldiers against Ukrainian residents in Bucha and other places.

"The murder of civilians is a war crime," says the Chancellor.

Such and similar cases would have to be clarified in detail.

But the killing of the Russian military continues.

"It must remain our goal that Russia does not win this war," says Scholz.

That is the basic idea behind all efforts, for example when it comes to reducing dependence on Russian energy as quickly as possible, building LNG terminals on the north German coast at high speed - or even delivering weapons.

Scholz' answer is typical

The Union has resolved to attack the chancellor at precisely this point.

Foreign policy expert Johan Wadephul serves.

Green Party leader Omid Nouripour said there was a discrepancy between what Ukraine wanted and what Social Democrat Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht was making available to Kyiv.

Nouripour said in an interview that such a synchronization did not take place was "very unsatisfactory".

What does the chancellor have to say about that?

His answer is typical.

He spoke to Nouripour.

"He told me the opposite." In close coordination with its partners in the EU and NATO, Berlin is doing everything "that is right and makes sense".

Scholz obviously has no desire to be portrayed as a procrastinator when it comes to arms deliveries.

The next Union MP, Florian Hahn from the CSU, first makes it clear that Scholz is wrong in his assertion that the previous Union-led government never delivered weapons to a war zone.

Because as early as 2014, the then black-red government had delivered weapons to the Peshmerga Kurds in Iraq, which was also correct.

If Scholz was only referring to Ukraine, the CSU man points out that the traffic light coalition only changed its position on arms deliveries when Russia started the war.

Scholz does not address the objections at all.

He just stays stoic with his answer.

"This government did it, this decision is right." The anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons that Germany has already supplied have made their contribution to

Only the third member of the Union deputy, it is the foreign policy spokesman Jürgen Hardt, succeeds in persuading the chancellor to give a somewhat more detailed answer.

Apparently there were armored vehicles and infantry fighting vehicles "on the yard" in Germany, but they were urgently needed by the Ukraine.

Hardt alludes to the reports of around 100 Marder infantry fighting vehicles, which Ukraine wanted but which Germany rejected.

Scholz initially asserts political reasons for this.

The votes in the EU and NATO also include "that nobody pushes ahead, not even Germany," he explains his government's decision.

From the Chancellor's point of view, it would be "a serious mistake if Germany were to play a special role here".

So did Germany reject the request because the NATO partners were against it?

Or because Germany shouldn't be the first country to deliver tanks because of its history?

The chancellor doesn't say it that precisely.

Perhaps he also senses that his line of argument belongs more to the old German tradition of skeptics, which he has just praised himself and his government for overcoming.

Scholz's second statement then gives another reason why the martens have not yet been delivered.

It also depends on whether they are available and "what quality they have".

According to security experts, the martens are tanks that were sorted out by the Bundeswehr and are now owned by the manufacturer Rheinmetall.

They would have to be overhauled, and the Ukrainians would also need several months of instruction in how to use them.

However, the Bundeswehr could deliver Marder to the Ukraine from its current operations and then take over the repaired tanks for it.

But there is hardly any room for such discussions at Question Time.

Hardt, however, does not accept Scholz's objection that NATO does not want to press ahead with tank deliveries.

After all, the Czech Republic is now delivering infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine.

The federal government had agreed to the delivery of almost 60 tanks a few days ago.

Scholz himself mentions that these are "very old stocks" that came from the National People's Army of the GDR.

But they have the advantage that they can be used well because Ukraine has experience with them.