Enlarge image
Chancellor Scholz: Already intimidated
Photo: Liesa Johannssen / REUTERS
One of the most common accusations against Olaf Scholz is that he does not adequately explain his politics.
On the question of whether Germany should deliver Taurus missiles to Ukraine, the Chancellor has now done things differently.
He explained his position in detail.
If only he had remained silent.
Scholz achieved several things with his remarks: He raised doubts about his competence.
He disavowed Ukraine and strengthened Vladimir Putin.
And he has angered key allies.
It's not about how he positioned himself when it comes to Taurus.
One can discuss how important and useful it is to supply Ukraine with cruise missiles.
Did the Chancellor lie, as the opposition claims?
Probably not.
In any case, he spoke honestly in the central places.
That's the problem.
It is now clear that he does not trust Ukraine.
He doesn't say that openly, but that emerges from his statements and those of the Air Force officers whose virtual conversation the Russians intercepted and published.
Scholz fears that Kiev will not stick to agreements and could use the Taurus missile to attack targets deep in Russia.
This can only be prevented if German soldiers program the targets.
Scholz rejects that.
It is unclear why the Chancellor distrusts Kiev.
So far, the Ukrainian government has stuck to the agreements.
Even if you grant Scholz that his doubts are legitimate, it is stupid to make them public.
Who is supposed to believe that Germany will do everything to ensure that Ukraine doesn't lose the war?
How does Scholz want to convince an increasingly war-weary population to support the Ukrainian government, whose sincerity he doubts, in its fight?
Vladimir Putin can be happy.
No Western head of government has ever made it clear as much as Scholz that he is afraid of Moscow.
Fear doesn't have to be a bad thing in politics, but you shouldn't show it to a warmonger like Putin.
It is no coincidence that the Russian president threatened to use nuclear weapons again last week after a long break.
It was a greeting to Scholz.
He reiterates that Germany must not become a party to the war.
The statement is meaningless under international law.
Politically, this is not in the hands of the Chancellor.
Putin decides for himself who he sees as a warring party.
For him it has long been Germany, his propagandists have made that clear.
It would be all the more important to show that the federal government will not allow itself to be intimidated.
Scholz shows that he is already intimidated.
While the Chancellor is playing into the hands of the Russian ruler, he is duping his Western partners.
The Russian services probably knew anyway that the British and French were helping the Ukrainians operate their Storm Shadow and Scalp cruise missiles.
The fact that the Chancellor has publicly confirmed this is a diplomatic disaster.
It is fitting that the German air force officers who were intercepted were talking about civilians with American accents in Ukraine, that is, about US soldiers operating covertly.
Regardless of whether they are Americans, French or British, the partners can rely on the Germans not being too particular about keeping things secret.
They will draw their conclusions from it.
Admittedly, Scholz is not the only one who makes mistakes.
French President Emmanuel Macron does not want to rule out the West sending soldiers to Ukraine.
Supposedly this is intended to serve the so-called strategic ambiguity, i.e. to keep the enemy in the dark about their own intentions.
But if the partners then make it clear that they will not send soldiers under any circumstances, then that is pretty clear.
That doesn't make Scholz's behavior any better.
It is more dangerous than the Frenchman's foolish talk.
Unfortunately, Macron is right at one point: Anyone who, like the Chancellor, draws red lines while the opponent knows no limits will ensure that the spirit of defeat takes root.
Well-meaning people suspected that Scholz wanted to do the right thing politically.
He just communicates it poorly.
Since Scholz explained himself, it has been known that communication is not his weak point.
It's his politics.
In terms of domestic policy, the traffic light under Scholz's leadership achieved little.
So far, he has been credited with doing a lot of things right, at least in terms of foreign policy.
Now within a few days he has lost his credibility in this area too.
“I am the Chancellor, and that’s why this applies,” said Scholz about the Taurus decision.
But what remains of the Chancellor who wanted to suggest to the Germans that they could confide in him?
Not much left, it is to be feared.