Olaf Scholz’s Ukrainian tank battle
The German chancellor is sending some heavy weapons to
Ukraine but is hesitant to do more — here’s what behind his reluctance.
BY HANS VON
DER BURCHARD, LAURENZ GEHRKE AND MATTHEW KARNITSCHNIG
May 27,
2022 4:33 am
BERLIN —
Accusations of broken promises and spreading fake news. Criticism from within
the government coalition’s own ranks. And a chancellor defending his course
with references to Emperor Wilhelm II.
In other
words: Just another week of Olaf Scholz’s wavering policy on military support
for Ukraine.
The German
chancellor, who has steadfastly refused to visit Kyiv or even say he wants
Ukraine to “win” the war, has been under heavy fire since March for hesitating
on delivery of tanks to Ukraine. When Scholz last month bowed to pressure and
agreed to send some heavy weapons, he surprised the Ukrainians, allies and
experts with his decision to provide anti-aircraft tanks, which Kyiv hadn’t
asked for, while continuing to hold off on the delivery of the battle tanks and
infantry fighting vehicles Ukraine had been urging the West to send.
Scholz’s
latest scolding came this week from Polish President Andrzej Duda, who accused
the German government of breaking its promises on military support for Ukraine,
which just entered its fourth month of intense fighting. Poland has donated
over 200 of its own Soviet-made tanks to Ukraine and was counting on Germany to
replace them with modern German equivalents, Duda said, adding that Berlin had
not honored a commitment to do so.
Scholz’s
reluctance to deliver the weapons has also fueled criticism from within his
ruling coalition, which consists of the chancellor’s Social Democrats, the
Greens and the liberal Free Democrats (FDP).
“Poland’s
criticism is understandable,” said Anton Hofreiter, a Green MP and chair of the
Bundestag’s European Affairs committee. “Germany has a difficult reputation in
the EU anyway, because we coordinate too little with our European partners. We
urgently need to work on this.”
Pressure on
Germany is growing further as the Ukrainian army has struggled in recent days
to contain a new Russian offensive in the Donbas, which triggered fresh calls
to provide more support.
To help
clear the fog of war surrounding Scholz’s tank conundrum, POLITICO answers the
key questions surrounding the controversy below.
What the criticism is about
Even before
Russia’s latest invasion, Ukraine has urged Germany, the world’s fifth-largest
arms exporter, to send tanks, most notably the Marder infantry fighting vehicle
and the Leopard battle tank.
However,
“there is an absence of political will to really do something,” Andrij Melnyk,
the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany, told POLITICO.
The German
government presented various arguments for why it wasn’t able to comply with
Kyiv’s request, first saying that it could not deliver weapons to crisis zones,
and then — after Scholz’s Zeitenwende speech in late February — arguing that
German tanks required too much training for Ukrainian soldiers, before also backtracking
on that claim.
Berlin
further argued that it could not spare any tanks from its own reserves. Yet
German defense companies like Rheinmetall say that they could directly deliver
decommissioned tanks from their stocks — if Scholz authorized them to do so.
(Defense contractors require government permission before exporting arms.)
“It’s also
a Zeitenwende if 100 Marders sitting around at the manufacturer are authorized
for export,” said Marcus Faber, a defense policy lawmaker from the FDP,
referring to what Berlin has hailed as a sea change in its defense posture in
the wake of the Russian invasion.
Ukrainian
officials say they began discussing the Marder deal as far back as March with
Rheinmetall, which told them it could deliver within weeks. But so far, Berlin
has refused to greenlight the deal.
This week,
German Deputy Defense Minister Siemtje Möller came up with a new justification
for holding back the Marders — a 1970s-era armored vehicle used to transport
soldiers on the battlefield — claiming that NATO countries had collectively
agreed to not send any Western-type battle tanks or infantry fighting vehicles
to Ukraine.
Möller’s
comments triggered an immediate backlash from the German center-right
opposition. “Such an agreement does not exist,” said Roderich Kiesewetter, a
lawmaker from the Christian Democratic Union, arguing that Möller had
“promulgated false information. The absence of any agreement “is confirmed by
different sources, among others, directly by NATO,” he added.
Möller has
since backpedaled via a spokesperson, arguing that she had merely intended to
point out that other allies like the U.S. were also not supplying Ukraine with
modern Western-made armored combat vehicles, such as the American M1 Abrams,
the U.S.’s main battle tank.
Yet, given
that the American tanks are located thousands of kilometers away in North
America and would require much more intensive training than Germany’s Marders,
which could be delivered to the Ukrainian border in less than 24 hours,
Möller’s argument has struck many allies as fairly eccentric.
What’s
more, the U.S. has been Ukraine’s main arms supplier — its aid to Ukraine
dwarfs that of the entire EU, in fact — and unlike Germany, it hasn’t made
promises to Ukraine its hasn’t fulfilled.
Instead of
sending tanks directly to Ukraine, Berlin has offered to send Leopards and
Marders to eastern NATO partners, which in turn can deliver their remaining
Soviet-era tanks to Ukraine. German officials argue that this swap scheme,
known as Ringtausch, is advantageous for Ukraine because it gets the same
Soviet tanks that its soldiers and mechanics are already familiar with, while
NATO’s eastern flank receives a military upgrade.
Yet while
Germany successfully implemented such a “Ringtausch” with the Czech Republic,
the sharp criticism from the Duda highlights that Berlin is struggling to make
such a deal work with Poland — even though Berlin on Wednesday rejected the
accusation that it had broken any promises.
What tanks Germany is delivering to Ukraine
Despite all
the criticism, it is also true that Germany has recently stepped up its
material support.
Berlin
promised this week to send a first set of 15 Gepard anti-aircraft tanks to
Ukraine by the end of July, and to train Ukrainian tank crews. The Germans also
pledged to provide another 15 vehicles by the end of August. Although those
tanks were decommissioned some 12 years ago, experts say they’re still state of
the art when it comes to identifying approaching enemy aircraft or helicopters,
and neutralizing them with the tank’s two 35-millimeter cannons. Those cannons
can also be directed at ground targets to inflict serious damage on infantry or
lightly armored vehicles.
Politically,
the Gepard delivery is also significant, because Germany would become the first
ally to deliver modern Western tanks to Ukraine. Although other countries
including the U.S. have already sent armored personnel carriers such as the
M113, the Gepard — with its high-tech radar and target-detection system, as
well as its cannons — is in a different league.
Ammunition,
however, could prove challenging: Because the tanks are no longer used in
Germany, supplies are scarce and have to be procured internationally. So far,
Germany could guarantee provision of only 59,000 bullets. Given that a single
Gepard can fire up to 1,100 rounds per minute, that doesn’t sound like much.
The German defense ministry, however, says that the Gepard only needs to fire
in short volleys, which are calculated by the onboard computer system, and the
actual amount of required ammunition is therefore reduced. Berlin also argues
that the mere presence of Gepard tanks in Ukraine would have “a deterring
effect” on the enemy airforce.
Like other
Western countries, Germany also committed to supporting Ukraine with artillery
pieces, which can add valuable military support in the difficult battle in the
country’s east. German soldiers are currently training Ukrainian soldiers on
the Panzerhaubitze 2000, which is, like the Gepard, a sophisticated weapon that
can fire at targets at long range and then quickly change its position, making
it more difficult for the enemy to attack the artillery unit with counter-fire.
However,
Germany’s Panzerhaubitze commitment did not come entirely voluntarily; rather,
it was compelled by an earlier Dutch announcement to deliver five of the
Howitzers. Since military experts say it requires 12 artillery pieces to use
them effectively, another country had to deliver the remaining seven Howitzers
to make the deal work. Berlin initially hoped Italy step up, but ultimately
agreed to do “a little more than would otherwise have been possible,” as Scholz
put it last week.
Previously,
Germany also sent lighter weapons such as anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles,
guns, ammunition, grenades and mines to Ukraine.
Why Scholz is so reluctant
The
chancellor has in recent weeks repeatedly argued in background discussions with
journalists that he does not want to repeat the mistakes of Wilhelm II, the last
German emperor, who played a key role in Europe’s fatal descent into World War
I in 1914.
Although
historians disagree on whether the current geopolitical situation can be at all
compared to 1914, the comments by Scholz, who had already warned about the risk
of a nuclear war, underline his concern that too much military support for
Ukraine could spark World War III. Haunted by the past of Nazi war crimes
committed in Russia, German officials also fear a potential scenario in which
German tanks could — unintentionally or not — fire at targets on Russian soil.
“We won’t
do anything that would make NATO a party to the war,” Scholz said Thursday
during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, repeating what has become
his mantra since the beginning of the war.
Such
reservations make it unlikely Scholz will approve the delivery of Marder or
Leopard tanks for Ukraine anytime soon — unless a decision by the U.S. or other
allies to supply modern Western tanks forces him to change course.
Scholz’s
logic also explains why, when pressured by allies last month to step up his
game, he chose to deliver the Gepard tank, which German officials see more as a
defensive asset and as less likely to power an offensive operation against
Russia.
“The Gepard
tank is very suitable for protecting critical infrastructure,” a defense
ministry spokesperson said this week.
In other
words, when it comes to actually winning the war, Ukraine shouldn’t look to
Berlin.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário